• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Aresby

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    United Kingdom
  • Interests
    All things Arduino & Electronics
  1. Thanks for clarifying the differences, c_major, between the two methods of generating videos in two products. I guess the point here is that NCH obviously understands our need for speed and has it on their backlog. That's all we can ask for. Stability first, of course. Now that I've found the root cause of my BSODs (bad memory stick) I'm generating my VP videos with gay abandon again as I'm not on tenterhooks waiting for the crash!
  2. And Bob has the machine that I aspire to get; but he (well, VP) also has the problem that prevents me from even thinking about it. Now, NCH say some of the processing is done by the GPU and VP's been made more efficient generally, but I still second Bob's desire to configure VP like the Prizm Video File Converter; render a 40 minute video in under 10 minutes whilst you're having a coffee. Re-exporting when you discover a mistake is then not so onerous. Any plans on this front NCH?
  3. Final update on the Windows 10 BSOD saga: It's not VP causing it. After lengthy investigation (crashes were sporadic) MemTest86 identified a stick of Crucial memory that was to blame, which I'm hoping to RMA as they have a lifetime warranty (for the original purchaser). So, nothing to worry about on the VP front, I'll get this stick replaced and get another to bring the total to 16Gb that may help general Windows (and more specifically, VP) improve performance.
  4. Right, I understand about the 16Gb, as you rightly say Win10 and everything else that runs will certainly make use of more memory anyway (previously I had 12Gb) and will make less of use of a swap file. Regarding the bit about offloading the processing onto the GPU, does that apply to all GPUs even my rubbish Intel Graphics (that you positioned one step above a 32K VGA card I believe)? I'm not sure my GPU is going to help (rather hinder) but it raises the question about upgrading my GPU to something more meaty. Put it another way: if I were to upgrade to a modern Intel i7 Quad Core (eg Intel (Haswell-E) Core i7 5960X) with NVIDEA Gforce GTX1080 (just a random card) would I expect to see a significant reduction in export time (I render not in H264 but mp4 as it's quicker, at a constant 8192bps and 25fps)?
  5. I mean VP process varied between 30% - 70%. There was still capacity (% idle) left. Regarding your point about memory usage, I can totally understand that you don't want to my PC to run out of resources but I'd like to know how to increase the performance (reduce the export time). For example, I've removed what may be a faulty RAM stick from my PC so now I'm only running on 8Gb (barely sufficient for Win10 and VP). If I purchase another RAM stick to bring the total to 16Gb will VP increase the threads to take advantage of that extra memory or am I wasting my money? Any pointers gratefully received!
  6. I generating my most recent video using V5.01 (and tried out the "censored" filter whilst I was at it, pity you cannot move and resize the block on screen rather than via the sliders, a future enhancement perhaps?). I was disappointed that despite your previous response to my post about slow exporting, this version did not use all available CPU on my i5 quad core machine. It seemed to render in more-or-less real-time (35-minute video took roughly 35m to render, and the CPU varied between 30% - 70%). I don't understand why the export rendering process cannot be made more CPU intensive - under the control of the user. That is, if I want to just go and make a coffee whilst exporting because my PC is, effectively, 100% busy with VP exporting then that's my choice. On the other hand, if I do want to still use my PC and accept that VP will export more slowly that should be my choice too. I reckon my PC used to generate a 30 minute video in about 20 minutes using 4.48 and it used 100% CPU. Why not now?
  7. release note

    Because they are selling software almost as a service. Whilst your current version will work forever (?), the new version requires a new payment which I was happy to do given it's been a year since I paid anything. Pretty standard to do this although I must admit to expecting a bigger step change between v4 and v5.
  8. Mmm. Interesting. I added my clips in the usual fashion. They tried to start generating the green line but gave up about 30% of the way through (the green line generated so far disappeared). I then increased the "cache clear out" setting to 3Gb and guess what? They started generating the green line again and succeeded. Coincidence? Only NCH support will be able to tell us whether that clear out value is in some the maximum size of the cache directory. Is this the answer?
  9. Did that, even moved the cache folder to a different drive, no difference. I'll be making another video this weekend so I'll let you know if the symptoms repeats...
  10. Many times, in fact. I even moved the cache folder around. VP used to be so stable... On the plus side, it did export my 30+ minute video, first time, without crashing or anything!
  11. Hi Guys Another video, another surprise from VP. This time, I noticed the preview was being particularly awkward, with it freezing with a fixed picture many times, especially after I had cut it. I've cleared the cache to force it to regenerate but it happened many times. I even changed the resolution of the preview to ensure it really was regenerating the cache. I also noticed that when I added video clips to the project, no preview seemed to be generated; that is, you could play the clip, but no green line appeared below the clip to indicated it was (or had) generated the preview. Many of my clips now have partial green lines (I left it for several hours) with several gaps. Here's a (partial) screen shot: I've never seen this sort of behaviour before with VP (all my clips in all my other 70+ videos all generate the green line as soon as added to the project, with no gaps). I've cleared the cache, restarted VP, but the behaviour persists. Is my cache too small? I've set it to clear out unused cache files once it hits 1Gb. Any ideas?
  12. So as long as I preview in a 16:9 format and export in same format (although at different resolutions), the preview setting will have zero impact on the export performance, bit rate, time taken etc?
  13. encoding

    The support guys have also told me to untick the Use Hardware Acceleration under the options too, as my PC is the worst in graphics capabilities. It certainly enabled me to generated my video but may have been coincidence as it doesn't fail every time.
  14. Good, as I expected. Thanks for confirming this.
  15. You could try what was suggested to me when I had export failures: Create final, ready-to-export sequences of a much shorter length (perhaps 30 minutes). Export each sequence so you now have a number of .mp4 files (or whatever you choose) then combine (join) those using any number of (free or paid for) utilities. If you find my response to the original problem I had, I mention which one I found worked OK - no video preview in the UI, just a list the videos and it produces (eventually) one single .mp4 file. Looking at your spec, I would think that more memory might help too. Windows 10 (you using Win?) requires on my machine 4Gb just for itself. Using VP brings the total to about 6Gb. Your rendering (export) time is huge, perhaps I don't appreciate the format you're rendering to. With VP 4.58 I'm finding it exports in about real-time (30 minute video takes 30 minutes to export). The next version is supposed to revert to pre-4.58 behaviour and spawn more threads or something to fully utilise available CPU so will be much quicker. If NCH ever produce a 64-bit version of VP they could just load all our videos into memory and work on that - that would speed things up I guess but that's all it is