|
|
Hi Zoltan,
you are right but take a look at this post
http://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/14313.page
It worries me more that the new timeline editing mode is far away from beeing matured 
|
|
|
This exactly what I am forced to do now !
And I dont like this extra work without any benefit.
Lots of clicks for an easy thing which could be done with one !
|
|
|
I can see no reason why the system allows to shorten by dragging the end of an object (video or image) and does not accept the reverse action.
This is not logical and I cannot imagine any technical reason for this.
|
|
|
with PD9 it is still possible to short any object like audio or video by dragging the right hand side to the left. This causes that the clip is shotended and the gap is closed automatically.
This is the fastest way of trimming and I can view all other tracks.
If I now recognize that the clip was shortened too much I cannot drag the right end of the clip to the correct position. So I am forced to open the Trim dialog and do it there. In this dialog there is no way to allign the clip length to other timeline objects like music because you only see the clip which is currently trimmed.
For me this is a massive step back in usability versus PD8
|
|
|
Guys,
we are asked what should be the default. This means the Highlander principle is valid:
"There could only be one"
My clear opinion is
KEEP OVERLAP AS THE DEFAULT !
1) overlap is the way a user knows from PD8. Cross confuses everybody even advanced users.
2) it is by far the most common transition type.
3) it works perfekt for crossfades which is the most popular transition
beside "no effect" - which only crossfades the audio.
Another urgent request is:
give the back the duration button please. There is no reason for removing it at least not for overlap transitions !
|
|
|
Quote:
To CL. Thats depends of the complex video project.
Quote:
I just recreate a 1 hour project inserting many clips, color boards, ramdom transitions, etc. Capture a 3 seconds comment and it only takes about 2 to 3 sec to load on the timeline.
In my first post the project was simple compared with this last one and has Andreas have post. But if i take this last complex 12mb .PDS project and produce a mpeg2 file, and then try to recreate the all test with that file, all imported wave file samples will only takes from 2 to 5 seconds to load into the time line (AND WITHOUT THE "NOT RESPONDING ERROR")
Okay guys, let's keep the tiny little quarrel aside 
To sum it up:
@NicolasNY,
thanks a lot for all your efforts, all users who capture audio for their project will profit if this bug will be fixed. For me the problem already occurs for quite simple project without any transitions or effects. Just loading about 50 clips to the timeline. To render the project after all video editing has done and capture and place the comments in a new project using the rendered file is not an alternative. The complete video is not very handy you cannot see the different scenes where the little comments should be placed.
@Dafydd
could you submit this issue to CL?
Again, thanks to all who contributed 
|
|
|
Well, I have an USB plug and play microphone from Logitech which uses the windows system USB audio drivers. My Win7 is always up to date. Nevertheless I tried to update the windows driver manually but the message was, that I am already using the latest driver.
Du you use an USB microphone too ?
|
|
|
Wow, that's how it should be !!
PD8 works for me in the same way !
What kind of footage do you use ?
Thanks for your efforts
|
|
|
Hi Nicolas,
that's a nice general description but it does not explain why PD8 and other editing programs do the same job within 2-3 sec even for much bigger projects. Thats what one can expect. Just just since PD9 this has changed.
Another point is that the wav file is created fairly quick (about 2 sec) no matter what recording quality. The time is burned by loading the file to the project!
|
|
|
@Dafydd,
many thanks for your support 
@NicolasNY
when I say "comment" I mean open the voice over recording room and use an USB microphone as device. Probably it also happens with a line in microphone.
This action creates a wav file which is loaded to the timeline at the cursor position on the comment track. The dialog that pops up tells me that the wav file is created in about 2-3 sec but then it takes very long to load it to the timeline. The more different video clips are on the timeline the longer it takes.
That is why I assume that there is a problem in organisation of the project file.
I try to comment my latest 29 min long project which is nearly impossible with this kind of effect. It takes endless 
The only chance that I see now is to render the Video completely and open a new project using this video for creating the audio incl all comments.
@JL_JL
Thanks for reproducing it. I really appreciate your efforts 
What do you mean with color profiles?
|
|
|
I really wonder if nobody has tried to comment a small to mid size project using a microphone. 
In the meantime I found out that this also happens with other AVCHD Material:
Canon 1440x1080 16Mbit/s
JVC 1920x1080 24Mbit/s
It does not occur when I copy one single clip 50 times to reach a project length of about 15 min.
The following scenario should be reproducable.
1. create a new project
2. load a single clip
3. comment --> no problem wav file is loaded in 3 seconds
4. add about 40 differrent clips to the Timeline to get a reasonable projectlength of about 15 min
5. comment --> it takes more than 40 sec to load the wav file (incl the message "not responding")
6. delete the 40 additional clips from the timeline
7. comment --> it takes more than 40 sec to load the wav file (incl the message "not responding")
8. close PD and reload the project which now has only one single Clip on the timeline
9. comment --> it takes more than 40 sec to load the wav file (incl the message "not responding")
So it seems that there is a mess in the project file.
