orizaba

"Minimize video card usage (for slow PC)" does not allow second pass when creating HD video for PC, 2-pass option, or even the only pass on preset high quality? Is it a PTE bug? I put this on troubleshooting but got no reply.

55 views, and no ideas? Me too, this problem has no aparent reason. I even tried the 1-pass way (Preset 1920x1080, High quality) and... surprise, the creation did not even start, kept on 0%. I googled to see what is "FFServer...", then I looked for what happens with FFServer when CPU reaches 100% during the process, which fact I verified during the first pass of the failed 2-pass creation, and I concluded that all the problem could be related with my CPU. Which fact remembered me that some weeks ago I ticked the option "Minimize video card usage (for slow PC)", in Settings, Preferences, System, because I was affraid of some crash as project included some heavy slides and videos, and lots of audio tracks. In fact, my PC is not slow at all, but... Ok, after that "Minimize..." was cleared, I made my 2-pass creation, 20000Kbps, without any problem, as usual. Question: what this video card usage has to do with the second of the 2-pass custom creation, or even with the Preset "High Quality (1-pass)"? I should like to know the answer to this, or if this is a bug of PTE. Jose

My system: Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit, updated, RAM 32GB, CPU Intel Core i7 Quad core PTE v9.0.11 Project with 213 slides (photos and videos), 38 audio tracks, 33min 03s long. Template is 5,43GB. Problem: When I intend to create HD VIDEO FOR PC (Bitrate 20000, 2-pass), first pass runs ok and takes 32min, but second pass does not start (after waiting almost 1 hour), timeline keeping on 50%. Trying to see what could go wrong, I opened Windows Task Manager, and could see that Process "FFServer.exe *32" was steady on CPU 13, Memory 276.164K, and "PicturesToExe.exe *32" was steady on CPU 00, Memory 482.000K. Computer was not frozen, working normal. I can not imagine what is going on, as this is the first time it happens to me, even with big and long projects like this one. I know tha I can try to use the "1-pass" solution, but I do not want to, as its best quality is not as good as my 2-pass, 20000Kbps. So, someone has any idea what can be this problem? Point is that I intended to finish this project to present it to people tomorrow, and I can not make the necessary HD mp4 file. Thanks to all. Jose

You are right, I wanted to say "transitions", sorry. Jose

Hi Denis and Lin, Yes, a great innovative solution! I tried it and it starts to show as a real curling page! Good! Thanks to both of you. By the way, I didn't understand nothing of the former posts from Dave, but I think he is suggesting some kind of update to next PTE version concerning masks... Good! Best regards, Jose

Yes, it works... more or less! But the real effect of a real curling page does not really shows without the real page really curling. This is because we only see the text "curling" and this text beeing so small (in my case) we do not get the view of the page curling. Of course, in case the text occupies the full page, we can get "a sort of" curling page effect, but not so good. This is not a PTE problem or even a problem of the this mask solution, but only a problem of the visual effect itself beeing not so nice. See my tests: https://orizaba.sharefile.com/d-sd8d61cb7f394ef38 Jose

Very clever! Thanks for the idea, yes, other effects can be made. José

Thanks very much Lin, yes, I believe this is not possible in PTE. Regards, Jose

Is there some way to use this transition "Curling of page", in which the page is transparent and only some text really curls and shows over the former/under page? Thanks, Jose

Igor, With former PTE 8, MP4 Joiner always worked 100% correct with my MP4 files always encoded with 2 pass mode, I never used Quality mode. So the problem is not with MP4 Joiner, neither with MKV Toolnix, but with PTE9. I am not interested to create 2 short sample projects, I have my own big projects to join and I would expect to join them but this is not possible using the usual MP4 Joiner or even MKV Toolnix. In this meantime I can let you know that I succeeded to join my projects using a VLC command line which I discovered in the Internet, and it worked perfectly. Point is that PTE9 has something new which does not allow MP4 Joiner to work. Yes, you already said, PTE9 uses different encoders, but I suspect these new encoders have some kind of problem, much anoying, not to speak of my other problem concerning the ghosts, as I already reported you some months ago, including some samples I sent you. May be you should like to receive my actual big PTE9 projects which I want to join. I could send them to you by WE TRANSFER, and you could analyze them. Best regards, Jose

