Hi Dan

I cannot offer much advice except (if you can) go back to PD8 and try again.

Note, any projects saved in PD9 are not 'backwards' compatible so finish any work(s) before the change back.

Good luck Happing editing

Best Regards

Neil
CubbyHouseFilms
My Youtube Channel
My Vimeo Channel
PD3.5, 5, 6 & 7. Computer: Dell Dimension 5150, Intel Pen. 2.80 GHz, 2GB RAM, NVIDIA GeForce 8600GT 256MB, Windows XP Pro!!
PD8 Ultra v3022. Computer: Dell Studio 1747, Intel, i7 Q740 1.73 GHz, 8GB RAM, ATI Mob. Radeon HD 560v 1GB, Windows 7 Ult. 64
PD10 Ultra v2023. Computer: HP Pavilion dv7, Intel, i7 2630 2.00 GHz, 8GB RAM, ATI Mob. Radeon HD 6770 2GB, Windows 7 Pre. 64
PD12 Ultra v2930. Computer: HP Pavilion dv7, Intel, i7 2630 2.00 GHz, 8GB RAM, ATI Mob. Radeon HD 6770 2GB, Windows 7 Pre. 64
PD13 Ultim v3516. Computer: HP Pavilion dv7, Intel, i7 2630 2.00 GHz, 8GB RAM, ATI Mob. Radeon HD 6770 2GB, Windows 7 Pre. 64
PD16 Live v2101 Computer: HP Pavilion dv7, Intel, i7 2630 2.00 GHz, 16GB RAM, ATI Mob.Radeon HD 6770 2GB, Windows 7 Pre. 64
Director Suite 6: PowerDirector 16 Live, PhotoDirector 9, ColorDirector 6, AudioDirector 8

Cameras: Sony(s) HXR-NX5P, HXR-NX70P, NEX-VG10E, a6300 4k, HDR TG5E, GoPro 4 Black, Canon 6D DSLR

Visit PDtoots. PowerDirector Tutorials, tips, free resources & more. Subscribe!
Full linked Tutorial Catalog - PDtoots happily supports fellow PowerDirector users!

Neil,

Thanks for your reply but guess I wasn’t clear enough in my explanation…

The old clips I’m working on are raw untouched files and have never been previously edited in any program; they are from my DV camcorder and were burnt onto a DVD. They play fine on a standalone player, PC, even in PD9U… It’s just when I go to edit them that problem arise.

Reverting back to PD8 is definitely an option and something which I did when installing the first release of PD9U, this was on another machine and the initial experience was bad to say the least… PD9U was slow, crashed often plus a few other issues so waited till a patch came fourth plus upgraded my equipment and tried again... Still not happy with the reliability and performance issues that seem to have compounded, gradually gets worse with every version.

As a side note I must say that in my opinion the type of editing I’m doing now would be considered very, very basic and could be done in any simple editing program, yet it is nice to have the option to go further.

Dan
HP ProBook
Core i5 450
Win 10 Pro, 64-bit
RAM 8GB DDR3
ATI 512 MB
256GB SSD & 500GB 7200RPM HDD

So nobody has encounter a similar issue as mine?

Decided to give it another go today and turned out to be another big waste of time... tweak, render and check results... Repeated that operation several times only to be met with dismal results.

If I use the trim option and find the point where I want the clip to end, as soon as I click on the "mark out" button the clip is automatically "scrubbed" backwards several seconds far from my intended point.

Tried manually trimming on the timeline with no better success, may look fine at that moment but is not when played as a whole or rendered... Like I said previously zooming in and out of the timeline alters the clips?

I can view the clips within PD9U and they “can” look fine, render the video, view, and I end up with clips that are shorter or longer than wanted as well as portions of a clip will be repeated and inserted elsewhere within the video????

Obviously looks like PD9U is a lost cause for me, not sure if I'll revert to ver. 8 or move on to something other... At this moment my mood is saying the latter LOL.

Dan HP ProBook
Core i5 450
Win 10 Pro, 64-bit
RAM 8GB DDR3
ATI 512 MB
256GB SSD & 500GB 7200RPM HDD

Have you tried using the SPLIT function? I have never been that pleased with the Multi-Trim function, but have had great success using SPLIT. Highlight the track in the timeline, advance to where you want to trim, and select SPLIT. Discard the piece you don't want.

If you are dealing, as I was, with old movie films converted to VHS and then captured for DVD conversion, SPLIT is fast and efficient. I had to remove many segments of overexposed film from the video capture. So I would split where a bad section began, split again when the bad section ended, and then deleted the bad segment.

