At least one comment has been added to this article, only an administrator can delete the article now.

Do you really want to delete this article?

Enter the password for this article, then click the "Delete" button. Click the "Cancel" button to exit this page.

Question - Smart Rendering Compliant Files - Slower than Re-Rendering No.69997
TomLewandowski  Mail / Home )  2015-11-02 20:50:22 ( ID:.t38jdbdulr )  

Almost all of my HD 1920x1080 30p read as fully SMART RENDERING compliant upon loading them into TAW5. In fact, I've even created a few HD videos by taking compliant clips, and re-rerendering them in TAW5 -- then reloading them into a new project. There are no flags, no indications that any clip is not SR compliant, and all the settings indicate the final product is prioritized to utilize Smart Rendering.

However, every time I start outputting the BDMV structure, TAW5 goes through an "ANALYZING" process for each video clip, except the menus (which also contain SR-compliant video backgrounds.) This "analyzing" process is soooo slow that I've given up waiting for it (over 24 hours for 4, 40-minute videos.)

If I simply re-render the videos by disabling Smart Rendering, the same project renders in a couple of hours. So, what's the deal with this extremely slow 'ANALYZING' process, and how do I get rid of it? I don't see any mention of settings for it in PREFERENCES, and the HELP in TAW5 doesn't really mention it.

I use the IBM HARDWARE SDK for encoding, though I've tried using TAW5's X264 encoder as well. I have all encoder settings set to NORMAL, 1-pass VBR, Smart Rendering Prioritized, MPEG-4 AVC (but have tried MPEG-2 SR-compliant files, too), all files in the track are SR compliant (not a mixture of FR and SR files). Even if there's only one file with no menus, and the file is 100% SR-compliant, the damn 'analyzing' begins as soon as I try to output the BDMV structure -- and it takes hours to analyze.

I've given up trying to use TAW5 with Smart Rendering enabled, and just end up re-encoding projects to a slightly higher bitrate, using the SDK Hardware Encoder; it's so much faster. Even when using a software encoder, re-encoding the project is so much faster than waiting for TAW5 to "analyze" each file.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

shinrabansho  2015-11-03 10:45:30 ( ID:q63jyagigco )  

In my case, "ANALYZING" completes in the matter of seconds (or maybe minutes).

If I were you, I would uninstall the "the IBM HARDWARE SDK for encoding" to see if (1) the uninstall would eliminate the problem you refer to, and (2) TAW's own encoder is better or worse than the IBM SDK.

TomLewandowski  Mail / Home )  2015-11-04 05:07:59 ( ID:.t38jdbdulr )  

Well, I've disabled the SDK Hardware Encoder, selected TAW5's x264 Encoder, and it's no different. I tried this with a 30-minute HD (full smart render compliant), and "ANALYZING" appears. I let it run to see how long it would take, but gave up after just about three hours of v-e-r-y slow progress. I'm not sure how to access IBM's SDK encoder settings (there's nothing in Windows' Control Panel or Device Manager that I've been able to locate, but I'll check again. I'm hoping you're right and disabling IBM's SDK hardware encoder will resolve this issue. I'll let you know.

shinrabansho  2015-11-04 08:24:50 ( ID:q63jyagigco )  

I do not know what your system looks like (mobo, CPU, memory, GPU etc) or how important the IBM SDK is to you but, if reinstallation of Windows is not an option for you, installtion of a virtual machine, e.g. VMWare Workstation Player (free), might be worthwhile to see if the clean and simple setup of Windows environment (without the IBM SDK etc) plus TAW only cures the problem. I have been using TAW for several years by now but have never had a case where ANALYSING took such a long time.

TomLewandowski  Mail / Home )  2015-11-04 22:21:50 ( ID:.t38jdbdulr )  

I'm running TAW5 on an Intel Core i5 processor, under Win7 Professional, 8GB's RAM, on a Acer Aspire laptop - Intel HD 3000 integrated graphic card. The SDK Hardware encoder isn't used by any other authoring software I'm using; just TAW5, so I might as well bite the bullet and uninstall the SDK support files. Think maybe I'll first try booting up in Safe Mode, and disabling everything I can that will still allow TAW5 to function. If all else fails, maybe do a clean Win7 install. I really would like to be able to use TAW5 without re-encoding.

I was hesitating on doing anything drastic only because I was hoping, Pegasys would release either an update, or upgrade that would include "end of clip" play options, and integrate some basic "copy and paste" or full "duplicate" menu and menu item features -- something that would seem to be a pretty basic BDMV authoring feature. But alas, they don't seem to be addressing these limitations.

TomLewandowski  Mail / Home )  2015-11-05 04:03:37 ( ID:.t38jdbdulr )  

I was able to disable the Hardware SDK encoder, limiting my choice of encoding using the x264 software encoder. Didn't help. I'm using a one-video BDMV format with no menus, and still, when I begin the BDMV creation, the "ANALYZING" message pops up and creeps along very slowly.

I also uninstalled the current version of TAW5, and installed an earlier version, and disabled all other installed multimedia software from loading (via CCleaner's Start-up editor). Still, no change.

