Russ Croucher

Okay I'll start the transfer to my cloud since it is 13GB.

I have a customer privacy issue with the original full AVI file. This also is not necessary since I'm trying to understand a little bit about the internals of how videopad operates. If I were to reduce the AVI file I would have to use videopad and to chop it. What version would I use? Then it's not the original version. I guess I could provided in PM of some sort if really necessary.

Okay I have a project file I'm using here it is: https://1drv.ms/u/s!AuSetTxgq7JxqNsdqdg1U2lOKMgSig?e=EZUOQp It reads an AVI file into the system so it can be exported. The project was created with 10.52 but seems to work with 7.51. The AVI file read in the property say 640x480 in 7.51 but 720x480 in 10.52. I was told this file since it is ace 720x480 file an AVI would be read in at that same resolution regardless of what the property say. However, my question is what is given to the image stabilizer? Here is the output in 7.51 mode one minute of the export. https://1drv.ms/v/s!AuSetTxgq7JxqNsfTG19tYclWga2MQ?e=oVczFK For some reason 7.51 is three times larger than the new version which 10.52 is three times smaller. https://1drv.ms/v/s!AuSetTxgq7JxqNseUBz6x9MwLKO0qQ?e=7ItL6A Thoughts? Help?

My issue is with all later versions of videopad they seem to come up with the properties in the bin directory of 640x480. So is that what is sent to the image stabilizer or can't send 720x480 even though the property say it's 640x480? 7.51 is the only version I have in recent history that comes up with properties of 720 x480 because of an aspect ratio bug. I must store the file as a mp4(720x480 or 540) version before he gets reloaded into videopad to do the image stabilization on different computer. I don't care too much about the aspect ratio before the image stabilization. I only care about it afterwards. I am trying to determine if I can use a later version to read a this pinnacle file 23 AVI, do image stabilization in videopad with at least 720x480, write it out as MP4, and then send to handbrake for final processing at the appropriate encoder level. As you can see I have a very detailed order of which things must occur. Are you saying if I read in AVI of 720x480 which it says is 640x480 and I specifically say store it out as 720x540 it will write it out correctly without any loss?

Here is the file I'm looking for from video pad 10.52 or the latest version. https://1drv.ms/u/s!AuSetTxgq7JxqNp_6061iwurXbs7zA?e=uW8M0n It is the previous file in 720x540 resolution with the aspect ratio 4 x 3. This provides no loss of detail on the width and stretches the vertical 482 match 540 for the aspect ratio stretch. This was done with version 7.51 storing the file in 720x480 and then reloading the same file with the latest version and stretching the vertical to 540 with the output being 720x540. This can then be image stabilized. I did verify that 7.51 could read the AVI file of pinnacle 23 and directly stretch the output vertically. So my real question is is there any way to do this exact same same thing with the latest version so I don't have to go back to 7.51 and rely on a bug? If I can force video pad to read the width at 720 or greater, not 640 I think the rest would be history.

What I'm really trying to do is use Pinnacle 23 to collect the data in FireWire and produce either an AVI or an MPG file at 720x480. Knowing all this that the aspect ratio is incorrect it would be nice to have the ability of videopad to import this as either 640x480 the default or 720x540 the correct aspect ratio with no loss of pixels. Do you know of any way to do this with the current version? It's okay to add extra pixels before the image stabilization but not take them away. That's why you have to use the input resolution of correct horizontal or vertical size that matches the original file. Taking information away before going into the image stabilization is not allowed. Should I make this is a request for possible addition if it's not possible now?

I'm finally trying to put to bed the retrieving of video with FireWire. I cannot get FireWire to work with videpad so I am using Pinnacle 23 which works fine. It will output an AVI or an MPG file with Windows saying it's 720x480 (aspect ratio 3:2). However, once that file is inputted into video and it will only load 640x480 (aspect ratio 4:3). I think in the previous post we already have determined that 4:3 is the correct aspect ratio. However, because of the image stabilization I need to read the file in 720 by something bigger than 480. I think the correct aspect ratio would be 720x540. Is this possible? Here is the original file that Windows says is 720x480 with Pinnacle 23: https://1drv.ms/v/s!AuSetTxgq7JxqNsA0szXACY5cMu1Aw?e=DtcPjW I then use a bug in videopad v7.51 which will read in the video at the correct resolution (720x480) but the wrong aspect ratio. Then I take and convert it to MP4 which could be read in later on any newer version of videopadwith the resolution 720x480. I would be happy was 720x540 which would be the correct aspect ratio. Here is the output file I create MP4 with version 7.51. https://1drv.ms/u/s!AuSetTxgq7JxqNp_6061iwurXbs7zA?e=JQ9E8b Can you guys give me some insight to what I should do? I don't want to lose the hundred bits of information that video is throwing away when is downsizing 720 to 640.

