Hi

. . . . I then go onto burn setting to burn Bluray in NTSC, after Magix makes the video footage ready to burn i am then told there is not enough space on the disc. . . . .

• How long is the video on the timeline after editing?
   
• Check you have not left any stray objects on the timeline after the end of the editted  video.
   
• Ensure you have a blank BD disc in the burner before selecting the Burn tab of MEP.
   
• Also check that the Encoder settings in the Burn dialog is also set to NTSC - by default it will be PAL if you are in PAL land.

. . . . . Is it normal for Magix to take up to 5 hours to prepare and burn footage onto bluray ?.. . . . . .

That depends on your computer specification and how complex the timeline is after editting.

JohnEB

Hi John. Thank you for your reply.

I found that i was trying to burn two identical files, haveing rectified this, i started a new project using only the one large file VTS _01_1  VOB 148,018 Kb and a smaller one VTS_01_3 VOB 431,790 Kb, placing a small amount of text editing.

Into BURN, where i use the Sparkle template, i then set to NTSC, insert a new blank disc, reading detailes i see "information bar used space indicator, used space on media; 19988 mb / 22586 mb ", I then press burn, after a while i then get the message " The project requiries ca, 25776mb of free space, please insert another blank disc or shorten the project"...

Hi

. . . . . i started a new project using only the one large file VTS _01_1  VOB 148,018 Kb and a smaller one VTS_01_3 VOB 431,790 Kb, placing a small amount of text editing . . . .

Something is wrong here - the largest file, VTS_01_01, is smaller than the smaller, VTS_01_03, - is there a typo?

What happened to VTS_01_02 which is the middle part of the video?

How long, in hours:minutes, is the video on the timeline after editing? 

With the project open, click once with the mouse on the timeline, then press the End key on your keyboard - what time does the timeline cursor go to?

John EB

Hi

. . . . . i started a new project using only the one large file VTS _01_1  VOB 148,018 Kb and a smaller one VTS_01_3 VOB 431,790 Kb, placing a small amount of text editing . . . .

Something is wrong here - the largest file, VTS_01_01, is smaller than the smaller, VTS_01_03, - is there a typo?

What happened to VTS_01_02 which is the middle part of the video?

How long, in hours:minutes, is the video on the timeline after editing? 

With the project open, click once with the mouse on the timeline, then press the End key on your keyboard - what time does the timeline cursor go to?

John EB

 

Hi John.

The missing VTS_01_02  which after checking seemed to be the copy of VTS _01_01,so not needed.

Sorry my miss typing, larger file should read 1,048,018.

Checking the time as suggested it reads as follows, 01.25 : 23.08, i suspect as there are two chapters, ie  VTS 01 and VTS 03

Hi

With respect to your preparation / burning time from DVD VOB to BD I have compared this to one of my standard DVD's adding 3 title and making 4 cuts and got the following results:

As you can see, assuming yours were also burned using standard DVD settings,  there a discrepancy in the DVD files - this may not be a cause of the issue however there is something odd about them.

Is your computer a laptop?

What is its specification and Windows version?

. . . . Checking the time as suggested it reads as follows, 01.25 : 23.08 . . . .

Is this by both methods I suggested or just one?

If one which method?

The only explanation for the massive increase in the disc space requirement of your project that I can think of is that you have a lot of empty space after the 'last' object on the timeline, ie at 1h 25m 23s, with a stray object which may not be visible until you zoom in.

Did you get any message about blank space in the project?

Here is a hi res image of an example of a '1hr project which is actually 2 hours long because of a single stray object. 

John EB

Hi

Surely the only explanation here is that the choice to burn a Bluray is invoking a conversion from standard def to hi def hence the larger file and long encode time. This would happen if you just chose Bluray disc in the burn dialogue and then only changed from PAL to NTSC without reconfiguring the encoder advanced settings for frame size, bitrate, etc.

This maybe what you are trying to do but there seems little point as you are unlikely to gain any quality by doing this so why not just burn to DVD which will play in any Bluray player. The player or connected HD TV will upscale the SD to HD on playback and probably do just as good job as MEP converting the SD to HD.

Ss

Hi

I agree with ss regarding the upscaling DVD to BD.

@ ss - do you have any ideas on the massive discrepancy on the disc space used when converted to BD without changing the advanced settings of the encoder, which we assume starship.1 is not doing.

The only way I can get a big jump in disc space usage is:

By the video being longer then is seen on the timeline due to a stray object, as I have posted

or

Making ridiculous changes to framerate, bitrate and more advanced settings eg reducing GOP length to ridiculously low numbers eg 1 or 2.

John EB

Hi

. . . . I then go onto burn setting to burn Bluray in NTSC, after Magix makes the video footage ready to burn i am then told there is not enough space on the disc. . . . .

• How long is the video on the timeline after editing?
   
• Check you have not left any stray objects on the timeline after the end of the editted  video.
   
