706h and H.264 editing and XP

MrVideo

Active member
As soon as you saw this thread title, I'll bet that the first thought was: "Oh no, it doesn't work!"

Well, the first test of an H.264 project seems to indicate no glitches at the cut points. I reviewed 5 seconds before the cut and let it run at least 5 seconds after the cut (in VRD) and saw nothing wrong.

That was with one company's source. Next test is with an ABC net feed.

Thanks for fixing this. I can't be the only one still using XP, though I'm sure that list is getting shorter and shorter. :D
 

glenpinn

Member
I know this is off topic as i cannot help you with your problem, but i am more curious than anything about why you are still persisting with using XP ?

Personally i don't get it to be honest, but you must have some pretty valid reasons to continue using it, however, in all honesty, i fully support any software developer for stopping support for old versions of windows, and they would be falling in line with microsoft officially not supporting XP and server 2003 anymore as well.

I do computer/laptop repairs for family and friends in between doing my video work, and i dont touch any computer or laptop that has XP or Vista installed, nor will i touch any computer or laptop that is older than 5 years because the hardware is getting old and outdated.

Back in my old editing days when i was shooting in Dvd format, XP was a bitch with editing and encoding because the Hdd always needed Defragging every other day to keep it running properly, so how you are managing XP now with what you seem to be doing is beyond me, but anyway, each to their own i guess, but you are the only person i know who is doing video work with XP installed, everyone i know gave XP up years ago.

I am also curious to know what your computer system consists of.

Cheers (and i mean no offense or disrespect to you by my comments)
 

MrVideo

Active member
I know this is off topic as i cannot help you with your problem, but i am more curious than anything about why you are still persisting with using XP ?
Go into the Pixelation thread for more details on the what and why of my needs.

I do computer/laptop repairs for family and friends in between doing my video work, and i dont touch any computer or laptop that has XP or Vista installed, nor will i touch any computer or laptop that is older than 5 years because the hardware is getting old and outdated.
Personally I think it is shortsighted to refuse to touch any computer with an OS that is older than W7. It is what they are using, so deal with it (no offense). Maybe they can't afford a new laptop or afford to pay the price for a newer M$ release. Odds are drivers can be found for the laptop and W7, but it is not free to upgrade. If you are willing to pay for the upgrade, them maybe they would change. :D

I have a laptop that is running XP that is older than five years and that thing is running great. I use it on my trips (it is smaller than the newer larger models.

Back in my old editing days when i was shooting in Dvd format, XP was a bitch with editing and encoding because the Hdd always needed Defragging every other day to keep it running properly, so how you are managing XP now with what you seem to be doing is beyond me, but anyway, each to their own i guess, but you are the only person i know who is doing video work with XP installed, everyone i know gave XP up years ago.
I've yet to defrag W2K or XP drives. Never, I repeat never, an issue. I've authored some DVDs on W2K using Premiere and a thrid party MPEG-2 encoder and a pro DVD authoring program. Never an issue with that OS either. XP won't even defrag my 2TB HDDs. Claims that it can't do it. They are so full that there is no space to even think about trying to defrag and if it were able to do so, it would take forever and I can't have the system down that long. Hell, since I don't have an issue with my HDDs, there would be no gain.

Hell, earlier today I was capturing to a drive and from the same drive was transferring data. No issues. I normally only like to capture to an HDD and do nothing else on that drive until the capture is done. Years of doing this with no issues. While you may hate XP, that OS just keeps ticking and I do not like M$, but am forced to use it.

I am also curious to know what your computer system consists of.
The sat computer, which does the VRD editing, uses an ASRock A770DE+ mobo, with an AMD X64 dual core processor (I forget the speed) and 2 GB of RAM. Runs 32 bit XP

Cheers (and i mean no offense or disrespect to you by my comments)
No offense taken. They are many like you who dump the previous OS ASAP. Those who went to Vista right away paid for that with lots of pain. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. For the job that the platform is doing, it ain't broke.
 

Danr

Administrator
Staff member
Until last year, one of our professional clients was still using XP and Windows Server 2003. The amount they paid for maintenance made XP support quite a bit easier to justify. I don't have a count, but I don't think there are many XP users left, but there is some added expense for us to support XP. For example, we spent some time checking 707 on XP, and found that an Intel Quick Sync library prevented VRD from opening on XP. We then had to go back and change the program structure so that the QS library load is optional. In this case the fix wasn't very hard, it's just a PITA. In other situations, there a bunch of code to write or maintain.

