Comments

videoITguy wrote on 10/17/2014, 7:06 PM
OK, folks, do not know what is going on here - but the referenced codec pack cannot be found on the official Avid website. Version 2.3.9 is the latest and has been for sometime. What's up with the link to what? that PeterDuke provided? Version 2.5 is not even indexed by Google search engine.

Beware!
PeterDuke wrote on 10/17/2014, 8:04 PM
I found it by Google.

I wondered whether there was a later version than 2.3.9 and not knowing whether it would be 2.3.10 or 2.4.0, I searched for 2.4 which came up with 2.5 which has a reference to 2.4

I thought VideoHelp would be safe.

Oh dear, please don't shoot me!
Tom Pauncz wrote on 10/17/2014, 8:16 PM
So, Peter, did you download and install?
Was it really 2.5?
Tom
john_dennis wrote on 10/17/2014, 8:40 PM
"Was it really 2.5?"

I downloaded it and put it on a test machine earlier today. The file was named "2.5". Since I didn't do a test render or actually use it today, I can say little else.
videoITguy wrote on 10/17/2014, 9:39 PM
As I said Avid as a company knows nothing about such a version. Hence I am led to believe as happens so often with helper sites or sites masquerading as helper sites - they just rename the download link - and that creates a unique Google index only linking to their site. Can you guess why that is?
PeterDuke wrote on 10/17/2014, 10:21 PM
Yes I installed it. AVG free antivirus did not complain when I downloaded it and Malwarebytes found nothing either. I did a test render and everything seems normal.
PeterDuke wrote on 10/17/2014, 10:25 PM
Version "2.5" file size is slightly greater than 2.3.9 so it would not seem to be a simple link to AVID's web site.
videoITguy wrote on 10/17/2014, 10:27 PM
There is NO link to Avid corporate website my friends.
NormanPCN wrote on 10/18/2014, 12:18 AM
Here is 2.4
http://avid.force.com/pkb/articles/en_US/Download/Avid-Codecs-LE-v2-4

The 2.5 seems to have the same/similar digital signature as the 2.4.
videoITguy wrote on 10/18/2014, 12:31 AM
Examine NormanPCN link above and appears on Avid Corporate as legit.
My Firefox browser is set up with a large number of safeguards and it detects the actual source trace of supposed author link of 2.5 original is hot and would be a risk to enter.
Tom Pauncz wrote on 10/18/2014, 9:22 AM
OK .. here's a question then...
Just installed v2.5 and when, in Vegas, I select Render As -> Customize Template and then Configure, the window titlebar shows v 2.3.7.

What do others see after installing v2.5?

edit: More testing...

Removed the installed Avid codec, claiming to be 2.5 and it looked like a clean remove.

Installed v2.3.9 first, and the titlebar, as above, still showed 2.3.7.

Removed again after tracking down where the codecs were installed as even after removal, I could still Configure in Vegas as before. This is because the uninstall does not remove the files installed in the directory below.

The codecs actually live under the QTComponents directory as .qtx files.

Once I removed those, I could no longer Configure in Vegas.

I now installed v2.5, and what do you know? The .qtx files had the same timestamp (01/08/2014) as the one showing 2.3.7 in the titlebar.

So, as far as I can tell, there IS NO later version than v2.3.7, unless I am very much mistaken.
NormanPCN wrote on 10/18/2014, 2:14 PM
Installed v2.3.9 first, and the titlebar, as above, still showed 2.3.7.

2.3.8 and 2.3.9 have both shown 2.3.7 in the dialog for me. The install did overwrite the old DLLs. It seems that Avid just has not updated the text string in their source code or resource file.
farss wrote on 10/18/2014, 3:06 PM
Possibly the revision level of the package is 2.5. The package contains several different codecs which may or may not have changed.

Bob.
Tom Pauncz wrote on 10/18/2014, 3:30 PM
Got that Bob, but how do you explain the time-stamps being identical to who-knows-what-I-had. I thought I had installed v2.3.9 some time ago.
Tom
farss wrote on 10/18/2014, 4:13 PM
[I]"how do you explain the time-stamps being identical to who-knows-what-I-had"[/I]

I cannot. Maybe someone should ask Avid. TBH overall their website leaves me cold. I appreciate this is something they're giving away but even so, they're not leaving me with a strong desire to invest in their products that's for sure.

Bob.
Tom Pauncz wrote on 10/18/2014, 10:54 PM
+1
PeterDuke wrote on 10/19/2014, 5:41 PM
I wonder whether the DNxHR codec will be available free!

I also wonder whether HD 50p will become available for DNxHD. It is discrimination that they do include 59.94p but not 50p.
ushere wrote on 10/19/2014, 8:36 PM
in general, (i ALWAYS generalise), most nle's seem to default to ntsc standards with pal playing second fiddle....

vegas is no different.