Hi Denis, I could try to use such command line. Please, just let me know in detail how, I mean, where must I locate the mp4 files to join, etc.. Anyhow, why PTE9 mp4 files do not work as former PTE8 files did? Concerning your mp4 files, you use 60fps, quality 100. Did you notice that this gives a much poor result than using 2-pass, 60fps, 20Mbps? Usually, 2-pass produces a file with 0,161 bits/pixel*frame, while 1-pass (quality 100) produces almost half this value, so quality is not so good, and we can clearly note the difference. Jose

Hi Igor, This problem still exists, all these months latter. I think this newer version of PTE 9 video encoders is not so good and reliable as former PTE 8 version, and this problem is causing me a lot of troubles indeed. I would thank you very much for trying to solve this as soon as possible, as in former PTE 8 version I NEVER had any problem with my published MP4 files, this is the reality. Now I have another problem related with this: As you know, I make big PTE projects, mainly using 90% video clips and 10% photos. Because of PTE 32-bit native version, I have to make several partial projects and join respective MP4 files together after. I always used software "MP4 Joiner" (joining without reencoding) and result in former PTE 8 version was perfect. Now, with PTE 9, this "MP4 Joiner" does not work! As an alternative, I convert my MP4 files into MKV files (using MKV Toolnix, no reencoding), and I try to merge new MKV files into 1 sole MKV file (again, using MKV Toolnix). Error! I am now making another big PTE project. I already built my first MP4 file (2 pass, 60fps, 20Mbps) (4,02 GB, 28:30,149 containing 201 slides, mostly video clips). I tried to join this MP4 file with a second MP4 file of same project, and after some 6 trials I did not get any result, it seams that both MP4 files are not identical (same parameters) and no joining software is able to join them without reencoding! This is a big problem! I remember that with former PTE 8 version I never had such trouble, things were reliable! Please, understand that this is serious. If you want, I can send you both MP4 files and you try to analyze them and join them if you can. I hope to hear from you. Regards, Jose

Hi Gary, I use Windows, sorry, I don't know nothing about Mac, I can't answer to that. Concerning Mercalli: you always must stabilyze clip by clip, never stabilyse 2 or more clips joined together (as recorded), because Mercalli doesn't know how to stabilyze "different" things! When is the case of old 8mm or Super8 movies (digitized), stabilyzation is a must because of the natural handy trebling when recorded and cameras had not any stabilyzation option, so, after using Mercalli the movie is much more smooth and pleasant. Jose

Hi Gary, I always have same kind of doubts and "sensations". Anyhow, I think that we must separate 2 cases: PTE project including video, or not (only slides). I am mainly interested in case when PTE project includes video clips. In this situation, all kind of videos (all kind of original frame rates - fps) when converted using PTE Converter, all are converted into AVI files with exactly the same frame rate as the originals. I mean, PTE Converter can give 12fps, 16fps, 18fps, 24fps, 25fps or 30fps, respecting the original. My theory is that I must publish HD MP4 files using a multiple of converted AVI files' frame rate used (whenever possible, so excluding 12fps, 16fps, 18fps and 24fps). I mean, when I use AVI files 25fps, my MP4 is 50p. When using AVI files 30fps, my MP4 is 60p (always progressive, never interlaced). Does this makes a difference? I "think" yes! In fact, I should like to hear a professional explanation for this. All this considering that I never sacrifice quality because of bigger files and more disk space used. In case of slides only, I would say that the best should be 60p, as all animations, etc., should be smoother. By the way: 12fps, 16fps, 18fps and 24fps are old frame rates used in old 8mm and Super8 movies, which when digitized frame-by-frame, produce AVI or MP4 files with exactly these frame rates, which fact produces a fantastic quality. I use to send my old 8mm and Super8 movies to "www.18-frames.com" (Germany), service and quality are super! When I receive back the movies and files, I separate all individual clips (using software "HandySaw DS"), then I use software "Mercalli" to stabilyze each clip, one by one, before using PTE Converter and editing my final movie as a PTE project. The final result is a fantastic quality of my old movies, better than seeing them projected in a screen, like in old days. I hope that all this information can be useful to some of you. Regards, Jose

Igor, Thanks for your testing. I have now updated driver for my graphic card AMD Radeon HD8970M (a quite recent update) and things are running better: now, the only player giving this problem is Nero Media Hub, while all other players run without this problem! May be you are right, problem can be with the player itself, but why in former PTE v8 this problem never showed, even with Nero Media Hub? Regards, Jose