So far we've been able to retain XP compatibility, but at some point that will not be possible.
 

glenpinn

Member
The sat computer, which does the VRD editing, uses an ASRock A770DE+ mobo, with an AMD X64 dual core processor (I forget the speed) and 2 GB of RAM. Runs 32 bit XP
Holy mackeral, man i thought my friend in sydney who i just bought a tm700 avchd camera for to learn videography on had a slow system, but he has an E5800 dual core with 4gb ram, with windows 7 64bit, probably a faster pc than yours by a bit i would say.

He is the one who i will buy a copy of VRD for so he can learn the correct way to edit and encode video.

Each to their own i guess, but XP wont defrag a 2tb hdd, but i will bet my bottom dollar it is so fragmented its not funny, because video editing is very hard on a hdd under XP, and it will be fragmented, but its size may be allowing it to run better than it would if it was a much smaller hdd.

Anyway, on a system like yours, if i encode a 1 hour 1080/50p mts file to 720/50p mp4 using VRD it would take around 5 hours at over probably 100% cpu usage :( yet on my 3770 cpu without quick sync, it takes 45 minutes with 80 to 90% cpu usage :)

You must have a lot of patience.
 
Last edited:

MrVideo

Active member
Each to their own i guess, but XP wont defrag a 2tb hdd, but i will bet my bottom dollar it is so fragmented its not funny, because video editing is very hard on a hdd under XP, and it will be fragmented, but its size may be allowing it to run better than it would if it was a much smaller hdd.
I do not have an issue with HDD speed at all.

Anyway, on a system like yours, if i encode a 1 hour 1080/50p mts file to 720/50p mp4 using VRD it would take around 5 hours at over probably 100% cpu usage :( yet on my 3770 cpu without quick sync, it takes 45 minutes with 80 to 90% cpu usage :)
You are assuming that I encode on the sat capture box. All of my major encoding is done on another XP box. You may not have seen posts where I've mentioned that. It is an AMD (I prefer AMD over Intel) Phenom II X4 965 3.4 GHz CPU. I use AVISynth and x264 to do the encoding. 99.9% of what I encode involves removing 2:3 pulldown and repeat frame pulldown, i.e., IVTC, to get the video back to its original 23.976 fame rate. That process, to go from 1080i29.97 to 1080p23.976 goes 3-4 hours. I also do 2-pass for the best results.

Your job would take less time as there is no IVTC processing going on. BTW, why are you reducing 1920x1080 to 1280x720? You are throwing away image quality.

So, while stuff is encoding on that box, I can happily edit or sat capture on the other box.
 

glenpinn

Member
BTW, why are you reducing 1920x1080 to 1280x720? You are throwing away image quality.
have you seen my 1080/50p mts (24Mbps) camera files down converted to 720/50p mp4 @ 12Mbps, if not, you should, many people i show them to are amazed at the quality, but yes you will lose some quality especially if you then upscale onto a full HD tv, however they do still look amazing none the less.

There is a reason why i do convert a copy of the finished video to 720/50p mp4 format.

All my family and clients video are shot in 1080/50p avchd (mts) format (i never use avchd in 1080/50i or anything in 25fps)

I use VRD v5 to edit, add my titles/credits if needed, and smart render back to 1080/50p m2ts which gives me basically the exact same file as i imported, and this is retained as my Master File for archiving and working with to output to other formats for my clients.

Most of my clients dont want their videos put on Bluray or Dvd, so i dont need to worry about making them compliant to those formats, so most of the files are given to them on a small capacity (500gb) usb3 powered portable hard drive, and they play them back directly on their HD tv via the built in USB port (most modern HD tv's do this now) or they use a Hard drive based media player connected via HDMI, or they will have a HTPC connected to the tv and watch the video from that.

Unfortunately, not all HD tv's are full HD, some are only standard HD @ 1366x768 (720p) and many struggle to play 1080p @ 50fps either in m2ts or mp4 container, but they will play 720/50p mp4, so because i need to cover all scenarios, i smart render a copy of the 1080/50p m2ts Master video file to 1080/50p mp4 (it just changes containers) and i re-encode a copy to 720/50p mp4 @ 12Mbps so clients have a choice of either formats to watch, depending on which one is supported on their tv or playback device.