It would be great if someone could confirm this.
|
|
|
@just_for_fun,
I never use any hardware encoding since I have experienced that there is no accelaration but lower quality on my machine. The rendering speed on your core I7 CPU should be higher or at least the same as using Cuda or ATI Stream of a graphic card.
The quality of the internal AVCHD encoder is much better than the harware based stuff. This the more true for PD9.
If you continue to use Cuda is a must to bring your system up to date installing the latest drivers, patches and updates for both operating system and graphic card.
|
|
|
To load a recorded comment using an USB microphone takes terribly long.
It lasts more than 20 times longer than in PD8.
- Project length between 9 and 29 min
- device: USB micro
- volume 100 for recording
- Profile CD quality
To load a 6 sec long comment the system requires about 40 seconds where the dialog shows not responding.
In PD8 the same action took 2 seconds
Can anybody confirm this ??
|
|
|
It took several trys and patches to make SVRT of the old PD8 encoder work. But even in the latest version it still produces stumbles, flashes and other things when the video switched from rendered to unrendered e.g after a transition. This happens on some video devices.
This is why CL recommends not to use the Single IDR Frame option in the produce dialog.
But of course the SVRT indication in the SVRT track is currently not correct. It shows no rendering required even when the whole clip is rendered.
|
|
|
I completely agree to Andrew's and JL_JL's statements in a former post!
http://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/14130.page
But like always there are two sides of the medal.
The reason why Cyberlink has trouble making SVRT work as in PD8 is that they have changed the AVCHD encoding completely. One can see this when the result file is analysed using mediaInfo.
PD8 produces Scantype:Interlaced files
PD9 produces Scantype:MBAFF files
The new encoder obviously cannot handle the single IDR frame of a Canon or Panasonic video clip, which is not in line with AVCHD spec and not tolerated by the encoder. This is the bad news
But there are also good news:
- The quality of the encoder is far better than the old one used in PD8
- It is a little faster
- The AVCHD result is fully compatible with SVRT. This allows to edit your video in handy chapters and combine them afterwards to a huge project without rendering again. The final movie is then of a consistant quality whithout changes in quality and structure.
An example for the improved encoding quality is below. It is heavy stuff for an encoder. A turn of the cam with hard contrasts and very detailed background.
|
|
|
|
Quote:
Hallo!
... Die Schnittstellen zwischen kopiert und encodiert sind wohl nicht ganz ordentlich oder die Player müssen sich auf anders kodiertes Material einstellen, was sie Soft-Player anscheinend besser schaffen.
Die große Frage ist ob es am "SVRT auf Einzel-IDR H.254 zulassen" liegt und warum PD8 den Film nicht wie von der SVRT-Info angezeigt ohne diese Funktion nicht smartrendern kann.
Wieso ist SVRT eigentlich vom Kamera-Modell abhängig ? Kommt ein Update wo Sony-Cams dabei sind ?
CU Tom
Hi Tom,
ich denke es ist so wie Du vermutest, gerenderte Sequenzen haben offenbar eine etwas andere Struktur wie ungerenderte. Bei meiner HG10 habe ich den Aufblitzeffekt an den Übergängen zum Glück nur am PC, egal mit welchem Abspielprogramm. Es hat auch nichts mit dem Grafiktreiber zu tun, wie zuerst vermutet. Mein WD TV Media Player, über den ich die Filme am Plasma sehe, stellt zum Glück alles sauber dar.
Wäre das nicht der Fall hätte ich auf ein MPEG2 Profil wie BD1920 zurückgreifen müssen.
Zum Thema Updates denke ich, daß es für PD8 wohl keins mehr geben wird, dafür ist die nächste Version bestimmt schon viel zu weit. Möglicherweise wird es damit auf diesem Sektor verbesserungen geben.
Mal schauen 
|
|
|
Oups, I am missing my latest post from this morning. There was an attachment containing an compare.
I assume this was the one Andrew has answered to.
Has it been deleted or is there a technical problem ??
|
|
|
Hi Bannon,
I made a similar experience with my HD5770 card trying to profit from hardware encoding. My source and target format is AVCHD 1440:1080
Take a look at this thread:
http://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/9718.page#42887
As a summary, I have decided to keep the hardware acceleration disabled and wait if there is any improvement in supporting ATI Stream technology in next version.
|
|
|
Hi Martin,
yeah, I agree with Tony, a really cool clip with an excellent choice of music. 
By the way, you placed a CC hint for the music at the end of the clip. Is this sufficient to avoid license problems? I'm just curious because I very often use commercial titles in my clips.
Thanks and have a nice weekend.
I think in Vancouver they wish there was as much snow as in Frankfurt in these days
Cheers, Andy
|
|
|
Hi Andy,
exactly that's what it does !!
With the length of the transition you can define how many frames are cut away and how smooth the audio cross fade should be.
By the way this is the only method to create an easy audio crossfade with zero effort. Any other method has to extract the audio of both clips to different audio tracks and fade then in and out one by one manually. TERRIBLE.
Audio crossfades are already on the wishlist
|
