Vegas Pro 9.0d

chiltern wrote on 4/13/2010, 10:29 AM

Just noticed... For M2T clips in a 'new' project, 9.0d creates .SFK files in the folder, as before.
For Cineform AVI clips, _no_ .SFK files are created...
This might well explain the extended load times for a Cineform project on my system...
(Just FYI, 9.0c on my system _did_ create .SFK files for Cineform clips..)

I will add this to my info reported to Sony....

Robert Gadsdon.
Vegas 9.0d on a Core Duo 3MHz, with 4GB RAM, WinXP SP2 NeoHD 4.3.0 Build 240

ECB wrote on 4/13/2010, 10:44 AM

Just noticed... For M2T clips in a 'new' project, 9.0d creates .SFK files in the folder, as before.

I just tried loading Cineform files in a V Pro x64 9d project and the .sfk files were created from the cineform files in the folder.

EB

LoTN wrote on 4/13/2010, 10:52 AM

Is anyone running a dual core working as successfully with AVCHD or HDV content in 9.0d as in 9.0c ?

I do my edits on a dual core. Without any backup system, I can't afford jeopardizing months of work for my current project. This thread makes me paranoid...

rmack350 wrote on 4/13/2010, 11:08 AM

JABloom said "In the past, I uninstalled the previous version manually and then installed the new version."

Some people here in this thread are saying that uninstalling old Vegas applications before installing 9d solves some of their 9d problems.

Rob

Christian de Godzinsky wrote on 4/13/2010, 11:29 AM

Having tested sof far onlythe 32-bit version on one exitsing 9.0c project- with mixed AVCHD and SD material (both PAL). Overall playback speed is disappointingly SLOWER than on 9.0c!!!

If I set the project settings to match AVCHD then timeline preview of AVCHD is real time, but SD is slow at about 6..8 frames/sec. This was before almost realtime in 9.0c. I can notice even less that real time within HD material, a thing that NEVER happended on 9.0c.

Setting the project to match SD then SD is realtime and AVCHD is fluctuating between realtime and 1,5 frames/sec.

I would not call this a huge step forward. Very disappointed, albeit the test is very limited. Knocking wood, not hangs yet...

Better test the 64 bit version before making any conclusions, and with a fresh project. It seems that there are more new bells and whistles and less efforts making timeline preview smoother...

Christian

EDIT: Meant AVCHD material (now edited, before I wrote HD). Testing the 64 bit version. Disappoiting first test done. I was able before to run two AVCHD clips with a crossface at full play back speed at 25fps, now it drops to about 12..14 fps during crossfades!!!

SCS - what have you done ???

malowz wrote on 4/13/2010, 11:42 AM

WTF????

my 9.0c projects are not opening.... im waiting about 8 minutes, progress bar is in 4%...

just about 100 dv-avi files, was just cutting. no effects or 3rd party stuff whatsoever

using filemonitor, vegas is reading ALL AVI FILE CONTENT not just header/index. i think its a bug in avi reader...

YESSSSSS!!!! its the avi reader. using vegas 9.0c aviplug.dll the project now open in 10 seconds ;)

i recommend you guys do the same.

Dan Sherman wrote on 4/13/2010, 12:47 PM

Can't playback project on the time line.
Can't deliver project to client as promised today.
Vegas 9d tells me "an error occurred while starting playback, an unsupported media type was requested."
And that media type would be an M-Audio Delta card?
Unsupported?
Been using Delta sound card since version 3.
Anybody makes sense of this?
And Yoyodyne, whoever you are, this stuff is supposed to be sorted out at the Beta stage.
Your thanking me for trying 9d? And keep those reports rolling in?
Right now all I want to do is get a project out the door!

Tom Pauncz wrote on 4/13/2010, 12:56 PM

There's obviously an issue for some of us with 9.0d.

I just tried the malowz fix and for me it's made a vast difference in opening an HDV project with 9.0d. Also makes a difference in opening an SD project.

My next step may be to revert to 9.0c, but I do like the new white balance FX.

System specs are filled in if anyone's interested - System #1.

malowz wrote on 4/13/2010, 1:05 PM

if you like the white balance filter, copy the "Video Plug-Ins\colorcorrector.dll" from 9.0d to 9.0c

i think it will work

JJKizak wrote on 4/13/2010, 1:13 PM

Noticed with Cineform files in old project vegas 9D starts loading fast then stops then continues then stops then continues to the end no problem. White balance eyedrop is really cool.
JJK

CClub wrote on 4/13/2010, 1:16 PM

Malowz... the man of the hour... how do we get the "vegas 9.0c aviplug.dll" if we've already installed 9d over 9c?

Tom Pauncz wrote on 4/13/2010, 1:19 PM

I can mail you mine! :-)
Email me off forum...
Tom

Tom Pauncz wrote on 4/13/2010, 1:25 PM

Thanks again ...
Now have white balance working in 9.0c. Best of both worlds...
You gotta love this forum!
Tom

chiltern wrote on 4/13/2010, 1:33 PM

Thanks malowz, for the fix!

I seem to recall having to use 'older' versions of dlls to fix Vegas problems with previous updates....

Now Cineform AVI projects open correctly, as with 9.0c, and the .SFK files are created in the folder...