I usually retain only the 1080/50p m2ts master file for 12 months at the permission of the client, i then give them (on their portable hard drive) the 1080/50p mp4 and the 720/50p mp4 format files, plus a folder with all the unedited footage taken from the camera.

Cheers
 

qz3fwd

New member
I know this is off topic as i cannot help you with your problem, but i am more curious than anything about why you are still persisting with using XP ?

Personally i don't get it to be honest, but you must have some pretty valid reasons to continue using it, however, in all honesty, i fully support any software developer for stopping support for old versions of windows, and they would be falling in line with microsoft officially not supporting XP and server 2003 anymore as well.

I do computer/laptop repairs for family and friends in between doing my video work, and i dont touch any computer or laptop that has XP or Vista installed, nor will i touch any computer or laptop that is older than 5 years because the hardware is getting old and outdated.

Back in my old editing days when i was shooting in Dvd format, XP was a bitch with editing and encoding because the Hdd always needed Defragging every other day to keep it running properly, so how you are managing XP now with what you seem to be doing is beyond me, but anyway, each to their own i guess, but you are the only person i know who is doing video work with XP installed, everyone i know gave XP up years ago.

I am also curious to know what your computer system consists of.

Cheers (and i mean no offense or disrespect to you by my comments)
Well-there are some things which require XP and will not run on any newer Windows version.
I use firewire capping and this really needs XP together with TSReader pro. I asked Rod if he supported the firewire module on 7 and he replied its not supported.
I also use OSX for firewire recording, and it has much better tools IMO, but OTOH video editing sucks big time on OSX and Windows is absolutely required to edit TS files.
 

glenpinn

Member
Well-there are some things which require XP and will not run on any newer Windows version.
I use firewire capping and this really needs XP together with TSReader pro. I asked Rod if he supported the firewire module on 7 and he replied its not supported.
I also use OSX for firewire recording, and it has much better tools IMO, but OTOH video editing sucks big time on OSX and Windows is absolutely required to edit TS files.
I would love to know what sort of editing you are doing, and what these particular things are that only run on XP that are not supported on any newer versions of windows.

still using firewire ???

and please don't say things like video editing sux big time on OSX because it does not, many professional editors use Macs for everything, including my son, and he has no problems editing .TS files with OSX either, even i have done it myself, however i cant stand OSX as an everyday operating system, but i love the quality of their laptops and iMacs, just far too expensive.
 
Last edited:

qz3fwd

New member
I would love to know what sort of editing you are doing, and what these particular things are that only run on XP that are not supported on any newer versions of windows.

still using firewire ???

and please don't say things like video editing sux big time on OSX because it does not, many professional editors use Macs for everything, including my son, and he has no problems editing .TS files with OSX either, even i have done it myself, however i cant stand OSX as an everyday operating system, but i love the quality of their laptops and iMacs, just far too expensive.

Do tell-what MPEG2-TS smart rendering video editor are YOU using on OSX-the all suck big time, and yes I think MPEG Streamclip sucks.
I didnt say that I use firewire for editing, but I do use it for HDTV and this is not replaceable on Win7+, and XP-32 Bit is required.
If you understood what firewire capping is, then you would understand the context of video editing sucks on OSX comment, but apparently you didnt get it.
I am sorry that you mis-understand.
 

Arfer Daley

New member
I am still using xp pro I use it for recoding stuff over night and thru the day sometimes, when my main machine is tied up recording tv programs
also my canon printer runs better in xp as does my scanner I refuse too buy new printer and scanner just for the sake of w7/8/10
 

glenpinn

Member
also my canon printer runs better in xp as does my scanner I refuse too buy new printer and scanner just for the sake of w7/8/10
Your printer and scanner must be very very old from what you are saying in your post, because many older models do have drivers for them for newer versions of Windows, you just need to know where to look, and, believe it or not, many older scanners and printers will work using drivers from newer models, but the hardware manufacturers will not tell you this because they want you to buy new scanners and printers.

I am sorry that you mis-understand.
I do know what you are talking about, and there was never any misunderstanding on my part, but your rediculous claim that video editing sux big time on OSX is still nothing short of nonsense.

There comes a time in life where you just need to leave the past behind and move onto newer and much better things, you just might get a surprise just how wonderful life is in futureland :)
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom