Corel VS can't handle 120 fps video?

[JPW]

Is anyone able to share a 120fps video sample, upload to a sharing site and provide share link in your reply.

Here is a link to the file I've been testing with. This is the one I took with an iPhone. I can't say for sure whether it is VBR or CBR.

https://1drv.ms/u/s!AvYa_moOCY-RhB8GQCTUxaGxo13D

Edit: I should mention that this file is the one that won't play natively in VS without leveraging Smart Proxy and this includes a brand new laptop that is fairly powerful (7th gen i5, Solid State HDD, etc.).

[pepegota]

Go to the following link to get the slow motion file taken with my FZ2500 camera.
https://www.sugarsync.com/pf/D1814182_040_858057838

[lata]

Hi JPW

No real problem using that sample given my older pc, I was unable to play the clip smoothly in clip mode or any of my media players, but my pc is on the slow side

Using Video Studio and Smart Proxy files I had no problems with Project Playback and could use Speed / Timelapse 25% that increased the duration 4 fold to “1 min 51 sec.”

Rendering that to Mov files did take a while at 10 minutes

I then rendered to Mpeg4, taking 3 minutes.

I have uploaded the Mpeg4 sample to my One Drive here:-
https://1drv.ms/v/s!ApBs8FwBwJ5jikYxMYVQfdjBr6Ig

[Ken Berry]

I also had no trouble at all with that clip, JPW. And my computer is only a Core i3, yet I didn't even have to use SmartProxy for it to play smoothly (apart from some handshake from the camera at the start) in both Clip and Project mode. I also had no difficulty in doing some minor editing, clipping a bit off at the end where the camera had been covered by the upflung snow. Then I rendered it to a new mp4 at 1920 x 1080 and 59.94 fps (the correct figure for what is usually called 60 fps), with SmartRender enabled. The rendering took just slightly over a minute, and the new clip played smoothly as well. And like lata, I had no trouble adjusting the speed (in my case to 50%) using Speed/Timelapse.

The Properties of your clip confirmed your earlier advice that the frame rate was 119.911 fps, which is of course only a smidgin over the correct reading which would have been 119.88 fps.

The only curious thing about the Properties of your clip was that the audio format was not identified, though said to be 48,000 kHz 16 bit stereo. In my rendering, I chose AAC format. I should add that in any case the audio came over clearly in both the original and rendered video. ("Get lower" the skier shouts to the cameraman...) But of course after applying Speed/Timelapse, the audio too was slowed down.

[JPW]

Thanks for the information everyone, but this exact scenario is what leaves me scratching my head. Lata can't play my sample file natively, but Ken Berry can. You might assume this is due to Ken Berry having a more current computer, but I don't think that's it since I've just purchased an i5 with solid state drives, 8 gigs of memory, and a dedicated video card coupled with a fresh install of Windows 10 and VS X10 Ultimate. Why would Ken Berry's system be able to play the file back just fine whereas my more powerful new computer can't?

Ken Berry's experience is exactly what I expected out of this new computer, and when it couldn't, it led me to ask why VS was struggling with the 120fps content. But now that I know that an i3 can play back the file without SmartProxy it really leaves me confused. Any idea what the difference might be?

[Ken Berry]

The only thing I can think of is to ask whether you have the Quicktime .mov codec on any of your computers? I certainly have it on mine, and of course your video is AVCHD H.264 video wrapped in the .mov wrapper.

Now I know there has been a lot of debate in recent months about the safety or otherwise of Quicktime, and the fact that Apple has dropped support for it. But the problem with it seems to be associated with the Quicktime player rather than the codec itself. And when installing it, there is apparently a way of just installing the codec instead of the whole package. (I confess, though, that I have owned the Pro version of Quicktime for many years and have never removed the player from any of my computers.)

And AFAIK Video Studio still requires the QT codec to be present when a .mov video is inserted into it -- regardless of what the real format of the .mov file might be under the wrapper.

EDIT: In case you don't have the QT codec installed, a step by step guide for doing so can be found at https://www.codecguide.com/quicktime_installation.htm

[JPW]

Still weird results for me on a brand new computer with pretty much only VS and Premiere Pro installed on it. I should mention that my sample video has always played fine inside of apps other than VS like Windows Media Player. It plays back fine there without anything like Smart Proxy, but once I get inside VS the only way to get it play back without extreme stuttering like its choking on it is with Smart Proxy.

Ken, thanks for the link to QT Codec installation. I followed all the steps, but the same behavior exists in VS.

[Ken Berry]

After installing the codec, did you reboot your computer to ensure the codec was registered and available the next time you opened VS?

[JPW]

Unfortunately, yes, I did reboot. The clip stutters and appears to be slower in playback in VS. In Windows Media Player it plays fine. The only way to get smooth playback in VS is to leverage Smart Proxy.