I have had a pretty good experience with PD9 and have used it for a couple of months. For the price, the capabilities are awesome and the product has been reasonably stable on my computer. Considering what the software is doing, glitches are inevitable and variations in drivers, codecs, and hardware impact performance and stability.

Hope this helps. Have a great day.

Regards,
-Phil

PD9 is not as stable as PD8 at this moment. But most of it's problems are with HD content. PD8 would be a better choice for you. As for the splitting function: yes, it could be much better by providing a larger pre-view screen and more detailed stepping capability when selecting the segment. Win 10, i7

Hi Slivy58,

You will not have the editing problem you describe if you place your sound clip in a track below your timeline. Just place the new sound clip where you want it in a lower track. Nothing will be moved in your main timeline. No sync will be lost.

PD9 will then play both sound clips (If, for instance, you are merely adding background sound) or, you can precisely delete the sound that is in the timeline if you want it to be replaced by the new clip. You can also overlap the beginning or end of the new sound clip to create a fade in or fade out effect.

Phil gave good advice about using the split instead of trim functions. Laptop PC, ASUS
Core i7 Q 720
Win 7, 64-bit
RAM 8GB DDR2
Graphics, NVIDIA GeForce GTS 360M 1GB DDR5

Hi garioch7,

Thanks for the suggestion… Guess with all the frustrations I forgot about the split function, don’t believe we tried that with my latest production so may just give it a go. Wasn’t looking to be too precise as “close enough” would have done the trick but couldn’t even get anywhere near that.

The thing is I produced a couple of other videos w/PD9U and the trim function appeared to work fine then so not sure what went wrong now. Glad to hear PD is working well for you; just wish my luck was as good… Like I mention previously, the first PC didn’t like PD9 so we upgrade systems (PC) and it’s turning out no better… Even a re-install of PD didn’t solve anything.

This latest footage was taken from different sources so all the clips were not from the same batch or camcorder.


HDedit,

That’s the kicker, I’m not editing HD content at this time just the same old SD content I’ve played around with for the past 12+ years and surely it must be able to do that… My PC purchased in 2001 w/P1.8GHz and 768 MB Ram did a better job with this same footage.

As for PD8, it’s what I was using until the decision was made to upgrade, kind of disappointed to have to revert back since my plans were to edit more HD content but just might have to since my measly Toshiba 1.5GHz C2D could edit HD using PD8… Using an i5-450 now w/512 ATI video.


PAX 123,

That’s just what I was doing… Simply put I was adding a sound clip (music) at the beginning (title only but on lower track and not during actual video footage) and an audio clip at the end (credits), even resorted to rendering the first half then adding it to the last half, still went all wonky… Did not try “rendering” each segment separately then combining them to see if that solve it… This happened when using SmartSound and my own clips of various formats.


In the end… We’re having trouble staying loyal to PD as it’s becoming more of an annoyance with every version, the idea was to “produce” movies and not trying to solve glitches in software which I find myself doing more of… I’m fully aware that every piece of software has its problems yet PD hasn’t gotten better in my case, the frequent “crashing” issues I encountered with previous versions still persists in PD9 and my solution was to slow down the pace but not sure if we can go much slower.

One could say maybe it’s my PC with the problems and you could very well be right except… I have 12 computers of various configurations and PD has been tried on a few and can’t say any of the installs have eliminated “any” of the issues I’ve encountered.

Dan

PS Thank you all for your suggestions as it's very much appreciated, after we calm down I might look further in it.
HP ProBook
Core i5 450
Win 10 Pro, 64-bit
RAM 8GB DDR3
ATI 512 MB
256GB SSD & 500GB 7200RPM HDD

The Trim and Multi-Trim function in PD9 is set up to handle HD files not SD clips. You will find that when attempting to trim SD clips the entire capture, that includes the clip highlighted in the timeline, will load into the trim window.This makes accurate trimming nigh impossible I have an SD Camera and have been through this exerecise. Cyberlink have been contacted regarding this but only seem interested in HD.
The so;ution to this is to use third party software when capturing, that converts theSD clips into files. I currently use a programe called Scenalyzerlive to capture SD footage and now have no problems ( www.scenalyzer.com ).
I hope this helps

Windows 7 Professional 64-bit (6.1, Build 7600)
VM Windows Professional XP
Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 860 @ 2.80GHz (8 CPUs), ~2.8GHz
Memory: 8192MB RAM DDR3
Card name: ATI Radeon HD 5700 Series
Chip type: ATI display adapter 0x68B8
Motherboard ASUS P7P55D-E
1TG Hardrive

Hi Des Towers,

Appreciate the information; find it interesting but kind of sad if that is the case… Just a little strange that my first couple of productions w/PD9 and the many others done w/PD8 did not exhibit this issue, was always able to get my trims within the “ball park” that I was trying to achieve with relative ease.