• Ensure you have a blank BD disc in the burner before selecting the Burn tab of MEP.
   
• Also check that the Encoder settings in the Burn dialog is also set to NTSC - by default it will be PAL if you are in PAL land.

. . . . . Is it normal for Magix to take up to 5 hours to prepare and burn footage onto bluray ?.. . . . . .

That depends on your computer specification and how complex the timeline is after editting.

JohnEB

Just reopening this subject, What would be a good computer spec ? as i am thinking of rebuilding my PC or maybe purchase new...

Hi

. . . . . Just reopening this subject, What would be a good computer spec ? as i am thinking of rebuilding my PC or maybe purchase new... . . . .

That is the one question that you will get many replies for and none will agree with one another in some aspect or other.

My answer would be:

• Intel i5 or i7 6th generation
   
• Motherboard to suit with at minimum of 4 RAM slots, dual channel, 6 slots triple channel
   
• Minimum 2 HDD - one for OS and programs - 2TB min, the other for data - 2TB + *
   
• 16GB RAM minimum, 32 GB recommended **
   
• BD burner
   
• 2 x 22inch minimum monitors - calibrated / profiled using eg Colour Munki
   

Things I would personally avoid:

• cheap motherboard and components
   
• using an alternative graphics card eg AMD or NVidia.
   
• a computer specced and set up for gaming -  in my experience they do not make good video editting machines
   
• Xeon processors
   
• SSD drives - expensive

*    If you add a third HDD then I would set it up so that all exports goes to that drive

**  With a minimum of 32 GB you can turn off the Windows page file system so that everything runs in RAM - this avoids repeated read / write to the OS HDD and gives a modest increase in speed.

Approx cost of above £1000 / € 1400 / $1200

HTH

John EB

Hi

. . . . . Just reopening this subject, What would be a good computer spec ? as i am thinking of rebuilding my PC or maybe purchase new... . . . .

That is the one question that you will get many replies for and none will agree with one another in some aspect or other.

My answer would be:

• Intel i5 or i7 6th generation
   
• Motherboard to suit with at minimum of 4 RAM slots, dual channel, 6 slots triple channel preferred
   
• Minimum 2 HDD - one for OS and programs - 2TB min, the other for data - 2TB + *
   
• 16GB RAM minimum, 32 GB recommended **
   
• BD burner
   
• 2 x 22inch minimum monitors - calibrated / profiled using eg Colour Munki
   

Things I would personally avoid:

• cheap motherboard and components
   
• using an alternative graphics card eg AMD or NVidia.
   
• a computer specced and set up for gaming -  in my experience they do not make good video editting machines
   
• Xeon processors
   
• SSD drives - expensive

*    If you add a third HDD then I would use it for all exports to that drive.

**  With a minimum of 32 GB you can turn off the Windows page file system so that everything runs in RAM - this avoids repeated read / write to the OS HDD and gives a modest increase in speed.

Approx cost of above £1400 / € 1800 / $1600

HTH

John EB

Hi John EB

I agree with most of your comments but not sure I agree with you on the additional Graphics card. My new i7 system (see my sig.) has integrated iGPU Intel 5300HD graphics but this appears to be stretched when previewing clips with New Blue Effects applied. GPU-Z utility shows 100% GPU load at full Res preview of 1080 50P AVCHD with NB effects - and stuttering, so am about to start experimenting with an Nvidia card as well.

As I mentioned elsewhere recently a French member MN34 has found he can enable both discreet and integrated GPU's simultaneously and drastically reduce render times. I will post back with my experience when I have had a play.

Peter

Hi Peter

I would be interested in the results you get after experimenting.

The problem I have with speed comparisons is that we are not using a standard common project which replicates real world editting and computer setups.

For instance I note that MN34's rendering rate is up to 0.6 x real time, the highest speed I have been getting is up to 0.48 x real time, the slowest in real time, just using the integrated HD graphics chipset.

For my comparisons between versions of MEP I have a 'standard' project which is typical of those I create.

I would suggest for real comparisons we should all render the same project eg one of the Magix demos installed with the software.

John EB

Hi John

My thoughts exactly. The best I have seen so far is 2x realtime but if you are rendering 25fps interlaced and I am using 50fps Progressive then that is 2x as many pixels my machine needs to render if all other effects and settings etc. applied are the same.

The Magix demo sounds like a simple solution even though this is in SD mxv format which most of us do not use, but it should serve the purpose.

Might take me a few days to get to this but we should start a new thread.

Cheers

Peter

Hi Peter

. . . . rendering 25fps interlaced and I am using 50fps Progressive then that is 2x as many pixels . . . .

A good point however, as I see it,  when converting interleaved to progressive there is additional processing done for Interleaved video compared to Progressive, so the difference may be less than the pixel count ratio would suggest.

Out of curiosity I did the following tests using MEP 2016 and its demo video - all using the Intel HD codecs and integrated graphics (HD4600) for HWA:

No other prameters were changed.

John EB