VS 11 Plus Crashes at 73% During Rendering Every Time

[2Dogs]

Hi Mark,

I wonder if your problem is caused by hard drive space issues. You haven't filled in your "system" info, however.

You obviously need to have enough space on the target drive to which VS is writing the project output, but also sufficient space for temporary files.

I would certainly run chkdsk to rule out disk errors, and also run defrag. (though the fact that you experience the problem on two separate pc's might rule out hard drive problems - unless you're using the same external drive connected to both pc's!)

I don't know how Vista handles virtual memory, but in XP, I always make sure that the page file is set to a fixed size.

Whilst I don't know what uipp.dll does, it shows as an Intel Integrated Performance Primitive and so may be expected to relate to Intel cpu use in some way. Is your system Intel or AMD based?

Assuming you can resolve the 73% problem:

If your jpeg stills form a significant part of your project in terms of run time, you should see a significant reduction in output file size by using variable bitrate encoding to your final mpeg2 file or DVD/DVD folders. This should enable you to use a higher maximum bitrate for the DVD than if you use cbr, which for a project of almost 90 minutes such as yours, should result in a noticeable improvement in picture quality.

I would also go the whole hog, especially with a dual core or better cpu and opt for "two pass" vbr encoding.

DV avi is a pseudo-lossless format. When video in a camcorder is processed into DV avi, much colour and luminance information is thrown away. That's the pseudo part. When you re-encode to DV avi, there is no significant loss in quality.

In your workflow, you're encoding jpeg stills to DV avi. I wonder if you'd get a better end result if you encoded to mpeg2 directly in the burning module - i.e. in the way always suggested in the VS manual. As you may know, burning straight to DVD with clips on the timeline has given some people problems in the past, and resulted in the development of the "suggested workflow". With AVCHD, however, many users report that finished disk quality is better when burning a disk with clips on the timeline. I've even read the same thing for other programs, and it prompts me to re-visit standard def DVD workflows.

[mark9422]

***Here's The Solution***
DVD Doug hit the nail on the head in the first reply to my problem. The issue causing the program to crash was several very large scan files --67+mb-- in the time line.
This project was a family video which included DV video, scans, and digital photographs along with transitions, titles and .wav audio. Three of the scans were pictures my kids did in school. Hoping to capture as much quality as possible, I scanned at a very high resolution which resulted in huge JPEG files. Every time the program came to one of those large scans, it would crash. When I scanned at a lower resolution and thus creating a much smaller file, the render process was flawless every time and the lower res scans looked just as good as the high scans since they were for a screen presentation. The usual JPEG picture file in my time line was about 2mb. These scans were over 67mb each and there were several.
Thanks to all who took the time to respond. Happy Holidays! --Mark

[Ken Veal]

For more info on Ripple Editing have a look at the following :-

http://phpbb.ulead.com.tw/EN/viewtopic. ... 2391#72391
and
http://www.takeoneflix.com/ulead-videos ... e-editing/
and
http://phpbb.ulead.com.tw/EN/viewtopic. ... ipple+edit
...............................Ken V

[2Dogs]

***Here's The Solution***
DVD Doug hit the nail on the head in the first reply to my problem.

Go DVD Doug!

[Zippy]

73% - Fascinating

Been editing a project for the last far-too-long, working on the naive premise that by the time it's done the AVCHD render issues will be resolved. The project's beed rendered out to PAL resolution a couple of times as work-in-progress, and last night I thought I'd got to a point where it was worth crunching some numbers and rendering to HD (HDV for PC 1080 in this case).

All was fine, then BANG. at 73%

Some grumble about not having enough memory, dead X2

Coincidence?

As the project renders just fine to PAL resolution, I'd discounted the idea of a corrupt source file... and the 67MB mooted above seems trivial for a file size really, compared to the size of some video files... I would have expected my system to handle this OK - whole film is ~35 minutes at present, no sortage of disk space.

Zippy!

[Videomaker]

Hello,
I'm running Windows XP SP3 with PENTIUM4 2.1GHz and RAM=1.5Go. Primary hard disk (where Ulead VS 11.5 plus is installed) has 6 Go free. Secondary hard disk (where VS is storing rendered and proxy files) has 220 Go free.

I faced same trouble as mark9422. Means either ¡§Error 5.0.0 unspecified error¡¨ when trying to create the DVD, or ¡§Error 15045:0:5 invalid parameter¡¨ when trying to create the video file.

