VideoWave 8 way too slow.

[Pepper]

VideoWave has always been slow but it would appear that vrs. 8 is a lot slower than 7 and even locks up WinXP on a regular basis.

Doing some searching here, I've come across this problem many times but haven't found any resolution.

 

My PC is an AMD 1866 megahertz AMD Athlon XP (2500+XP).

OS: Windows XP Home Edition Service Pack 2 (build 2600)

Mem: 1024 Megabytes Installed Memory

Hdd: 85.41 Gigabytes Hard Drive Free Space

Vid: RADEON 7500 SERIES -68 mb.

 

The Hdd has been defragmented and everything else works very well.

I read that upgrading to vrs. 9 won't solve anything (and after finding that 8 was worse than 7, and not even backward compatible with vers. 7 dmsm files, - unlikely anyway).

 

Is this a problem that everyone is having or is there something that I can do to improve performance and prevent crashing?

[Beerman]

Editing mpegs is much faster for me in 9 than in earlier versions. If that's what you have a problem with, try the trial version of 9 and see if it's any better.

[Pepper]

Editing mpegs is much faster for me in 9 than in earlier versions. If that's what you have a problem with, try the trial version of 9 and see if it's any better.

OK, I've tried that twice now. It jus keeps hanging up during installation. I can only assume that the problems I've been having in vrs. 8 have gotten worse in 9. Back to 7.5 I go which appears to be the most stable to date.

[sknis]

OK, I've tried that twice now. It jus keeps hanging up during installation. I can only assume that the problems I've been having in vrs. 8 have gotten worse in 9. Back to 7.5 I go which appears to be the most stable to date.

 

I would agree that the higher versions would work slower on your computer. You are just above the minimum specs for processor speed (I know that AMD says it runs at 2.5 but...) and your video card/chip is not very good if it only has 68 (? typo) MB memory. looks like that card was from about 2001. It may not fully support DirectX 9c

 

I had to remove V8 before I installed V9 to get it to install and run properly.

[Pepper]

I would agree that the higher versions would work slower on your computer. You are just above the minimum specs for processor speed (I know that AMD says it runs at 2.5 but...) and your video card/chip is not very good if it only has 68 (? typo) MB memory. looks like that card was from about 2001. It may not fully support DirectX 9c

 

I had to remove V8 before I installed V9 to get it to install and run properly.

Yep, typo it's 64mb on the vid card.

I currently have versions 7.5 and 8 on the machine and if you had to uninstall 8 to load 9 then I guess that's what I'd have to do.

The problem with that is that vers. 8 was not backwards compatible with some vs 7 created files and I fear that Roxio has done the same with vrs. 9. Therefore if I wan't to edit a .dmsm slide show created in 7, I have to have 7 on the system and if I want to edit one that was created in vrs 8 then I have to have 8 on the system. Ridiculous!!

The only good thing with not being backwards compatible is that I'm not tied in with Roxio and can look elsewhere to see if I find something that works better for me. Either way it won't work with the old files.

Can anyone point me in the right direction for finding alternatives, especially for creating DVD slide shows?

[gi7omy]

No matter what program you get you are still going to have rendering problems with the 64 MB graphics. You'd probably be a lot better off installing a dedicated mid-range graphics card.

 

The reason is that for rendering, the graphics is called in to do the work as well as the CPU and onboard sets just can't cut it

[Pepper]

No matter what program you get you are still going to have rendering problems with the 64 MB graphics. You'd probably be a lot better off installing a dedicated mid-range graphics card.

 

The reason is that for rendering, the graphics is called in to do the work as well as the CPU and onboard sets just can't cut it

Well, I put in an ATI Radeon 9250 AGP vid board with 256mb DDR.

Also cleaned up the registry and now was able to install vrs. 9 trial in addition to 7.5 and 8.

 

I'm pleasently surprised that a VideoWave 8 production appears to be compatible with the new installation and if that holds true then I can at least uninstall vrs. 8.

But it sure is slooooooww. Inserting a single transition takes about 30 seconds.

 

What else do I need to improve performance?

Any help would sure be appreciated.

[gi7omy]

Unfortunately rendering is a very slow process and there's not a lot that can be done. I use Poser 6 here as well and to render a still posed picture can take 5 - 10 minutes on that

 

Movies in EMC take at least the length of the playback time. Pixar admit that the bottleneck in their production is rendering (and they have multi processor machines with tons of RAM linked together)

 

My normal method of dealing with video is to render and save to iso image and then open that with disc copy (separating the render and burn). When I start to render, I shut down all running apps, IMs and so on, and then go and watch TV for an hour or two