Don't Upgrade yet to V9 if using Cineform

CClub wrote on 5/12/2009, 3:25 AM

Sony has to IMMEDIATELY work with Cineform to address the compatibility issues with their intermediate files. For MANY of us using Vegas, using intermediates is not an option... it is part of our workflow for the many reasons known to users. I submitted a support ticket already, but I'm requesting that any other Cineform users also submit tickets and raise Cain until this is addressed as quickly as possible.

I received at least some positive information from one of the reps of Cineform (David Taylor) on a post last night at dvinfo.net: "We haven't done any extensive testing in Vegas 9 yet (with MOV) because most Windows users are doing AVI work, and we know AVI doesn't work right now. We had a good meeting with the Sony people at NAB and there is mutual desire to get this finished. But we need to get through the PPro importer problems first...." He also gave a workaround using mov files; won't work for me due to mass amounts of files, but if you're interested, http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/cineform-software-showcase/234173-vegas-9-compatibility.htmlhere's the link. [/link]

I appreciate that assistance, but this REALLY should have been addressed prior to V9 release, and at least we SHOULD have been notified. I would NOT have purchased V9 if I had known this, and I believe it's a bit of deceptive marketing... at the very least a "sin of omission" rather than of "commission." Bad form, Sony. I've always been a strong supporter of Vegas both in my local editing community and online. But I'm very disappointed with Sony right now.

Or am I missing something? Is Sony subtley telling us to back away from Cineform, from intermediates?

Back to post

Comments

CClub wrote on 5/13/2009, 4:19 PM

ForumAdmin,
Thanks for working on this.

Problem: I followed exactly as you stated above. Then I tried to open Vegas 9, it starts to load, gets up to "Creating Windows," and then Vegas 9 shuts right down.

I go back, delete the cfhd.dll from the Vegas 9 folder, try to open the same veg, Vegas 9 opens fine.

I re-copy cfhd.dll to Vegas 9, open the same veg, begins to load, Vegas 9 shuts down.

Edit: not sure if this makes a difference: I have the very latest version of Neo HDV installed, but the "Date Modified" for that file is 1-02-08... not sure if that could be the problem.

jabloomf1230 wrote on 5/13/2009, 4:25 PM

"In the meantime, if you have Vegas Pro 8, please close Vegas Pro 9 and then copy (not move) the file CFHD.DLL from the Vegas Pro 8 application directory (typically "C:\Program Files\Sony\Vegas Pro 8.0") to the Vegas Pro 9 application directory (typically "C:\Program Files\Sony\Vegas Pro 9.0").

This will restore the same CineForm capabilities and performance that Vegas Pro 8 had.

The CFHD.DLL from Vegas 8 is version 2.8, a version that SCS supplied with Vegas 8. The freestanding version that Cineform provides of the VFW codec (3.x or greater) is installed in the 32 bit Windows system folder (Either SYSWow64 or System32). If you're just using the SCS version 2.8, what you suggest might work. But any file created with a newer version of CFHD.DLL will not import or play properly with the V2.8 of CFHD.DLL installed.

CClub wrote on 5/13/2009, 4:27 PM

You're right, Jabloom. That explains the problem I just had.

jabloomf1230 wrote on 5/13/2009, 4:28 PM

I hope that the problem was computer-related. ;-)

CClub wrote on 5/13/2009, 4:34 PM

Haah!!

I tried going to the system32 folder, copying the cfhd.dll file there to Vegas 9 folder; it copied AND Vegas 9 started up. But I'm not sure what advantage I'd be looking for. Obviously I wouldn't see the 1/2 or 1/4 preview improvement yet, as that's being worked on... not sure how I would determine success....

jabloomf1230 wrote on 5/13/2009, 4:38 PM

The old versions (2.x) of the VFW CFHD codec (CFHD.DLL) are not completely forward compatible with files created under 3.x (and probably the 4.x beta codec) The old versions may allow importing and previewing of some files created by newer versions, or they may not work at all. You will also lose options for rendering that have been added between versions. I posted a question to the Cineform guys over at their message board to see what they know about this "workaround", but so far, they haven't responded.

