Problems in Free Trial Version- No HDV UNable to Uninstall

[Chris Barcellos]

I ordered PP 2.0 upgrade yesterday from Video Guys, but I was anxious to see how PP 2.0 responds, so I downloaded the trial version.

The 550 mgb file downloaded fine. I installed it, and ran the program. THE FIRST THING I NOTICE IN RUNNING THE PROGRAM IS A NOTICE THAT YOU HAVE TO UNINSTALL THE FREE VERSION BEFORE INSTALLING THE PURCHASED VERSION. Okay, fine I'll do that when I get it. The next thing I notice when program is loaded is there is no HDV preset--

I assumed, since my 1.5 had HDV preset, that there was an error in the install, so I decided to uninstall and try a reinstall. I went to the uninstall at Windows menu, and started uninstall. Seemed alright at that point. I then reintalled, and I get a message that registration is not valid. Seemed crazy, since this is a free version. I then try to uninstall again, and it won't uninstall. It give a message something like "The installation was incomplete, please try to reinstall."

Now I can't uninstall when the purchased version arrives. Anyone from Adobe out there that can help ?

[Chris Barcellos]

The Second part of this is why isn't there HDV support in the trial version. Afterall, this is what I will be using !

[Ed Smith]

Hi Chris,

Have you tried removing it with add/remove programs in control panel and/ or removing by running the installer again?

You might want to un-install version 1.5 as well just in case it is getting confused.

If you stil get the error after trying to install it again try, deleting the Adobe Premiere folder in C:\Program Files\Adobe (replace c with your drive letter where you installed premiere). Reboot the machine and then try installing the trial version or just wait till you get the full version to re-install again.

It could be possible that adobe has taken away the HDV feature from the demo of PP2. Do you have any release notes that came with it that explains what you can and can't do with the trial version?

thanks,

[Chris Barcellos]

Ed:

Thanks for the suggestions.

Except for uninstalling 1.51, I have done everything you suggested. I guess I will try that next. I was resigned to awaiting my upgrade from Video Guys, but I think I will try that. Hope I don't have a problem reinstallying 1.51 after that.

[Giroud Francois]

there is no mpeg2 feature in premiere 2.0 demo, and since this version will rely on mpeg2 for HDV, then no HDV either.
anyway, i doubt you would use native mpeg2 HDV editing , since Cineform is offereing a lot better solution.

[Chris Barcellos]

Originally Posted by Giroud Francois

there is no mpeg2 feature in premiere 2.0 demo, and since this version will rely on mpeg2 for HDV, then no HDV either.
anyway, i doubt you would use native mpeg2 HDV editing , since Cineform is offereing a lot better solution.

Okay, I ve been asking that question over and over again, and I don't get a satisfactory answer. Why is Cineform a better solution. What could be easier, assuming you have the computing power, than editing in the native format. Why is it better to transcode to another format ? I'm looking for a reason that I should lay down all that money for Cineform rather than having system work in the native format. Its being done in Liquid, and other editors, and I think 2.0 is intended to do that too, I'll find out when I get my upgrade I guess.

[Steven Gotz]

Chris,

I believe that I can help you with the question about why is it better to use the Cineform Intermediate Codec as well as why it is faster and less stressful on your PC.

First, let me say that I am a HUGE fan of Cineform. But, I don't work for them. Nor do I represent them in any way other than providing a link from my web site.

The fact is that MPEG is hard to edit with the long GOPs. So you would need a very powerful PC. And one day such PCs will exist. So let's address why it is still better to use Cineform Aspect HD.

The wavelet technology - well let's steal a quote from the White Paper on the subject - with a name change to reflect the change to the real name from the working name they stated with:

"To allow real-time video editing with high image quality, Aspect HD converts the MPEG2 Transport Stream capture format from external devices into a representation that is both: i) visually lossless, and ii) optimized for video editing. To increase editing performance with standard computing hardware, the algorithms within Aspect HD take advantage of two things that are quite new: i) video is stored in a format that allows more efficient retrieval from hard drives, and ii) its compression format allows for very efficient video effects processing."

Basically, instead of dealing with rearranging the GOP after every cut, the PC can deal with each frame individually. The White Paper is here: http://www.cineform.com/technology/N...WhitePaper.pdf

In any case, Aspect HD provides a higher quality edit, at light speeds faster than native in Premiere Pro 2.0. So it is up to you, but I made my choice and I have made no secret about it. When I saw what Aspect HD could do for me over a year ago, I freaked out. I had to own it. No question about it.

