#RAZOR PRO/PAR users
31 messages in this thread
We have discovered a mildly bizarre error which can
occur if your AUTOEXEC.BAT contains the dps_par line
as mentioned in the RAZOR PRO manual.
In the manual it read:
C:\dps_par\parinit /p=c:\dps_par\ /win=c:\windows\
However we have discovered that the extra backslashes
at the end of each of the parameters can cause odd
behaviour and we now suggest that the line reads:
C:\dps_par\parinit /p=c:\dps_par /win=c:\windows
Jamie Carr
in:sync
Jamie,
I've been trying Razor and it is (I should say "will be") a fantastic program.
But there are so many bugs in it that it appears to me that you are selling a
beta release — not the final, production version. Most software developers who
sell beta releases don't charge full price — and I don't think you should be.
The bugs I've found are numerous but the most harmful and repeatable one is
that every time I double click on "titles" segment on the composition screen, I
get a GPF which crashes so hard that it re-boots my machine. The steps I go
through are: 1. load project 2. Double click on "titles": that's all. I get the
message "AVEDITOR caused a GPF in module KRNL386.exe" When I hit the "close"
button, my machine reboots.
Please note this occurs on two separate machines: a 486/66 and a P90.
I'm looking forward to a fix.
Alec Jason
Alec,
99% of problems that people have when using RAZOR PRO
and the PAR are related to the system's memory configuration.
When Windows is set up on a machine it automatically sets the
virtual memory to be 2 or 3 times the amount of physical memory.
This is a bug. It should be set to be the same size as the
physical memory or a smaller size. eg if you have 20 MB RAM, set
the virtual memory to 20MB or less.
To set the virtual memory go into the control panels and then
into the 386 enhanced section and click on the virtual memory
button. Then change the swap file size to match the amount of
physical memory you have, then restart your machine.
We do check the amount of virtual memory on your machine when
RAZOR PRO starts up, but this check doesn't always work on
every machine.
If the above solution doesn't work, then please email, fax,
phone us.
Jamie Carr
in:sync
Jamie –
I spoke with you a couple of weeks ago regarding no sound from my Turtle Beach
Multisound when playing previews. I did get your phone message about a fix
with the new version. However, I found that it was due to having set my final
settings for PAR .ANI format output which doesn't support sound. Does this
mean I will be unable to use Razor Pro to playback ANI video with TB Multisound
audio simultaneously for recording to tape? Also, what is the status on the
manual and the new version of the software? My dealer still has not heard
anything from you. Still in the works?
Thanks
Larry Junda
Larry,
OK – this is how it works:
If you have the final output file set to be an ANI file then
RAZOR PRO assumes that you don't want to have any audio as
your final output and therefore that you don't need any audio
in your preview.
However if you do have audio then you should set your final
output type to be PRJ which is DPS' file format for a file which
contains ANI video and a WAV file together. If you do that then
the final output does have audio and so if you preview it now,
the preview will have audio.
The TB Multisound is a great choice of card.
There is a free upgrade coming to all registered users of RAZOR
PRO at the end of next week along with a new manual. We were
going to release it earlier but now DPS are updating their
software and so we thought we'd time the release with theirs so
that everyone can get it in one go.
I am sorry for the delay but I think you'll agree it will be
worth the wait.
Jamie Carr
in:sync
Jamie –
Great! I'll give the .PRJ approach a go. I assume we will need to contact
DPS directly for their driver updates (version 1.5???). I say take your time
and get your stuff done right. I rather wait a little longer and update one
time than deal with a series of updates anytime. Thanks for the update.
Larry
Jamie,
>> 99% of problems that people have when using RAZOR PRO
>> and the PAR are related to the system's memory configuration.
Very clever wording. At first I thought NO WAY!, but you're not really talking
about all the bugs.
I was really hoping that this software would be tested before it was released.
It would be so nice to spend my hours working on my projects, instead of
testing the reliability of software.
>> When Windows is set up on a machine it automatically sets the
>> virtual memory to be 2 or 3 times the amount of physical memory.
>> This is a bug. It should be set to be the same size as the
>> physical memory or a smaller size.