Thanks for the link. Version 10.52 works great. I have updated all systems at 10.52. I would be more than happy to try to figure out some other ways I can use your fantastic software with my scripts in the future. I will check it periodically. However sometimes my system is not fast enough to notice problems.

I will download it today and give it a try in the next 3 or 4 hours. I will let you know today here. Is there any way I can get signed up email when you update the beta version? I would be willing to give it a whirl if I know it's been updated. Can you give me the beta site link again I have lost it.

I will make the suggestion in the support post. I put it on here to see if anyone else has experienced a similar problem. I don't consider it a bug but consider it an undesirable characteristic. I will send the suggestion out tomorrow. It's frustrating because this is been in beta for about a week and I have not had time to research it.

In the latest version 10.48, a change was made to the video export that used the filename of the project as the name of the export video by default. A change was made now it uses the last name exported. This might be wonderful for an actual human operator using the product but in my case I have many scripts which are now useless because they would change the project name knowing this would affect the output of the file. I could change my scripts to output the export of the name into videopad however, this would require much more knowledge about the Windows export dialog screen. I could do 10 forward tabs to get to the name before I create the name or 3 back tabs. However, this locks me in to the format of the Windows dialog screen. Let me explain in more detail. I have a business of transferring videotapes and videopad is one of my workhorses. I use videopad to load the file, image stabilize it, and write it out to different numbers in an automated procedure. I have determined in life that computers do not make mistakes humans do. So the more automation the better. Computers are hundred percent right or hundred percent wrong. My suggestion would be to have config check box somewhere that you could choose or some configuration in an INI file somewhere. Anyone else have this problem? As of right now I had to stick with 10.43 until I have a fix for the problem on my end. This is not a bug with videopad. Any suggestions of how I get around this?

Normally I do go back and try earlier versions to determine which version works. I do have 8.45 but I like some of the newer changes of the newer versions. So I try to stay with the later versions if I can. I'm currently using 10.43 on everything. Also that computer is locked into that version I am using until I change it and my scripts that I run are tailored to the version I'm using. But since I have a workaround I'm happy. I'm tickled now that I have a good link on good ways (OneDrive links) I can give you support guys links to my files.

Being a software engineer for many years I knew this had to be file specific. For now the simple workaround of converting to MP4 allows me not to have to wait that 30 minutes just for the weird idiosyncrasy of that file.

I am in the process of converting about 50 small MOV clips into one single 30 minute MP4 video. The videos are all listed under properties as 1440x1080. However with the viewing of that file with the symbol media player or VLC are all it displays it as 1920x1080. The correct aspect ratio is definitely 1920x1080 but is only stored as 1440x1080 here is a cloud link to the 1st MOV video. https://1drv.ms/v/s!AuSetTxgq7JxqM0-zXZidQfdM4l44g?e=oHjUqI When I load this in videopad it takes 42 seconds to load that MOV file(I delete the cache file). So I have figured out a way to send that file to handbrake and convert to MP4 which will only take 2 seconds. So for my workaround I converted all 50 files to MP4 with handbrake and then sent those MP4's to videopad. The solution was very fast. Is there something else I can do to speed up the MOV files? What about the aspect ratio of the file being 1440x1080 but clearly needs to be displayed as 1920x1080. Also when I load that file either MP4 or MOV into videopad it comes up as 1920x1080.

Thanks I have to give it a try. I'm currently using 10.43 on everything.

SUCCESS! Apparently I was doing everything as H264 since I run my final product in H264. Even though this intermediate step is done with very high output (high-quality). So when I change it to MPEG4 everything was fine. So now I'll change everything to that and use that as my intermediate step. One last comment on the image stabilization is theater our older analog videos everything had to be done is interlaced. We got away from interlaced about 20 years ago. But older videos still use them.

