Announcement: Our new CyberLink Feedback Forum has arrived! Please transfer to our new forum to provide your feedback or to start a new discussion. The content on this CyberLink Community forum is now read only, but will continue to be available as a user resource. Thanks!
CyberLink Community Forum
where the experts meet
| Advanced Search >
The 365 version seems to be pushed very heavily and probably because it makes more money. Agreed: updated software is not in everyone's best interest since hardware technology is not upgradable in most instances.

I appreciate all of the testing you've done! On my end I don't have a clear enough sense of when SVRT should be available vs. when it actually is to spend much time on it. In other words, I often don't see any reason why parts or virtually all of my project can't use SVRT, but if the Profile Analizer doesn't come up with anything, I usually move on.

When anomalous producing happens due to SVRT, I'm much more likely to dig around and try to isolate and understand the issue, and then report it. This is one example, and I have a brand new one today where a 5 minute section of the original clip is missing when I put a few images on a lower track to merge them with the original using SVRT

I've been a PD user for 10 years. The problems popping up these days are small potatoes to the ones in 2008. "Anoying" is a mild adjective if it was applied to PD back then. None the less, SVRT has been a major pain in the past 3-4 years primarily because of it's inconsistencies. There appears to be very low level of logic being applied when determining what rule is being applied. Frankly I no longer trust it and ignore it. It has become another sales gimmick.
Quote Very annoying indeed. I have found the workaround for this. Create a custom mp4 profile using the data from the m2ts information. It works for me.

I have noticed that in this forum that it is only me that keeps bringing up SVRT issues and problems and then report them to Cyberlink support. Get no response from users who may have the same issue. Other users need to report the bugs when found as I find workarounds for just about every issue and don’t want to report them all myself and be the only one to get grilled. Please report this issue to Cyberlink support if you like.

I had to correct my original post: ONE of the files is an MOV file.
With the latest update PD insists on using M2TS even when all files (except one MOV) on the timeline are pm4 !

Very anoying.

I was able to download and install the app without issues. I got as far as the Activation screen, but I don't have a license for P2G 11. The installer also installed CL LabelPrint 2.5, Virtual Drive 11, Desktop Burning Gadget 11and ISO Viewer 11.

I would suggest trying a different browser (I used Edge) and maybe confirming that your AV program isn't interferring with the download. I've also placed a copy in this OneDrive folder, so go ahead and try that too. Please let me know if it works and I will delete the folder.

Thanks for the reply and the link. Your copy works as it's supposed to without any errors. I have notified tech support yesterday about the corrupted file but got no response. I downloaded it again from the Cyberlink web site after your's and guess what it's OK now. It looks like they fixed it sometime today.
As members we all get different free downloads of Cyberlink apps depending on our purchase status. I need another user to verify wether the following link offers a usable app ( Power2 Go ). I've downloaded the app 3 times and every time Windows tells me that the file has missing files. Please confirm :
Quote Hi.
I know, this is only software stabilization, but similar software works better, even at lower cost, but there is not exists software that is ideal in everything.
Why video after stabilization on have streaking/blurring effect?
For a few seconds quality is good, after image is clear and again streaking.
Another problem.
Straight ride, ridding on bike from a small hill.
When stabilization is on, "camera" turn to left side and lock for a while (couple seconds) in this position!
Maybe you'll think about adding option like:
Stabilize only in vertical axis?
Sorry for my english.

Suggest you enable "Use enhanced Stabilizer".
Quote A quick workaround is to move the slideshow to another track, and then drag it back into place. You'll be prompted for the appropriate action:

This is clearly a bug and I think you should contact tech support. Copy and paste the link to this thread in your description so they can see how you and Tony have documented the issue. Paste the CS# here once you've submitted your request to close the loop.

Let's see if they read these forums like they should.

  1. Place 6 or more images on timeline.

  2. Select images 2 to 5 for slideshow.

  3. Select "Motion" slideshow.

  4. Select "Advanced editing" to complete the effect. The slideshow will appear as one segment.

  5. Select "Customize" to alter the slideshow.

  6. Change the time for the first image to double the original seconds and OK to accept.

  7. The modified slideshow is now on the timeline but it now overlaps the next image when logically it should be asking if the project to the right of the slideshow should be moved over. This is a real pain on a large project.

Quote The new 2314 patch has fixed the SVRT issue where any assets other than another video clip added to the timeline would cause it not to work. This has created a new problem. The indicators are that any assets like Transitions, PiP objects, Particles, Slideshow, Image, and different type of video clips added to the timeline will not be rendered. See the attached screenshot. This workload reduced data is entirely wrong. Only fx added will need to be rendered. See the Attached screenshot.

Has anyone been able to get SVRT to work properly or the workload reduced data to indicate proper numbers in PD17?


In addition, SVRT fails to recognize very obvious common files and therefore subject to "smart rendering".
Quote Are you saying that you were able to reinstall PD16 and having it removed by the PD17 installation and keep both? That might have helped someone who posted about this Upgrade issue earlier.

Yes. I was able to re-install PD16 and now both work independantly. PD17 projects of course are not downward compatible.
In the past one could run current and previous versions of PD without any issues.

PD17 unwisely erases PD16 when upgrading.

This is unfortunate especially with PD17 as it is full of irritating bugs that I haven't seen since the bad old days of versions 8,9, and 10.

It's back to reliable PD16 for now. frown
See update web page.
This problem is fixed after 2314 update.

Another issue with SVRT :

  • In PRODUCE, if one selects PROFILE ANALYZER instead of the manual method

  • And AFTER the analyzer is finished it's processing

  • Then if one selects the BUTTON for the EXPORT folder

  • Then PD17 HANGS and goes into never never land.

  • One has to force Windows to close PD17 and restart.

  • Selecting another folder using the window next to the export button appears to work around the issue. The problem appears
    to occur if the file name matched one already in the folder.

Looks like a good reason not to instal the patch until more users try it out.
As stated by other users the bit rate of the original determines maximum video bit resolution which determines overall image detail.

On Youtube one can find videos at only 5Kb bit rates that are impressive to view. On the other hand there are 4K UHD clips with very high bit rates that look unatural when viewed on a TV with UHD capabilty.

Perhaps you need to decide how the video will be viewed and then decide on the best rendered options. SVRT is a good start but it is not reliable all the time.
Quote Hi. I'm completely computer illiterate and do not
understand the system requirements for running PD 16. Could someone PLEASE tell me if my computer is compatible with PD 16 (before I waste my money)?
Thank you so much!

Operating System: Windows 10 Home 64-bit

Microprocessor: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4700MQ CPU @ 2.40GHz

System Memory: 8GB

Memory Slot 1: 8GB

System Board: 1963 KBC Version 93.52

System BIOS: F.67

Graphic Device 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M

Version: (3/7/201

Graphic Device 2: Intel(R) HD Graphics 4600

Current Resolution: 1366 x 768

Refresh Rate: 59

Version: (9/29/2016)

Graphics Memory: 4,021 MB

Aero Status: Enabled

Looks good. Give it a try by downloading a trial version.
Quote Hi all:
I just got through with my first video using PD16 and I'm quite happy with how it went.
Here's the thing. Not giving it a lot of thought, I shot this with a Canon EOS 70D with the highest setting for quality which is 1920 at 30fps.

This video is going on Youtube and I'm now concerned that it was done at an too high a high resolution. When I started out shooting I knew that Youtube compresses what they get and I thought I should therefore take the shots with the highest rez, however, now I'm not so sure.

Now this camera also has a setting of 1280 but they're all at 60fps ( Youtube does accept 60fps ) with either low or high compression.
Should I have done the video @ 1280 60fps rather than the 1920 @ 30fps?

Whatever other info regarding this is appreciated.

Thanks for replies

1920 X 1080 is suitable for youtube. See here

That is correct. Ans Youtube not only fully re-renders your video to fit their specs it also up-converts the video when being played back depending on the device being used to watch.

After uploading you will notice that it can take some time for your video to be available in full HD as it takes a while to render all the formats.
Quote You are correct, I have PD-15, not PD 16. Both my current project and previously completed project are PD 15 projects. I'm not sure how to post my Diag dx but will try to attach it here:

  1. Are you watching the edited clip in the preview section or AFTER it is rendered to a file ?

  2. PD 15 and 16 are similar in rendering speed.

  3. It is normal for your PC to slow down as any change to a clip introduces bit processing time that. It cannot be instanteneous.

Quote I am so lucky. I never had an issue with hardware encoding, but the deactivation solves a lot of problems...


As a long time user I should have known better that HA was the culprit. The update enabled it but I didn't notice it until now. HA is better left off.
Go to:   
Powered by JForum 2.1.8 © JForum Team