iso render failure in 10d

SMcQ wrote on 5/7/2011, 5:49 PM
I rendered a 3D Blu-Ray disc image with 10d, all seemed to be going well until the very end when I got only an error message for the long wait. There was no iso file.

"An error occurred preparing the image.
Filename:
Status: Failed to connect to an IPC Port: The system cannot find the file specified."

I used the 1080 24p template and the image only option. I don't think there was anything in the render setup about an IPC port, and can't figure out what "cannot find file specified" can mean when Vegas clearly was rendering the file out for hours.

Can't test with a render and burn combined command yet as I need to get a blu-ray burner, but that should not have mattered if simply rendering a disc image. I have no doubt whatsoever that that is what I chose, not a possibility of operator error on that count because I triple checked myself, but the error message would suggest it looked for a burner even though this was a render to image.

A bug, I'd say. I really don't want to bother with support, they are useless, and I don't think they even bother to read this forum. (I have a support contract I've not even bothered to initiate because of the negative feedback on this forum, which is THEIR OWN!)

Anyone else experience this, or perhaps experience a direct contradiction?

SMcQ

Comments

ushere wrote on 5/7/2011, 6:26 PM
if you don't report faults then scs will probably never know about it. all it takes is filling in the form - if you don't then you can't say scs is 'useless' if you've no 'personal' experience of it...

btw. if you expect any help fill in your sys specs!
Steve Mann wrote on 5/7/2011, 7:50 PM
You didn't fill out your system specs, so I just have to guess that you're still running Vista?

You should never get an IPC (Inter-Process Communication) port error. You may have inadvertently deleted a folder or the log file. If you can't find DVRMSToolbox, look in the Windows event log to see what happened.

Steve Mann
SMcQ wrote on 5/7/2011, 8:52 PM
Win7 64 with Vegas 10d 64, on i7 860, 8GB RAM.

BIG UPDATE: Using the 720 60p 3D blu-ray template was successful in rendering an iso file. Saved to the same folder as the first, failed effort.

You are right, I should not complain, just focus on the issue. Disappointing out of the box experiences can sour one's mood.

No missing folders. I can post the screen shot of the error message, don't see how to attach pictures to this forum though.

What was different between then and now? I had rebooted, could make a difference. I did not try to pillar box ahead of time with pan and crop, instead letting the render default to pillar boxes for the 4:3 original. The 720 template is 60p and the original is 30p, while the 1080 template is 24p, Haven't the foggiest if any of these factors would determine a different outcome.

If iso images can be previewed, it might be useful to see how the job looks, but I think they can be played only after burning, which will have to wait until the drive arrives. Correct me if I'm wrong.

So, time to try again with a 1080 24p template. I do wish there were a 30p or 60p template, as there's no way to modify them. Or maybe there are good reasons those are not available to 3D blu-ray, I don't know.

Will report further results.

SMcQ

gpsmikey wrote on 5/7/2011, 9:25 PM
See the #2 sticky "forum markup ... " at the top of the forum for markup information (adding links, images etc).

mikey
SMcQ wrote on 5/7/2011, 9:42 PM
Checked the display sys info box. Didn't know about that until scolded for not doing it. As far as images, the links method is useful for stuff posted elsewhere and I'll use that; for throwaways like a screen shot of an error message I'll have to get a web site where I can upload them first.

At any rate, a second effort with the 1080 24p template is plugging along. Is there sound technological reason for not having a 1080 30p or 60p template? Would this be out of 3D BD specification?

SMcQ
john_dennis wrote on 5/7/2011, 10:24 PM
"Is there sound technological reason for not having a 1080 30p or 60p template?"