Robert Gadsdon.
Vegas 9.0d (modified) on a Core Duo 3MHz, with 4GB RAM, WinXP SP2 NeoHD 4.3.0 Build 240

dreamlx wrote on 4/13/2010, 1:35 PM

Copying the aviplug.dll from 9.0c also seems to solve the slow project opening problem for me, thanks.

malowz wrote on 4/13/2010, 1:47 PM

### Malowz... the man of the hour... how do we get the "vegas 9.0c aviplug.dll" if we've already installed 9d over 9c? #####

start 9.0c installation. when the "select language" popup appears, don't click ok.

go to you windows temp folder (C:\Documents and Settings\USER\Local Settings\Temp) you will see a folder called "SonyInstall_1" or something like that.

if you don't find, do a search on you windows HD for "SonyInstall" to find it

inside, theres a file called "aviplug.cab". open with winrar and you can extract the aviplug.dll.

after that, cancel the installation.

also, PSD layers may work if you copy "FileIO Plug-Ins\stl2plg\stl2plg.dll" from 9d to 9c ;)

as dvd burning is "unusable" (and was the main good news), i will go back to 9.0c with some enhancements from 9.0d ;)

ingvarai wrote on 4/13/2010, 1:58 PM

Dan Sherman:
And Yoyodyne, whoever you are, this stuff is supposed to be sorted out at the Beta stage.

Excuse me, but I even did not dare to try 9d before my hobby project was secured. If you make a living using software, trying out a new version of this software when you have a deadline is risky, very risky..
Ingvar

dreamlx wrote on 4/13/2010, 2:09 PM

For my part, I always use clonezilla to do an image of my OS partition before updating anything, so in 20 minutes, I am always back if anything goes wrong.

Dan Sherman wrote on 4/13/2010, 2:45 PM

Came on too strong there Yoyodyne.
My apologies.
Bit frustrated with work piling up.
I guess I'm one of those children of the 50s who actually believes newer is better.
As in "New Improved".
It is called an upgrade.
Anyway, I echo your words Ingvar, to Yoyodyne, excuse me.
And I should check to see if this malfunction is related to 9d before blustering like that.
I'll be OK.
Thanks goodness for beta blockers.
Now what have I just said.
I'm going to leave that last line alone.

Grazie wrote on 4/13/2010, 3:03 PM

I would politely suggest that swapping DLLs between iterations of versions, without the prior arrangement and agreement with SONY is not the most wisest thing to do. If people are finding that doing this is efficacious then primarily SONY really need to know of the results.

Best regards

Grazie

malowz wrote on 4/13/2010, 3:26 PM

so... lets back to 9.0c and wait for 9.0e ;)

in the mean time, anyone still with problems, or problems with 9.0d and not 9.0c, report to sony.

if they don't know, we can't complain for not fixing it ;)

also, if few people complain, they don't give much attention... so, ANYONE WITH PROBLEM contact sony.

few people complaining = problems that hang for "generations"

CClub wrote on 4/13/2010, 6:42 PM

Grazie's words of wisdom: "swapping DLL's... is not the most wisest thing to do." Very good. I tried switching... #%*'d everything up and Vegas just kept crashing.

I ended up following another suggestion above and it solved my problems: I deleted all Vegas versions off my system, shut down/restarted, and reloaded 9d from scratch (i.e., inputting serial #, etc). Worked great, AND with the bonus of no more red frames on veg files that were previously showing many red frames in 9c. This MAY be of help to SOME.

As mentioned in several posts, some of us aren't having any problems... some with different systems are. My initial reaction was to panic and get upset, but by persevering, there is some great assistance available here. Rather than pointing the finger at each other or Sony, there are a few great ideas floating around, and hopefully we can help each other to get through a few initial glitches and benefit from the collaborative assistance available on this forum.

Harold Brown wrote on 4/13/2010, 7:47 PM

I have a very large project that was very slow to open in 9d and looked like it was not responding. I let it run as I checked my email and it came back after several minutes looking for missing media. I had it search and find it and everything loaded and works. Now it still comes up a little slow but works fine once it opens. The project is 35 seconds long with 26 tracks (including 3 composite tracks and mostly audio tracks). Lots of FXs applied to the clips including Neat Video, Brightness, CC, NewBlue V2 Shadows & Highlights, Sharpen, AAV ColorLab, and Unsharp Mask). This was with Vegas 9d 64bit.

Grazie wrote on 4/14/2010, 12:18 AM

"Rather than pointing the finger at each other or Sony, . . we can help each other . . and benefit from the collaborative assistance available on this forum."

HooRah!! Well said CClub! Your statement should be writ large all over this Forum.

What I want to add is that there are "others" reading these posts and not all are going to be appreciating the complexities of programming - I DON'T! So what I posted was also meant as a word of warning to those contemplating a non-SONY fix. Others may well have decades of working in the mainstream, programming industry. What I would appreciate is that when a "fix" is enthusiastically applauded here, then an equally loud appreciation of just HOW this could confuse, screw-up an application install and could be seen as tampering with the "official" update, with all the ramifications about that install's legitimacy and post an explicit warning not to do this but wait until it has been verified by SONY - yes, and that means even VP9e (we're not all of the same level of competency). However, I see no real harm in contacting SONY directly to field what has been discovered.

OK, notwithstanding the issues around non "official" fixes, great harm can be done when an "innocent" reader here believes the "fix" is straightforward? Least of which is that when that same individual then directly approaches SONY for an official "fix". Where would SONY start if a non-SONY "fix" has been previously implemented?

Great insights CClub.

Grazie