Igor, Thanks for your testing. I played all 4 files using Nero Media Hub (which is the one I usualy use). First 3 files gave exactly the same big problem. The file "Problema 01_PTE10-NVENC" played with no problem at all. But, using MediaInfo, I can see that you got this good result downgrading Bitrate from my usual 20 Mbps to only 5000 Kbps, so getting 0,077 bits/pixel*frame instead of my usual 0,161 bit/pixel*frame. This means a much poor image. And the fact is that in former PTE v8 I still used Bitrate 20 Mbps and got no problem at all. So, why? Regards, Jose

Hi Igor, My both computers run Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit, 100% updated, not XP, and problem shows on both. Graphic cards are AMD Radeon HD8970M and AMD Radeon 5700 Series, drivers are updated. CPUs are Intel Core i7-4900MQ and Intel Core i5. Problem is that this problem only shows after upgrading to PTE v9, not when I used v8. Your MP4 made on Windows 10 shows exactly the same problem on my both computers. However, you say that you saw this problem only once on WMP. How can you explain that one time? Thanks and regards, Jose

Hi Igor, Please download from Dropbox all you asked for. This project I am sending you is a small part of the big project to which belongs. I am sending you the MP4 file published with 1 pass, but problem occurs as well with MP4 published with 2 pass, Bitrate 20000, 30p. The "Playing" screenshot is from playing the MP4 in my computer using Nero Media Hub. I hope you find the cause of this problem. Regards, Jose https://www.dropbox.com/s/9nmtzf6tluxv31k/Problema 01.mp4?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/6smozsx4mx7ad9y/Problema 01_Jun6-2017_16-58-35.zip?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/y26pn48j6xdlcqi/Problema 01.pte?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/a03gphjigv0vel8/Publish.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/r4nguos8d307wnu/Playing.jpg?dl=0

Since I moved from old PTE v8.0.21 to actual V9.0.10, I can see that quality of published HD video is "different". Using old v8.0.21 and versions before, I never got the problems like shown on the attached files 01 and 02 which are from v9.0.10. Original frame is attached file 03. These snapshots are from a slide which is slow panning from right to left. This slide (and other similar slides) are from a PTE project, but I can see same problem with several PTE projects made with v9. My computer and all used software did not change at all, so, problem must have to do with the way the HD MP4 is built in PTE v9. I must say that this problem shows when I play the MP4 on my computer using Nero MediaHub, VLC, Media Player Classic, etc.. But it did not show by the time of v8.0.21 and before. By chance, when I play the same MP4 using my Media Player "Popcorn Hour A-210" from Cloud Media (that is were I keep all my videos to show on TV), this problem does not show, and I am happy for that! What can be the reason of this problem? What is different in v9 from v8, concerning the way the MP4 is built? José

Hi Barry, "... and then just ran the mp3 through Audacity noise reduction." Did you find it necessary? That "metallic" voice is not nice. I use to do it and no need of Audacity. Regards, Jose

Use keyframes to fade-in / fade-out the title, using opacity 0 to 100 and 100 to 0.

I just sent private messages to Lin and Igor on this subject (including zip project). It seems that PTE does not create final MP4 file, as second pass is not done. Thanks, Jose

Igor, I just opened 2 new topics, in SUGGESTIONS, with these 2 requests. Jose

Igor, It concerns "zoom in" the timeline. When we zoom in (Ctrl+), the cursor moves quickly to the left or to the right and disapears. Most inconvenient! Would it be possible, when we zoom in, to keep the cursor static (in front of us)? Regards, Jose

Igor, It concerns to "Add track" (in Project Options - Audio). Every added track shows in Timeline view in the last/bottom place. Problem is when we have 10 or 15 tracks, when I want to edit such new track, I must MOVE TRACK UP 10 or 15 times, to put it in first place, because I must have it close to the slides in order to better sync, work volume control, etc.. I think it would be very easy to create 1 more option, besides the actual MOVE TRACK UP and MOVE TRACK DOWN. This new option would be MOVE TRACK TO TOP, I mean, put it in first place, close to the slides. In fact, in projects with many audio tracks (complex soundtrack), sometimes I have 30 or more tracks, so you can imagine how annoying it is to move them up, click by click, 10, 20 or 30 times. Regards, Jose