Can you explain why all of a sudden this is a bug? I've never heard of the
requirement that the virtual memory must be the same size or smaller than the
physical memory in Windows. I been using larger virtual memory for years now
with no problems.
Also, can you explain to me why I cannot use QEMM in my system anymore. I have
many applications that recommend using QEMM, at one time Microsoft sent out
MAX386 with their development system, so I'm wondering why the PAR and RP
cannot use anything but EMM386.
Here's a feature I can't explain. I copied the example CAMERA.BMP file several
times with the program manager (CAMERA2.BMP, CAMERA3.BMP, CAMERA4.BMP).
Whenever I load these files (stills) into the Library, the total times are
different; and when I place them into the Composition window, I can stretch out
the original (CAMERA.BMP) and last copy (CAMERA4.BMP), but not the middle ones.
Is there no way to display the filenames of the objects in the Composition
window? If the library is empty, how do you know where the files are located?
Would it be difficult to drag (or copy) an item from the Composition window to
the Library window?
When are you planning on releasing the next version?
What is your return policy?
Thanks in advance,
byron
engineering arts
Byron:
/_______________________From your message________________________\\
I'm wondering why the PAR and RP cannot use anything but EMM386.
__________________________________________________________________
I don't have RP yet but the PAR works fine under QEMM.
Bob
Bob,
My question was based on the fact that Jamie told me (over the phone) to
"unload QEMM because the PAR didn't like it". I was having trouble getting RP
and the PAR chip working, and was told by in:sync that "I should be using
EMM386". I've been using QEMM 7.5 with no problem also, but I've already lost
lots of money because of PAR corruption, and I'm getting a little paranoid
about the integrity of the new hardware and software showing up.
I assume in:sync has a little more knowledge about PAR than the rest of us, and
if they tell me I shouldn't be using QEMM, I think I have a right to know why.
byron
Byron:
/_______________________From your message________________________\\
My question was based on the fact that Jamie told me (over the phone) to
"unload QEMM because the PAR didn't like it".
__________________________________________________________________
Well, my point is, with all due respect to Jamie, that this is misleading
information. The PAR functions fine under QEMM.
/_______________________From your message________________________\\
I assume in:sync has a little more knowledge about PAR than the rest of us,
and if they tell me I shouldn't be using QEMM, I think I have a right to know
why. __________________________________________________________________ in:sync
may know more about the PAR but they have given you misleading information with
regards to the PAR and its 'liking' QEMM. You have a right to know why using
EM386 is suggest and frankly I'd like to know why such a suggestion was made.
Razor Pro is a different animal, one I know little about. Perhaps there are
specific differences which in:sync could enumerate which will describe the
different effects of these memory managers.
Bob
Bob,
I'm not sure what's going on with QEMM. I just know I need it with a fully
loaded system, like LAN, PAR, CD, sound, etc. I know about the difficulties of
developing and supporting software for the PC, but if you get into the business
then you've got to accept the responsibilites. As I have stated, I feel like
in:sync is knowledgable and concerned about any problems out there. Let's hope
that all of these issues are history with the soon to be released PAR software.
>> Perhaps there are specific differences which in:sync could enumerate which
will describe the different effects of these memory managers.
It would be interesting to hear from Gus or Jamie about any inside info about
the memory managers out there. Not how they work (the QEMM manual explains
that), but is one more compatable, etc. – the inside scoop. Or maybe things
they've learned to avoid, or early warning signs, etc. Or the tools they use
to monitor memory or the managers.
Thanks for the feedback.
byron
engineering arts
Robert,
My only point was as Byron nicely put it that if you are using
QEMM with RP and you didn't have a problem then don't worry
about it. We have noticed some bugs when using an old version
of QEMM (which a lot of people had because they hadn't upgraded
yet) and SCSI drives. I understand this has been fixed and won't
be a problem any more.
Having well managed RAM is extremely important to RP. From what
we have seen the latest versions of EMM386 and QEMM handle things
fine.
Jamie Carr
in:sync
Jamie:
/_______________________From your message________________________\\
We have noticed some bugs when using an old version of QEMM (which a lot of
people had because they hadn't upgraded yet) and SCSI drives. I understand
this has been fixed and won't be a problem any more.