John_Cline wrote on 5/13/2009, 4:45 PM

For what it's worth, after installing Vegas v9-32 it wasn't seeing the Cineform codec from my Neo Scene installation. I reinstalled Neo Scene and everything is fine now.

CClub wrote on 5/13/2009, 4:54 PM

Jabloom,
I finally put together what you said with ForumAdmin's comments (I'm a bit slow):
1. Those who want the basic Cineform access that they had when they purchased Vegas 8 can get it back if they do what ForumAdmin states to do.
2. Those who purchased the freestanding Cineform codec shouldn't do that.

David Newman wrote on 5/13/2009, 4:54 PM

Unfortuately the work-around will only work for those who never licensed the newer and significantly better CineForm codecs nor recieve CineForm source from others. For CineForm customers stick with Preview Full and auto off, until a patch is created.

Joking: We could say to CineForm customers, just install Vegas 6. :)

David Newman
CTO, CineForm

TGS wrote on 5/13/2009, 5:47 PM

btw Blinky,
Your father wants his image removed from this thread.

blink3times wrote on 5/13/2009, 6:36 PM

Yeah.... okay....

My father is Dr NR Anthonisen, served as Commander in the US Navy in Vietnam, and today happens to be of the top ten chest physicians in North America. While retired, he is addressed as The Dean of Medicine Ameritas. At 76 years of age, he still sees patients, edits for the New York Journal Of Medicine, and sits on more boards than you will see in a life time. He can probably run circles around both you and I before he's even had his morning coffee. Do a google on his name and see how many hits you get.

Now... can we move on please?

CClub wrote on 5/13/2009, 7:09 PM

And I'm sure if he did a Search of you on this forum, The Dean OMA would be proud of you as well.

blink3times wrote on 5/13/2009, 7:19 PM

For standing up in what I believe and not allowing myself to be bullied.... Yes... he would be.

NOW.... Can we PLEASE move on?

apit34356 wrote on 5/13/2009, 9:33 PM

"Can we PLEASE move on? "......... "Move On" lets not! Vegas9 is shaping up, SCS is working on it, (not at some people' speed), but they are trying.

If anyone has written over +100K code lines for a single app in C++,C#, Basic, Fortran, Java, Xcode..... knows not all errors are easily traceable especially with multi core threads.

Intel is currently updating testing software to help tune "threads" and to avoid "threads" crashing over memory and caching issues. If Intel has to continuously improve their products operation, maybe SCS can be given a little time before they are pronounce business idiots.

I would love to think vegas9 is error free but real-world testing seems to suggest other. I did buy the upgrade Box(not arrived yet) but I have not installed the Trial version either,( trying to avoid the pain). '-)

Terje wrote on 5/13/2009, 10:01 PM

>> Please show me where I said "I hate mac users"

That is how I interpret the paragraph below - you think of Apple users as "spoiled brats". The way I read it is that Apple produces overpriced computers for yuppies (Daddy's sports cars) - but then again, perhaps I am giving you too much credit when thinking you can be metaphorical.

Primarily why I hate Apple so much... the great land of yuppies. Funny... when I think about Apple I get this picture in my head of some spoiled brat driving around in Daddy's sports car wearing one of those silly white driving scarfs and driving gloves. It's everything I absolutely detest.

Terje wrote on 5/13/2009, 10:12 PM

>> maybe SCS can be given a little time before they are
>> pronounce business idiots

They should be, when it comes to bugs, and I am looking forward to giving V9 a spin as soon as I get some time. On the other hand, there are several different types of errors that may crop up in a piece of software. One of them is bugs in the way you describe, and they can easily be forgiven.

Another, much more problematic error, is when a software vendor decides to change public ABIs that are used by third-party vendors. Or even just APIs. This should only happen in extreme cases. The reason is simple, any serious vendor today is utterly dependent on third-party vendors. Public APIs and ABIs don't change accidentally due to errors. They change intentionally due to management decisions. Usually a development or a product managers decisions. Some times they also change due to lack of control of the dev team, in other words, the dev team are allowed to alter public APIs and ABIs willy-nilly.

