Has enyone else had encoding issues with DVD Arch

gwyador wrote on 8/23/2008, 10:05 AM
Greetings all, I loaded 5.0 up and have not been able to encode new files for dvd without them coming out flickery on the dvd and looking like the are missing one of the interlaced frames when the vob files are viewed on the PC. Now before anyone jumps in with "it's the media" or the Drive, I have thorughly ruled all elements out. in fact the only way I got back to writing successful dvd projects is to remove 5 and reinstall 4.5. has no one else had this issue? I am not making blueray discs just regular SD projects for now. I am really surprised and concerned if no one else has seen this because I went through a lot of media trying to rule out different brands of media as the cause. but old projects created before 5.0 was installed burned fine... crazy, if no one else has seen this it may be a fluke but I think it is a bug in 5.0.

Comments

johnmeyer wrote on 8/23/2008, 10:52 AM
Media will not cause flickering, that's for sure. If you have bad media, typically the symptoms are playback, then freezing, followed by more playback, etc. Or, simply no playback at all.

Flickering is probably caused by having the wrong settings. The project settings must match the media. If you have 29.97 media and encode for 24p, bad things will happen. Same thing the other way around.

Finally, you will get MUCH better results if you encode in Vegas and then simply used DVDA for authoring. If you do this correctly, DVDA should NOT re-encode the results.

To help you any further, since you didn't fill out your system specs for your profile, we'll need to know:

1. What camera did you use to capture your video?
2. What render settings did you use in Vegas to create the file that you imported into DVDA?
3. Are you using the full version of DVDA, or is the Studio version?

You should be able to get near-perfect results encoding either HDV or DV to DVD using DVD Architect.


gwyador wrote on 8/23/2008, 11:35 AM

john, thanks for your reply, but it is NOT the avi or the camera or the fact I chose to convert to mpeg2 in ardhitect(except for the possibility that the mpeg2 render in 5.0 is broken)... and the render settings were software defaults for SD footage unless there is a hidden menu I am unaware of in Arch 5.0... once again creating and renering the project in 4.5 resolves the issue... any other thoughts?
johnmeyer wrote on 8/23/2008, 1:26 PM
You didn't answer any of my questions and that prevents me from knowing what to suggest.
alk3997 wrote on 8/25/2008, 1:16 PM
...and if your source was interlaced did you set the field (upper or lower) in your source file correctly? Double-checking that one parameter has fixed nearly all of my just perceptible flicker issues.

Andy
L8R wrote on 8/26/2008, 10:00 AM
I have had this same issue. I posted the same question on here shortly after upgrading. Here is the thread:

http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?MessageID=603413&Replies=20

I was going back and forth with sony for two weeks about it. They only offered work around solutions. They didn't admit that they did have an encoding issue.
Read my forum thread for further responses.

nolonemo wrote on 8/26/2008, 10:16 AM
I still don't understand why anyone would encode in Architect instead of Vegas, if only so that you wouldn't have to re-render all over again if you found a mistake, for example, in your button navigation settings. Not to mention that AFAIK, Vegas has more render options....
gwyador wrote on 8/27/2008, 5:20 AM
L8R, Thanks for your comments, I read your thread and it does appear that our issues have similarities but one BIG difference, even my Menus come out witht he flickery interlaced effects out of the render in DVDA 5.

John, doesn't that pretty much rule out my footage or the way it was imported?? okay, so i didn't answer your questions, I have a hard time seeing them as relevant to what I am experiencing. especially since the EXACT SAME PROJECT renders fine in DVDA 4.5 since I am not using iny HD/HDV footage only SD and here are you answers John:

1. What camera did you use to capture your video?
A: Sony VX2000

2. What render settings did you use in Vegas to create the file that you imported into DVDA?
A: None, camera capture, straight to DVDA.

3. Are you using the full version of DVDA, or is the Studio version?
A: FULL.

Honestly I believe there is something broken in the MPEG2 Conversion in DVDA 5.

PS nolonemo, You CAN'T render menus in vegas so you end up creating mpegs in DVDA(even IF your video content is already mpeg2 and you have no recompress on) anyway so why are you so against it?? the quality is comparable and the optimize tool makes it quick and easy for creating a dvd without ever having to open the video in vegas.

gwyador wrote on 8/27/2008, 5:26 AM
I did have one additional thought, I AM running XP service pack 3 anyone else out there NOT having issues AND running service pack 3? I will reinstall 5 and do more testing after I have this run of dvd's out for my client. I can't waste anymore time on rendering bad disc's right now. but I will watch for any replies or thoughts you guys have.
ECB wrote on 8/27/2008, 6:22 AM
I just created/rendered a DVD with DVDA 5 using XP SP3 and the DVD looks fine. Select File > Properties > Disk Properties see what the Video defaults > Bit Rate is set to. It should be 8 Mbps.

Ed
gwyador wrote on 8/27/2008, 6:46 AM
Thanks for the reply Ed, at least I can rule out service pack three... no it is not the bit rate, like I say the bit rate is the same for the project in 4.5 and 5.0.... It LOOKS like an interlace issue, and I suspect in the end something with interlacing/progressive is what I will find, but like I said above, the exact same project renders fine in 4.5 but looks aweful in 5.0. Now I just read in the release notes that the 5.0 install does not preserve the preferences from 4.5 but I have made NO CUSTOM preference changes so the base preferences in 5.0 must be different from 4.5 somehow. But it is sounded more and more like I am a corner case here. anyone else have any thoughts or seen this issue?

