Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Video

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

Leave a Comment
    • «
    • 1
    • »
    pringle
    pringle  6 United Kingdom
    24 Jul 2011 - 12:24 PM

    Hi Everyone

    I have shot a couple of short videos on my Canon 60D but when I try to play them back they are very jerky and broken....the sound is ok but the pictures break up and stick. Anyone have any suggestions how to get them to play smoothly.

    Thanks.

    Pringle

    Sponsored Links
    Sponsored Links 
    24 Jul 2011 - 12:24 PM

    Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

    justin c
    justin c  104527 forum posts England36 Constructive Critique Points
    24 Jul 2011 - 1:09 PM

    The problem is usually an underpowered computer. The video files from a 60D are a challenge to play back smoothly on a lot of older machines (assuming your computer is older, of course)
    Try VLC player, or, if you just want to have a look at some clips you've recorded, connect your camera to your television and play them that way. The sound and quality will be perfect that way.
    I had the same problem with a six year old PC, I'm now using a newer one, but still a long, long way from the latest and greatest machine, and files from my 5DII and 7D play back perfectly now.

    kinfatric
    kinfatric  9550 forum posts Scotland9 Constructive Critique Points
    24 Jul 2011 - 1:09 PM

    Try defragging your hardrive and shut down other programs that are running in the background, also do a search on here for other threads on the subject that may give you assistance recommended system specs etc. as you don't say the specification of your system, but one with a 4gb of ram and a fast sata hardrive would be recommended.

    User_Removed
    24 Jul 2011 - 1:36 PM

    Or just buy a discreet GPU (30) to natively decode the file.

    Carabosse
    Carabosse e2 Member 1139463 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
    24 Jul 2011 - 2:00 PM

    Whatever the age of the machine, RAM is crucial. With anything less than 4GB you may run into problems playing HD video smoothly.

    User_Removed
    24 Jul 2011 - 2:09 PM

    VLC's x264 decoding is ****. No way around that. Its a horribly optimised software decoder. coreAVC can easily handle HD with way under 4GB of RAM and on a 1.83ghz C2D without discreet graphics. lol.

    Last Modified By User_Removed at 24 Jul 2011 - 2:11 PM
    User_Removed
    24 Jul 2011 - 2:18 PM

    bottomline:

    A 2.4GHz Core 2 (the older generation) using ffdshow (pure software decoding) to playback x264 videos is fast enough to play back any 720p streams without maxing out the CPU, but 1080p would often be too much, and peg both cores at 100% with stuttering. A 2.4Ghz quad core was needed to playback 1080p streams reliably.

    VLC's x264 decoding is even worse than ffdshow, but you should be able to playback 720p purely in software on a 2.8Ghz core 2 fine, though possibly you well may still see heavy loads doing it.

    I would recommend either an improved software decoder and alternative player, such as CoreAVC + windows media player - which has a well deserved good reputation - or a partially hardware accelerated DXVA with a better graphics card which will pass workload from IDCT to bitstream to bitstream plus FGT - to get it away from the CPU. Newer NVIDIA cards - work well with Direct X Video Acceleration (DXVA)-enabled decoders such as those offered by Cyberlink, included in Media Player Classic Home Cinema, and even Microsoft's own MPEG-2 codec. Additionally, CoreAVC now uses Nvidia's CUDA to substantially boost decoding performance on newer Nvidia chips even without using DXVA.

    Ditch the "stock" VLC. Directshow players like MPC, MPC-HC, etc. perform better on Windows and don't suffer from corruption on (for instance) interlaced VC-1 streams. VLC also can't hand off as much decoding to your GPU as native directshow codecs can.

    With an appropriate upgrade to either, you could probably even playback 720p video well enough on your old P4, though if you don't want to optimise your software decoding you can just throw money at the problem and upgrade the machine. Smile

    justin c
    justin c  104527 forum posts England36 Constructive Critique Points
    24 Jul 2011 - 2:45 PM

    How do you get Windows Media Player to use CoreAVC?

    User_Removed
    24 Jul 2011 - 6:41 PM

    under core's settings you just tick "preferred decoder".

    justin c
    justin c  104527 forum posts England36 Constructive Critique Points
    24 Jul 2011 - 7:29 PM

    I've done that and I've also selected Use icon tray, which apparently should give some indication that it's being used. Trouble is, I've got no icon for some reason.
    Also, I'm using Windows Media Player, do I need to install the CoreAVC codec somehow? I've checked which codecs are listed and there's no mention of it??

    User_Removed
    24 Jul 2011 - 8:35 PM

    You have to make sure that no other decoders are installed and defaulted to WMP. - ffdshow is a real swine for this.

    I'm not coreavc's tech support dept. But they did create an installer to re-write these settings for you - but other decoders will still need to be removed.

    justin c
    justin c  104527 forum posts England36 Constructive Critique Points
    24 Jul 2011 - 9:06 PM

    Thanks for your help. I'll have a route around on the web to see what I can find.

    Just one further question if you don't mind.

    Windows Media Player 12 and VLC Player play back my Canon 5D MkII and 7D's video footage smoothly and without issue. Will there be any benefit in using CoreAVC, i.e does it improve the image quality at all in those two programs, or is it only of use if there's playback issues?

    Last Modified By justin c at 24 Jul 2011 - 9:07 PM
    User_Removed
    24 Jul 2011 - 9:33 PM

    It's a much better software decoder. So the answer is yes, if you notice things like that.

    For instance I can tell the difference between the two when decoding side-by-side and on their own. - it gives you a better base to tune from.

    I would liken it to that of the engines behind the 120hz TV sets - Some people can't see a difference so it would be a wasted investment to even look into what's available - some really do benefit from more fluid motion - particularly during fast sequences which comes in various manfu. flavours such as bravia or hyper-real - even though the source content is the same.

    The same applies to your decoder, but with the overall rule that a "better" decoder will just reduce your resource usage on the machine.. - it won't directly make the video stream "better".

    Which is fair enough for 15 even if you don't use the extra configuration then available to you. - if your decoder works smoothly and is set right then it should be 100% the same stream playback. core or ffdshow alike... (but this is never the case in practicality)

    justin c
    justin c  104527 forum posts England36 Constructive Critique Points
    24 Jul 2011 - 10:49 PM

    Thanks again. I shall endeavour to get CoreAVC working.

    • «
    • 1
    • »

    Add a Comment

    You must be a member to leave a comment

    Username:
    Password:
    Remember me:
    Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.