Dan Newman hangs out here. He is the CTO of CIneform, and his support has been simply amazing. And one other thing. Even Adobe admits that After Effects can't handle native HDV. But with Aspect HD, it is simple. Very simple. And fast enough to actually use it!

[Chris Barcellos]

Following up on Steven Gotz post:

I don't pretend to understand the difference in file structures between the two, but what I am coming to understand from you and Doug Spotted Eagle is that the benefit lies in the ease of editing and a cleaner way of applying filters, transitions, and other effects. In other words it is takes more work for a processor to apply the editing commands and effects in the Cineform .avi file. than doing so in a direct edit process.

I will review the white paper. What bugs me about the process is that we have this "efficient" codec which manages to pack a lot of information in a small file, and to edit we expand that file, and then recompress it. Aren't we liable to cause some degradation there somewhere. As I said, I am no Einstein with this stuff, but I have spent a lot of money on buying editing solutions in the past (editing boards, etc, ), and then have everything change to program based to take advantage of the faster processors. Now, I am thinking that plunking down $500.00 in this intermediate editing process might ultimately have the same thing happen. Adobe dropping of the intermediate codec for capture only raises the concern about where it is going in the future. I am running a dual core processor by AMD, 3800+, so I will experiment with 2.0 a bit before buying Aspect HD. I did use the trial version in both Premiere 1.51 and Vegas. I have also done some editing of .m2t files in Vegas, as well as in Pinnacle Studio 10 plus. (Studio 10 Plus is a consumer oriented editor that edits in native m2v format, like Liquid.) Aside from problems I had with trying to use a USB 2.0 drive for capture and editing to, it seemed to work decently and efficiently on simple edits. I did not do any significant color correcting, etc., so that may be where the benefits lie with the intermediate processing.

[Steven Gotz]

The other way around. Less stress using Cineform than native. The difference in the file structure? Mostly this... In an AVI, all of the info for each frame is contained in the frame. Using MPEG2, each frame references another. That means to show you anything, the program has to calculate it based on what came before.

As for recompressing... That is exactly what has to happen every time you make a straight cut when editing in native format. Why? The GOP (group of pictures) has to be recalculated.

Don't forget to test out using some of the included Aspect HD effects.

[Giroud Francois]

the reason why adobe is not continuing with cineform or any intermediate codec, is that they believe that hardware is better and less tricky.
You will soon see hardware solution for HDV, from mpeg2 hardware codec , to SDI or YUV capture for cheap.
For a long time anyway, the software solution will be better since it cost less and is upgradable and allow to work with format that are higher than the original one.
For example, i think the cineform work in 4:2:2 while HDV is 4:2:0.
This is not important when you are working only with cut, but as soon you mix pictures together, or apply filter, it become a real advantage.
Since performance of processor cost a lot more than disk space, i currently prefers intermediate codecs.

[Chris Barcellos]

I've read the "White Paper" suggested by Steven in this thread. I note that it is about 2 years old, but I now have a better understanding of the concept and reasoning behind using the Cineform solution.

So my next question is should I cancel my Premiere upgrade and put the money toward Aspect, or is there some great benefit to moving to Premiere 2.0 ? Any thoughts ?

[Steven Gotz]

It depends. Are you using After Effects? The interface between Premiere Pro 2.0 and After Effects 7 is fantastic. But only if you have the entire Production Studio do you get Dynamic Link.

I don't see any huge advantage to upgrading to 2.0 though. Unless you use some of the new features, like secondary color correction and subclips and other such.

[Chris Barcellos]

Thanks Steven, I may have seen the light.

[Giroud Francois]

there is a multicam feature in 2.0 that is great for those who are doing this.
for the others , i think 1.5.1 is ok because it is running ok and you know where you go.

[Alister Chapman]

PPro 2's implementation of preview via the PC's grahics card video overlay is much better than PPro 1.5. I am running a 3 monitor setup with my 3rd monitor used as a preview monitor. PPro 2 video overlay is running at 1920 x 1440, so I get full res 1920x1080 HD preview, even the aspect ratio is correct!

As for cineform if you by Connect HD you can capture and export cineform or M2t clips using HD link and you can edit the clips within either version of Premiere pro or Vegas. The only thing you don't get is the real time acceleration within Premiere. Having said that, even without the acceleration that Aspect gives I still get better editing performance using Cineform files than native m2t HD mpegs.