[JPW]

Maybe I should ask some questions about Smart Proxy because if it worked the way I think it should it might have kept me from making this post altogether.

Here is what I find very confusing for the user. First, I play a file in Windows Media Player and it plays back just fine, but once in VS, it doesn't? I can try to let that go since VS has a solution in Smart Proxy, but I'm still not sure I understand it.

So if I enable Smart Proxy I can ONLY use it when the radio button for PROJECT is selected...correct? That is incredibly confusing for the user because all it takes is clicking on a clip in the timeline to have the radio button go back to the file that is not Smart Proxy-ed and there is really no indication to the user that this took place other than the fact that the file now stutters. Additionally, if you try to Multi-trim the video it apparently uses the non-Smart Proxy-ed file as well rendering that function not usable as well. Ultimately, shouldn't the Smart Proxy-ed file be used *everywhere* in VS once you've gone to the trouble to render it? It seems like that would resolve a lot of confusion. Am I missing something?

[JPW]

I can't seem to let this go that Ken Berry's PC appears to have played this file inside of VS just fine in CLIP mode. I can't find any PC that will. What sorcery are you employing Ken?

[Ken Berry]

I promise you I did nothing special: just inserted the clip into the library window, then dragged and dropped it into the timeline. My computer specs are outlined under my avatar. I might note that apart from the NVidia graphics card listed, there is also the on-board Intel 4000 series graphics. But the clip plays exactly the same with either card. And no SmartProxy was necessary. In fact, just in case, I just started up VS again, and the clip continued to play as it did before.

The only other thing I could think of is that your listed Core 2 Duo CPU might not have been up to the job of playing the clip without SmartProxy. But you say you have tried it on other computers with similar results. So I am stumped.

EDIT: Just to see what might happen, I just opened VS X8, which you originally tried the clip with. I inserted your clip, and again it played fine in both Clip and Project mode, and again without SmartProxy.

[JPW]

Thanks for taking the time to write that up Ken. I am utterly stumped as well. I'm very confused why this 120fps clip plays just fine in Windows Media Player, but it doesn't in VS.

Just to be clear, I tried some time ago on the PC you mentioned that has the Core 2 Duo CPU. I fully expected it to choke on it and it did. BUT I was not expecting this to be the case when I upgraded to laptop with a 7th generation i5 CPU, dedicated Nvidia video card, 8 gigs of ram, and a SSD.

Let me throw this out there in case as a moderator you know something I don't. The one difference I could see is that I *AM* running a trial version of VS X10 on the new laptop. Could that impact playback in VS in some way? I certainly wouldn't think so. It was my understanding that the trial version is the full version with a time limit for use.

I've already purchased an upgrade for VS X10, but I haven't installed it on a specific computer yet because I'm waiting to see which computer might be best to put it on. If there is some kind of difference between the trial and the full version, I could always put it on the new laptop (the most powerful PC I have) and see if it makes a difference.

Thanks again.

[canuck]

Thanks for taking the time to write that up Ken. I am utterly stumped as well. I'm very confused why this 120fps clip plays just fine in Windows Media Player, but it doesn't in VS.

Just to be clear, I tried some time ago on the PC you mentioned that has the Core 2 Duo CPU. I fully expected it to choke on it and it did. BUT I was not expecting this to be the case when I upgraded to laptop with a 7th generation i5 CPU, dedicated Nvidia video card, 8 gigs of ram, and a SSD.

Let me throw this out there in case as a moderator you know something I don't. The one difference I could see is that I *AM* running a trial version of VS X10 on the new laptop. Could that impact playback in VS in some way? I certainly wouldn't think so. It was my understanding that the trial version is the full version with a time limit for use.

I've already purchased an upgrade for VS X10, but I haven't installed it on a specific computer yet because I'm waiting to see which computer might be best to put it on. If there is some kind of difference between the trial and the full version, I could always put it on the new laptop (the most powerful PC I have) and see if it makes a difference.

Thanks again.

Too bad you didn't mention that you had the X10 trial version, could have saved a lot of bandwith
The trial version is a severely crippled version of the full version and is almost useless for doing testing. It will not run a 120fps video

[Ken Berry]

I agree with canuck. The trial version is a joke. We have repeatedly -- and I mean repeatedly -- taken Corel to task over it (and earlier the trial versions of X8 and X9) but their bean counters won out. They have essentially stripped out of it anything for which they have to pay third parties a licence fee, on the basis that the trial version is free so they would essentially be losing money on it.

But as I said in my last post, I also had not trouble with your clip on X8 -- did you happen to have that on any of the other computers, apart from the Core 2 Duo, that you tried the clip on?

But at any rate, I would quickly uninstall the trial version of X10 from your i5 and install the full version... Hopefully that will set your mind at rest.