Likely not a purely technological reason, at least in the long run, but 24p is the only official progressive frame rate standard for Blu-ray disc. While you're waiting for your BD burner to arrive, peruse the first couple dozen pages of the DVD Architect manual. Even if you don't use DVD Architect there is some useful background information about supported formats.
ushere wrote on 5/7/2011, 11:07 PM
use photobucket or similar to host your pics then link to it here....
SMcQ wrote on 5/8/2011, 12:39 AM
This time the iso render from the 1080 24p template worked.

I was quite methodical about performing all the steps the same, but there were some differences in how the file itself was set up. But I prefer to believe that a simple reboot was the reason for success. Should have remembered that after an update install on top of an earlier version, always reboot. I don't know if that is written somewhere in the annals of common sense, but it has solved problems before.

The file size is interesting, when compared to .mp4 renders I've made from the same master, albeit at 30p and to 2048x768, with about the same average bitrate of 10Mbs. The iso file, which contains other stuff I'm sure, is the about same size for both the 720 60p and the 1080 24p: around 1.276 GB, give or take a couple of MB. Considering that the MVC format is supposed to be more efficient, this compares pretty well to the .mp4 file size of 1.85 GB 30p.

Of course, only when burned to BD and viewed will the quality be known.

SMcQ
SMcQ wrote on 5/8/2011, 1:13 AM
Apparently the DVD Architect 5.2 manual moves those pages to the back (page 197 etc), but you are right, they are useful.

What I could not find anywhere, even pages deep into Google Searches, is the technical specification for Blu-Ray 3D. Just a lot of blurbs about the announcement of finalization on Dec 17, 2009, abundant list opinions thereafter and a few rare technical critiques in early 2010, none of them with any citation of the technical document itself.

Its the actual, technical specification a trade secret? If somebody was critiquing it wouldn't they have access to the foundation document?

Not even the Blu-Ray Disc Association offers anything on "Blu-Ray 3D"; try the search and it turns up empty.

A link to the actual, technical specification document would be much appreciated. Not sure what it will tell me, as all that really matters is what Vegas 10d can do, but now I'm curious why this specification was announced but apparently not published on the web.

SMcQ
PeterDuke wrote on 5/8/2011, 1:22 AM
I presume the Blu-ray spec is like the DVD spec. It is commercial in confidence. Only after you have paid some money and signed a non-disclosure agreement can you get it.
WillemT wrote on 5/8/2011, 2:47 AM
Hi SMcQ. Just an idea.

If you use something like Virtual Clone Drive from Elaborate Bytes to mount the iso file, which then looks like the final Blu-Ray disk, you can use a viewer like PowerDVD 10 to play the Blu-Ray disk image you created. That at least gives you some idea what it looks like. Better than nothing.

Willem
SMcQ wrote on 5/8/2011, 3:26 AM
Willem, you nailed it!

I came back to the thread to report my good results and there your suggestion anticipated the outcome.

Except it is even better than one might think, when using Stereoscopic Player to open the SSIF file on the VirtualCloneDrive, which shows as a BD-ROM drive (by default, I guess, because I didn't choose that).

The cool thing about Stereoscopic Player is that it provides many options for stereo viewing, and it natively decodes MVC.

I'm happy to report the 720 60p looks good, with quality of encoding to equal .mp4 at the same settings. I don't know if a Blu-Ray player would enlarge this to the full 3D screen size or leave it at native resolution. The audio level was much lower than the same file setting for .mp4, might have been the choice of Dolby codec, or the player chain, I don't know.

Now to look at the 1080 24p version. I'm sure I'll not be happy with dropping 20 percent of the frames, but have to look to be sure.

SMcQ
SMcQ wrote on 5/8/2011, 3:50 AM
The 1080 24p version looks fine. I can't see any fame drops. Obviously, I'm delighted with the result and puzzled by my misconception.

At any rate, Virtual Clone Drive is free, and Stereoscopic Player is 39 Euros. A terrific combination. Even when I get my BD burner I'll preview the ISO this way.

Sony Vegas Pro 10d is a winner for burning 3D Blu-Ray from the timeline.

SMcQ