Bryan.
ECB wrote on 8/27/2008, 7:14 AM
I know you are convinced all the settings are the same between 4.5 and 5 and most likely they are but humor me. Select Prepare DVD , Next, then Optimize. Select Menu and check the settings on the right.
Do the same with your video. If the settings are correct try setting both to progressvie and see if that makes a difference.

Ed
nolonemo wrote on 8/27/2008, 9:18 AM
>>PS nolonemo, You CAN'T render menus in vegas so you end up creating mpegs in DVDA(even IF your video content is already mpeg2 and you have no recompress on) anyway so why are you so against it?? the quality is comparable and the optimize tool makes it quick and easy for creating a dvd without ever having to open the video in vegas.<<

Just a question of the right tool for the right job. DVDA is an authoring tool, and gives you less control over rendering parameters. Not to mention that the optimize feature doesn't always settle on the best bitrate.

As to time, my point was that if you render in DVDA, if you change anything in the authoring process you have to go through the time to render everything, including the video, again. On the other hand, if you rendered in Vegas, all you do in DVDA is to render the menu pages, which takes a negligible amount of time. Though as I think of it, the smart-prepare feature might let you redo the menus without having to rerender the main video.

But in the end, it's your choice of course.
gwyador wrote on 8/28/2008, 9:00 AM
Yes, Nolonemo smart prepare does work very well in 4.5. I do agree that the right tool for the job can be to go into vegas and render mpegs since that allows so much more access to raw settings in the encoder but many times I just need a quick burn and it works great right in DVD-A. PS I have not found the optimize to be "off" the bit calculator seems to agree with it most of the time and differences are minor.

ECB, all the settings were indeed the same as I suspected. so now you want me to set my video to progressive, even though it is interlaced footage and try that? I think I will create a smaller test dvd file for that, I can't wait for it to render this whole dvd just to find out if changing the video tag to progressive will solve it. still, if it does, I suspect DVD-A 5 is interpreting the footage wrong when it creates the mpeg. we'll see.

Bryan.
gwyador wrote on 8/30/2008, 8:19 PM
To ECB okay so I made a smaller test file and rendered in 5 and it came out with the samer issue. I looked at the settings again and the were as I said before, the same in both 4.5 and 5. so I loked at the video settings and progrssive was set to no in both, but interestingly enough the option for progrssive is missing in 4.5 and greyed out so it cannot be changed in 5.0 since my footage is interlaced I suspect that it un-greys when progressive footage is brought in(but I did notice that even a new project with no footage added has it greyed out. This is a mess, I think it has something to do with the new entried in the disc attributes. Oh well, anybody have any othter thoughts?
rrrrob wrote on 9/4/2008, 10:42 PM
flicker usually has to do with the upper field first/lower field first settings of both the source video and your rendered output as mentioned above...I keep everything lower field first and it seems to work for me.
gwyador wrote on 9/8/2008, 5:37 AM
great thoughts RRRRob, unfortunately all my video is already set correctly as lower field first AND the main issue is I create a dvd project and the same dvd project in 4.5 encodes fine but encoded using 5.0 looks like one of the fields of the interlaced frame is missing(IE lines through the image.) any one else have thoughts? I am still waiting on a sony rep to get back to me on my service ticket.
L8R wrote on 9/12/2008, 6:30 PM
you won't get a straight answer from sony gwyador. As I said earlier. Check out my thread. I had the same issues. I spent two weeks sending updates and render test to sony techs.
They will not say there is a problem. Apparently rendering in Vegas at 1440x1080 60i .avi format then rendering in DVDA at 720 x 480 was the "wrong way to do it from the start"... I should have been rendering .m2t video stream for DVDA.
That's it.. that was my answer from Sony.
So, apparently the .avi function is totally useless to me or anyone for that matter.
Now when I compile a full DVD with animated menus and several video projecs. I now have to calculate the acumulated time of everything and put it into the bitrate calculater and figure out what bitrate I need for everthing to fit on a disc.
If I miss by even a bit and my project is too big for a disc. I now have to render everything again at a smaller bitrate.
Before... I rendered everthing the same in Vegas... saw how much space I needed in DVDA and adjusted the optimizing accordingly.
It sucks ass.... just wasted 7 hours today rendering something all over again.
To think they might address it in 8.0C.... lol ya whatever.
gwyador wrote on 9/16/2008, 11:56 AM
L8r, you sure got that one right!! I don't even think the sony "tech" I have been corresponding with even understands what my issue is!! dispite the fact that you are dealing with HD-avi's and I am only working with SD-avi's it sounds like our issues are very similar and our support experiances too!! I just redefined the support request to them(again) in the hopes that a light will go on and someone will "discover" what I am trying to say but whoo knows... I am going to have to stay with DVD-A 4.5 at least until someone comes out with a 5.0a or b or c or something that might give me the hopes they have fixed this. I guess I will hold off on building my blueray pipeline for a while.(LOL!!)
L8R wrote on 9/16/2008, 2:09 PM
Ya, apparently they were "quite aware" of the forum posts and the techs were working on it. Each time I got a reply back from them I had to re explain in detail what my issues was each time. Reading their replys was almost like the telephone game... by the time I hit send it was like my message went through an encrypter and came out totally different on their end. They respond back with something almost unrelated at first until I blew a fuse with them and told them to thouroughly read my responses as they are wasting my time with this shit.