In my Ulead project, all video sources are AVCHD m2ts files (H.264 PAL HDMV), coming from my Sony HDR-SR10. Then I added some mp3 + Jpeg pictures.
Total length of project is only approx 10 minutes
The biggest AVCHD m2ts file is 102 Mega.
The biggest JPEG file is 1,6 Mega.

When it crashed, I first tried to uncheck "Smart render", but the problem remained. Then I tried the ¡§dichotomy method¡¨, means saving project as Test2.vsp and removing 50% of it. Tried to create again, and removed again 50% parts as long as bug appears, and so on.
But when I identified what I toughed was then incriminated video file, I removed it and add all the rest of the project, but the rendering operation crashed again.
Thus I think the problem is not coming from a corrupted file, but maybe because of a lack of space, somewhere?!
Or my PC's configuration is too weak to handle AVDHD m2ts files with VS 11.5 Plus? (remark: I'm creating proxy files for my projects).

Finally I found a method to create my DVD even it¡¦s not the more efficient one.
I managed to render completely my project, in SHARE stage / creation of the video file / HDV / HDV1080i ¡V 50i (for PC). No crash with this choice !

After I created a NEW project (adding DVD¡¦s menu and importing the previous rendered file) and I created the DVD without problem. The only issue is that the finished file is 2 Giga (instead of a bit less than one Giga), but at least I obtained my disk!

I hope someone can find the right solution to this problem, and I would appreciate if Corel technician can give more information related to the error codes 15045:0:5 and/or 5.0.0.

remark: it's the first time I faced this problem, then thanks to all forum's contributors. I made several film with Ulead VS before, without trouble.

Thanks,

[Ken Berry]

You don't give us much information about your System resources, apart from saying you have an Intel 2.1GHz processor and 1.5 GB of RAM. But is the Intel a Core 2 Duo or something else? If it something else, then it would certainly be well below what you require to edit, let alone play, AVCHD and even Smart Proxy requires at least a P4 3.0 GHz processor with hyperthreading... Probably not enough RAM either for those operations, which are incredibly resource-intensive.

But your computer is certainly capable of editing HDV as you have found!

[2Dogs]

Since 2.1Ghz is an odd clock speed for a Pentium, I would assume it's a dual core of some sort - but we know what assume does, don't we!

Anyway, since Videomaker can successfully output to HDV but not to ACVHD, I wonder if there's a pesky mega-codec pack involved? If so, I would suggest uninstalling the codec pack and trying again.

It's also always worth making absolutely sure that you have the latest Nov 2008 DirectX update installed.

The free space on the primary hard drive is a bit tight to my mind. An easy way to see if it's the cause of the problem would be to reduce the size of the paging file on the C: drive to zero, and to add a paging file of about 2Gb on the secondary hard drive. You'll have to reboot for this to take effect, but it will liberate some free space on the primary hard drive. If it doesn't help things, it's easy to change back. Incidentally, rather than have Windows determine the size of the page file, I always prefer to set both the minimum and maximum sizes to be the same. That way you eliminate any problem caused at the point where windows decides to increase the size of the page file during an operation, such as rendering a VS project, for example.

Of course if you're using the C: drive for data as well, it's easy enough to move some data over to the secondary drive to free up space on the primary one.

Do not neglect the basics. Run Windows disk cleanup to clear out "fluff" and defragment your hard drives - or at least the primary drive. I would furthermore run chkdsk to be certain that the problem wasn't caused by a bad sector on the disc. Whilst that may be iunlikely, it's always a possibility.

Next time you try to output the project, run Windows Task Manager in the "Performance" tab, and in it's "always on top" default mode, and watch what's happening with cpu utilisation, page file usage and available memory. It can sometimes give you clues about what's going wrong.

Oh, and welcome to the forum!

[Black Lab]

Then I tried the ¡§dichotomy method¡¨, means saving project as Test2.vsp and removing 50% of it. Tried to create again, and removed again 50% parts as long as bug appears, and so on.

But remember, if you are only splitting the project and the problem still occurs on all parts, then it could be a problem that spans all parts, like a music track, video filter, etc. You must systematically remove these as well in order to find the problematic clip, if it is, in fact, a bad clip.

You mention MP3s. VS had problems with some MP3s. Converting them to WAV files usually is the fix.