Worst case, a bug will antagonize users, a changing API or ABI will antagonize third-party developers who will, eventually, just walk away from the platform. That is why they should only be changed when there are no other alternatives, which is rare. Most successful vendors maintain a backwards compatibility layer even when they change things. This is generally considered a prime responsibility of the vendor. SCS seems to have broken this "contract".

apit34356 wrote on 5/13/2009, 11:28 PM

This could be a long discussion, fortunately I do have serious design meeting on Wednesday. I can think on many OS's and products that have or had newer versions that do not support or do not fully support older "API"s or "ABIs calls. But I do agree with you that in theory, supporting third party apps updating is critical.

But since we are discussing vegas9, my understanding is that Jetdv's Exc., VASST products, NewBlueFX apps, etc are working. Quicktime's encoders/decoders are working and Cineform's issues have a temporary workaround(I think?). I think about every "system" guy/girl was wanting vegas to leave the old MS video interface, so, its not too difficult to image where some old "resources" and old "tricks" used to boost performance may not perform correctly when video buffers are being resized in vegas9 or cineform.

PLS wrote on 5/14/2009, 12:56 AM

Dear Forum Admin, the suggestion to paste CFHD.DLL from Pro 8 to Pro9 as below does not work. Any other suggestions???

"In the meantime, if you have Vegas Pro 8, please close Vegas Pro 9 and then copy (not move) the file CFHD.DLL from the Vegas Pro 8 application directory (typically "C:\Program Files\Sony\Vegas Pro 8.0") to the Vegas Pro 9 application directory (typically "C:\Program Files\Sony\Vegas Pro 9.0").

This will restore the same CineForm capabilities and performance that Vegas Pro 8 had.

Serena wrote on 5/14/2009, 1:09 AM

>>>For standing up in what I believe and not allowing myself to be bullied.... Yes... he would be<<<

I think he would too. You're a brave boy.

farss wrote on 5/14/2009, 2:44 AM

You make a compelling argument.
We should not forget that SCS are also 3rd party developers.
Imagine if you will that M$ decided that their old vfw interface was a security risk and disabled it in the next round of updates. They've given 3rd parties over 5 years notice to stop using it, seems fair enough warning :)

Bob.

VidMus wrote on 5/14/2009, 7:10 AM

I am using AVCHD UpShift by VASST

http://www.vasst.com/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=shop.flypage&product_id=134&category_id=9&manufacturer_id=2&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=66

and it works quite well. I tried Cineform and didn't like it.

UpShift costs less and it works with V9 because it is stand alone instead of integrated. Use the default high quality setting and you will get very good results.

www.vidmus.com

Terje wrote on 5/14/2009, 7:37 AM

>> We should not forget that SCS are also 3rd party developers.

Imagine the following scenario. Between now and the release date of Windows 7 in October, Microsoft finds that VfW is, as you say, a security risk, and that they just decide to drop it with a 4 week warning. Suddenly Vegas is not going to run on Windows 7. I would love to be in the house of blink at that time. One second he is cursing MS for killing Vegas on 7, next moment he is blaming SCS since they are not keeping up with the Windows updates. Sooner or later he'd end up in a Fight Club situation where blink the Vegas fanboi beats the living daylights out of blink the Microsoft fanboi and vice versa.

Won't happen though, MS are not that nuts. Wonder why others are.

blink3times wrote on 5/14/2009, 8:06 AM

"I would love to be in the house of blink at that time. "

Listen.. I have to ask....
What exactly is this fixation and or fascination you have with me? Do I affect your life THIS much? It seems about every post you pin up these days has my name attached to it in some way. I don't even have to respond to your posts as above.... but there you are, back again. I can switch you off at pretty much any time I want since you don't make a stick of difference in my life one way or the other... but it seems you have a tremendous amount of difficulty doing the same in return. I'm truly beginning to wonder if you actually dream of me at night.

Sometimes the power of the internet simply amazes me. I can have this kind of affect on a person thousands of miles away with a few simple clicks on a keyboard. Imagine that!

cliff_622 wrote on 5/14/2009, 8:48 AM

About this Cineform issue:

It just blows my mind that SCS just said;

"Ehh,...so what? Cineform doesn't work in V9,...we don't think that enough of our valued fan-base will be upset about that..."

Man,...this is a really critical error in judgement.

I would love to know the "inside" story on why/how this thing happened?

Overall,...I'm very shocked that it was taken so lightly.

CT

1 … 3 4 5 6

of 6