As for most of my SD captures, I just transfer the DV content from my camcorder onto a DVD using a standalone burner via firewire then convert the VOBs to MPG format and we’re off, never ever an issue doing it this way.

Understand this is the day and age of HD content but there are many of us who have hours and hours of SD footage waiting to be viewed, can’t understand why Cyberlink would not design the software to be backwards compatible… Guess it’s time to get more acquainted with my Macbook Pro LOL, definitely works better for the task but hard to change “me” to their way of thinking or stray away from those Windows habits.

May have to stick to Windows Movie Maker for my simple edits and I mean simple, just a shame PD cannot handle the same… Have many other programs but really like PDs layout, simplicity and ease that edits can be done (when working properly) and the ability to “up” than anti if one so desires.

Dan
HP ProBook
Core i5 450
Win 10 Pro, 64-bit
RAM 8GB DDR3
ATI 512 MB
256GB SSD & 500GB 7200RPM HDD

Hi Dan

As far as I am concerned trimming to ballpark accuracy is not acceptable.If you use software like Scenanalyzer to convert your SD clips to files you can then trim to single frame accuracy. I wholeheartly agree with you. PD9 should include in its capture window the ability, while capturing, to convert SD clips into files so that they can be trimmed the same as HD files.You should not have to use third party software.

Cheers
Des

I wish people would read the instructions, you can trim or split at individual frame level.

When using trim just use the "." or "," to move the curser one frame back or forward.

When using Split just click and hold timeline and drag to the right until you are down to frame level. My youtube channel====> http://www.youtube.com/user/relate2?feature=mhsn

Hi Robert,

Not quite with you.We are talking about the different way that PD9 handles SD clips as opposed to HD files
in the Trim and Multi-Trim windows. There is a significant difference. Frame accuracy can be achieved the way you say (I presume the "or" function you refer to is the frame advance or frame back buttons ), when using the Trim or Multi - Trim function or the Split function.The problem with SD clips is that PD9 loads the entire capture that that clip is part of. This could be 1Hr long. While the SD clip is highlighted in blue in the timeline of the Trim or Multi-Trim window finding the exact start of that clip is a time consuming clumsy process. This is totally different to the way the trim functions handle an HD file where only the selected HD file loads. Try trimming 100 SD clips in a project and you very soon get fedup. My recommendation to Dan was to use 3rd party software to convert the SD clips to SD Files, while capturing. Makes life much easier.

Whew that was a ramble

Des

Hi,
I have moved from SD to HD a good while ago however I do understand the issues raised. I put Des onto the product he mentioned as it was one I've used from about 10 years ago and functions very well.

During beta testing of 7,8,9 Des has been "on the job" regarding SD trim issues and has made a good number of reports.

While PD does have the ability to segment capture by timecode (as opposed to segmentation of a full captured clip displayed only in the library). It is not an option that is overly smooth. However PD does have that option for DV editors.

Both Des and I realise that SD trim isn't going to change in PD. PD now has to cater for the HD camera user - it's a one or the other and HD is the way forward.

Thanks
Dafydd

As Dafydd states the capture option "During capture,detect scenes by timecode and then save each scene as a separate file(DV-VCR mode only)" available in the capture preferences is not a good option. When using this option the DV Camera hunts back and forward over the timecode thereby increasing the wear and tear on the cameras tape transport system. For this reason and other previously stated reasons I now use separate capture software.

Des

Des Towers,

Your statement “As far as I am concerned trimming to ballpark accuracy is not acceptable” is understandable and I couldn’t agree more, in my case though “ballpark” was more than acceptable during this production and we would have been ecstatic if that could have been achieved… My ballpark did not deter from the overall impact of the rendered video but PD’s did.

The “capture” part is not an issue at all with me as I have several methods at my disposal as well as numerous other forms of editing software, “was” just liking PD better.

Don’t quite understand why handling both SD & HD content smoothly isn’t plausible with PD and couldn’t have been achieved, cost?... I’m not a software engineer so I don’t know.

Dan
HP ProBook
Core i5 450
Win 10 Pro, 64-bit
RAM 8GB DDR3
ATI 512 MB
256GB SSD & 500GB 7200RPM HDD