At one point (during the past year) after one of the program updates, I actually did have a very short HD video, Smart Render, but it hasn't done so since.

Almost all of my HD video files are recorded with a Hauppauge PVR 2 HD recorder, at 1920x1080 30p. These HD recordings load perfectly into NERO VIDEO and require no re-encoding; audio is AC3 5.1, recorded using an optical (toslink) connection. NERO reads both VIDEO and AUDIO as 100% SmartEncode compliant. I then export them from NERO VIDEO as m2ts BD files, where they will then read as Full Smart Render compliant by TAW5. Nothing is flagged as non-BDMV compliant.

Very frustrating....

shinrabansho  2015-11-05 06:03:01 ( ID:q63jyagigco )  

Would you be able to upload (a part of) the video file somewhere so that I can check to see if the problem reproduces on my system as well?

TomLewandowski  Mail / Home )  2015-11-06 04:55:08 ( ID:.t38jdbdulr )  

Thanks! I'll upload one or two 5-minute segments of SR videos to my server, when I get home today....

TomLewandowski  Mail / Home )  2015-11-06 08:13:56 ( ID:.t38jdbdulr )  

Here's two, 2-minute 1920x1080 (30i) .m2ts AVC/AC3 video files, both which load as Smart Render compliant in TAW5 ... and both first go through a slow 'analyzing' process when outputting them to BDMV format.

Please let me know when you've downloaded the files so that I can remove the files from my serever. And thanks a lot for the help!

shinrabansho  2015-11-06 10:39:44 ( ID:q63jyagigco )  

Hi. Thanks for the upload. I just downloaded the two test files. I then loaded them onto TAW5 ( and attempted to make a Blu-Ray disk out of them (using the default setting in TAW). The "ANALYZING" part took about 4 minutes, and the Smart Render process (yes, my TAW recognized the files as Smart Renderable) also took another 4 minutes resulting in a proper Blu-Ray disc image (am viewing it with Power DVD). Thus, contrary to my earlier suspicion, the files produced by your capture device seem OK as I do not see oddity when I check the files with MediaInfo. One thing I would like you to test is the field order of the interlace setting in TAW: What happens if you change the field order to "Bottom field first" in Track setting (you have to change Output setting to "Re-encode all videos as blow" (instead of Automatic (Smart rendering prioritized) first to choose the field order option)? Does TAW still take a long time in the analyzing part?

TomLewandowski  Mail / Home )  2015-11-06 23:41:09 ( ID:.t38jdbdulr )  

Thanks for checking the files. It appears you duplicated the same results I get -- so when Smart Rendering a BDMV with four, 40-minute videos, the "analyzing time" becomes ridiculously long....and re-encoding (via Hardware SDK) takes only a couple of hours.

Reversing the field order doesn't appear to be any different, since TAW5 re-encodes at the same speed on my system, no matter how the field order is set; there's no "analyzing" screen that appears when I use either Hardware or Software encoders. I'm currently trying a 42-minute video Smart Render, and the "analyzing" screen is present: It states the remaining time as, 12 hours, 17 mins, though the time keeps increasing as the video progresses.

I've found that Smart Render works for me with TAW's definition of compliant "PROGRESSIVE" (instead of INTERLACED) video files! My PVR is capturing in Progressive format (1920x1080 30p ~16Mbps AVC.) When I load the captured file into NERO VIDEO, it reads it as 100% Video and Audio Smart Render compliant, and doesn't re-encode it. However, the resulting .m2ts file reads as interlaced, after NERO creates it. Since it's not re-encoding the file, I don't know why this is happening. MediaInfo, TAW5, and even Windows 'File Properties' all recognize the original file as progressive, until NERO creates a BDMV structure.

TAW5 flags several parameters or these original recordings as non-BDMV compliant. I think I need to play around with some PVR recording settings to see if I can find one that TAW likes. I'm not sure how much I'm able to change, but I still can't figure out why NERO is tagging these files as INTERLACED...there would be no problem if it would leave the file data intact.

shinrabansho  2015-11-07 06:57:54 ( ID:q63jyagigco )  

I do not use the capture device or the video editor you refer to so cannot give you much advice there. Meanwhile, I came across a message that might be relevant to you. I hope this helps.

Rick0725  2015-12-25 21:45:41 ( ID:gunkirozbqm )  


I explained above. The manufacturer used an incorrect flag in the HARDWARE for capturing 1080. It does not stricly follow the DVD/Blu ray standard when you capture 1080. 720P works fine and will smart rendor because the plag is correct for 720P.

It was a simple correction. I brought up the issue with the programmers at the company, they were subborn, and they refused to fix it. Therefore 1080 files will not smart rendor in software that is strict to the DVD/Blu Ray standards. TMPgenc strictly follows the standards other software may not.

Long story short...Give up trying to make it work. Waste of time. I tried for about a year to get the issued at Hauppauge corrected. it would have worked fine if the file was outputted from the pvr as interlaced instead of progressive.

View article | Back to TMPGEnc Home | Administrator TMPGEnc Net

Script written by TMPGEnc.