[Zippy]

...there is definitely some undefined, inconsistent behaviour here!

I mentioned my "73% problem" partly as I wondered if it were a system resources issue - e.g. does 73% correspond with memory usage when rendering to a given format on a Vista (32bit) machine with 3GB + 1GB... or something?

In my case,

I could render the project perfectly to PAL DVD - so had assumed no issues with the source files.

I could render any portion of the project to an HD format of my chosing with no issues, including the area around the failure.

Render the full project to (any) HD format and at 73%... BANG. Usually with the error "not enough memory", despite task manager showing that the system was ony using ~1.5GB of the 3GB available. Disk space/page file space is not an issue on my systems!

Then I got a message, "unable to read frame 2146". AHA - a clue, an errant file? Somewhere, 85s and 21 frames into a file, it was going wrong.

Errr - not quite!

I went through the project looking for video clips of that length, or where the source was that length at least, and there weren't any. Except for a static JPEG (no pan & zoom even) that was being used as a background, over which some other JPEGs were being faded in & out - and was on-screen for ~90s.

The JPEG was ~6MB in size.

So having read through this thread, and clutch at a few straws, I took my 6MB JPEG, did a crop to 1920x1080 in PSP, and popped that in instead.

Sorted
Project now renders perfectly every time!

[2Dogs]

I'm glad you reported back with your results, along with the happy ending!

Although in your case a lot of the possible factors may not have applied, it's still important that people attend to the basics. (though that puts me in mind of John Major's ill-fated "back to basics" campaign!)

It's all too easy to blame the program for problems actually caused by input or configuration errors.

[Videomaker]

Hello,
At first thanks All for your comments and expertise.

Unfortunately, my PC is not working with a Core2, but with an ¡§old¡¨ single core 2.20GHz, precisely (I first wrote 2.1GHz).

If I¡¦m not wrong and accordingly to VS 11.5 Plus user¡¦s guide, it¡¦s written that the minimum required configuration to handle HDV with Proxy mode is Pentium 4, XP SP2, and 1GB as RAM is recommended. And to handle HDV without proxy mode, then required config is at least a P4 3.0 GHz processor with hyperthreading.
Nevertheless it seems (and I¡¦m aware) that my current system reach its limits to handle AVCHD (even with proxy). I will see how long the situation is sustainable¡K

Dear 2Dogs, can you explain where and how to uninstall the codec pack and try again? I would like to check that also. Thx.

[2Dogs]

can you explain where and how to uninstall the codec pack and try again? I would like to check that also. Thx.

I think that since you ask the question, it probably means you didn't install one of those often troublesome codec packs!

Common ones would be things like the K-Lite codec pack. I've actually used that one with no ill effects in the past.

Check in your "Start" menu for such a codec pack - and then see if you can find an uninstaller for it.

If you don't find anything in your start menu, go to Windows Control Panel and click on the "Add or Remove Programs" icon.

In the list it brings up, look for any codec packs.

If you don't find anything, perhaps you don't have any to uninstall.

And maybe look for a faster pc in the January sales!

[Ken Berry]

Your computer should be able to handle HDV, especially with SmartProxy. However, it certainly will NEVER be able to handle AVCHD, even with SmartProxy, so I am afraid I would simply recognise that fact and move on.

EDIT: Reading the above reply again a day later, I realise it might sound a bit harsh. It is not meant to be. It's just that I get very cranky with the camera manufacturers who bring out cameras which are so incredibly demanding of computer resources to be able to edit their video correctly. The thing they do not advertise on the camera box or in its manual is that even if you manage to edit AVCHD correctly, using SmartProxy or something like that, you also have to have a powerful computer just to be able to play AVCHD. It is more difficult to play AVCHD than it is to edit it!!

When I first started playing around with it, my editing computer was a P4 3.0Ghz with HT and 2 GB of RAM running XP Pro and with an NVidia GE 7600 graphics card. I managed to edit some AVCHD, but it played back all jerkily, so I thought the editing had not been successful. I just happen to have bought a Core 2 Duo 2.4 GHz laptop and the edited video played back smoothly on that...

So really, my basic message is, unless you have a Core 2 Duo or higher, there is really no point in trying to edit AVCHD with any expectation of every being able to play it on that same computer. You either forget AVCHD as a format or else you upgrade your computer. Simple as that...