SUCCESS! Clearing that option with the cache file allows the audio file to work. However, 10.43 seems to have a lower audio amplitude than the 8.97 that I was working with. 8.97 seemed to be about 80% audio level. However with that new option unchecked and the latest version I'm only about receiving 25% audio level. Is that something I can change easily? I also had one DVD with 8.97 that all of the VOB files were 80% audio level and one VOB file was only 25%. So I'm going to redo that entire DVD with the latest version with that box unchecked and will all be at 25% volume level for the entire DVD.

Here is a link to the VOB file that has audio problem under the latest version 10.43. This works great with version 8.97. So until this audio problem is resolved I am sticking to 8.97. https://1drv.ms/u/s!AuSetTxgq7JxqMYZlYUB99M-jw_28Q?e=BCJHXu

Analog conversion is done with S-Video directly into a digital imaging Matrox VIO card card. I do the following tapes: VHS, SVHS, VHS–C, SVHS-C, Video8, and Hi8. All analog conversion is done using S-Video at 640x480 through BNC connectors. The loss of sync you're referring to is from the customer turning on and off the camcorder going through different video clips. All VCRs are commercial SVHS VCRs Panasonic 1970 and even on eBay sell for $500 used today. Some customers even switch between SP and LP mode between these video clips. The original unstabilized video is one hour and 21 minutes in both unstabilized and Windows 7 stabilized. However, under Windows 10 stabilized version is 5 hours and 16 minutes.

Recently I have updated to the latest version of 10.43 and now going back and copying DVD that have evolved files again the audio problem has cropped up again. So I go back to version 8.97 and works great. So do have a beta version I can try to see if this is fixed? Now that I use Microsoft dropbox for sharing files is or anything I can do to help get this resolved? I have no issues with version 8.97.

Here is a link to the original file unstabilized. https://1drv.ms/v/s!AuSetTxgq7JxqMYYtmc45CFLBb8jkw?e=bltSVb

Here is the 2 files that are identical except for one is Windows 7 and the other is Windows 10. win7 https://1drv.ms/v/s!AuSetTxgq7JxqMYWfcFJHuEyNZLtIQ?e=HG4Gn1 win10 https://1drv.ms/v/s!AuSetTxgq7JxqMYXUfvrRpQsOSx13Q?e=I1WbvE I also have one workstation that is dual processor and the image stabilization will not start again after one file. Is there any intention to ever change this so it will work with multiprocessor even if it doesn't use the other processor? I even went into that particular processor and told video not to use the other processor but that doesn't seem to help.

I did verify the image stabilization options above under the advances I always check them and there was no change. The one interesting fact is some of the videos I have are interlaced and some are not so that's an option I had to change a lot. Also on the version I have the NTSC standard is 0,.912. However, I've knows that only affects how much skewing is going on with the stabilization. I have uploaded to my Microsoft one drive 2 files that I'm going to submit official bug reports for this problem. I have a workaround which I'm currently using. That is to image stabilize with either Windows 7 or Windows 10 and then run the final output through handbrake which I always do anyway. Handbrake does an excellent job of the de-interlacing old analog videos and setting the encoder level I wish to use.

I understand it may not be a videopad bug. It's an anomaly I have a notice between the same project file with Windows 7 versus Windows 10. So to me it's a bug in Windows 10. Maybe there's a configuration that I did not notice inside only use Windows 7 in the past. So I'm going to go through the configuration of the D shaker plug-in very carefully. I don't mean to give negative results about any product but as an engineer who worked on very large programs we create bugs not even realize it. I love this program is awesome. But every awesome program has some possibility of bugs

I thought about it I did submit a bug report but I did check the box for uploading a file because the Windows 7 version is 2 gigs in the Windows 10 version is 11 gigs for the same file. So I would have to zip it all up and send it as one file and that would be 13 GB. So I opted to just not include the file update and see if anyone else's had the similar type of problem. I've just discovered this and I think I went back several versions it was still there. I normally use all Windows 7 but I have been slowly migrating to Windows 10 on my latest very fast workstations. Actually I like Windows 7 better because it doesn't do updates and I don't want updates. As long as it works I'm happy. I will say I absolutely love this product. But as all engineers like myself know you fix something and sometimes you breaks something without realizing it. I do have 1 TB of Microsoft one drive with my Outlook 365 account. Can I use that to create a link you could use here? I would find that much easier than your FTP server. That way I can actually include the link in with my bug submission. I would leave the bug file there until I realized it is fixed in the later versions.