__________________________________________________________________
Would older versions of QEMM be considered as meaning before version 7.4?
Anyway, I think it was your legwork that caused me to buy QEMM over a year ago.
Weren't you the one who discovered that RAM in excess of 64MB was not
recognized by DOS and EMM386? Didn't you find out that QEMM 7.4 would solve
this problem? I believe I owe you a debt of gratitude for reporting your
findings, my computer thanks you as well. When I can gather the funds I will
probably be purchasing Razor Pro.
Bob
Robert,
I believe the latest version of QEMM is 7.5. I would
recommend that version.
Everyone I know who is running the latest version is
not experiencing any memory problems that I know of.
Jamie Carr
in:sync
Jamie,
I just wanted to let everyone know that Elastic Reality is releasing the
Transjammer plug-in the end of Feb. The pre-release price is $100 or $150
after released. If you haven't got Elastic Reality you need to check it out.
Order a working demo of Elastic Reality and Tranjammer from ER 608-273-9240.
Transjammer comes with 61 transitions, allows you to create your own, and gives
you transitions similar to the Toaster. I don't think RP is complete without
it.
byron
Quote:
Also, can you explain to me why I cannot use QEMM in my system anymore. I have
many applications that recommend using QEMM, at one time Microsoft sent out
MAX386 with their development system, so I'm wondering why the PAR and RP
cannot use anything but EMM386.
–I have Qemm 7.5 running on my machine with no problems unless I use the
Stealth modes. However, it is a bit faster if you don't use QEMM but this is a
QEMM issue –from my experience.
Jerry
Jerry,
See my message to Bob.
byron
To all,
This is to follow up on the mildly hostile message directed toward in:sync.
This evening I got a phone call from Jamie Carr and had a long pleasant
conversation. I wanted to set things straight and post answers to the
questions that I asked earlier in this thread.
I explained to him that I come from a development background, and was very
disturbed by the amount of low quality products being "thrown" out on the 3DS
bandwagon. Also, very frustrated that certain manufacturers blame other
manufacturers for their problems. I chose the Autodesk platform because of
their commitment to quality, and I expect the same standards from the 3rd party
manufacturers. He assured me that they are very concerned about quality and
are committed to customer support. He also very thoroughly answered my
questions and was very open to my suggestions. I apologize for my insinuating
and categorizing. I now feel very comfortable that I have invested my money
and trusted my business to an honest and capable company.
So here's what we talked about.
>> When Windows is set up on a machine it automatically sets the virtual
memory to be 2 or 3 times the amount of physical memory. This is a bug. It
should be set to be the same size as the physical memory or a smaller size.
Actually, I don't think it's a bug, but it's apparently not well suited for
real-time video. As you allocate more virtual memory, the overhead of
maintaining it uses more physical memory – to the point of diminishing return.
As we all know, less RAM and more swap is not good. Setting your swap high to
retouch those posters is fine, but don't do it for video!
>> …can you explain to me why I cannot use QEMM in my system anymore.
It seems that there have been problems with QEMM and the PAR software with SCSI
drives. They recommend removing QEMM as a troubleshooting measure. Basically
the answer is – if you've been using QEMM with no problems, then it should be
safe to continue using it. The new version of PAR software should address
these issues.
>> Here's a feature I can't explain. I copied the example CAMERA.BMP file
several times with the program manager (CAMERA2.BMP, CAMERA3.BMP,
CAMERA4.BMP)…
Duh! Razor Pro supports series of files in the BMP and TGA formats. You
cannot stretch out a still when it is part of a series.
>> Is there no way to display the filenames of the objects in the Composition
window?
Currently there is no way to extract the path/filename of a clip that is part
of a project. Once you drag a clip to the Composition window, you have no way
of telling where the source is coming from. The RP manual suggests putting all
clips in a common directory when using and archiving. My argument is if you
have the PAR, a CD-ROM, a tape drive, etc., it may be impossible or undesirable
to put all clips into a common directory on the hard disk. Being able to
extract the file and Library information from the project file helps you to
restore your system to its original configuration. In:sync is very interested
in hearing new suggestions and welcomes any discussion for improvement.
>> sound cards
One of the issues with sound cards is the thermal drift of the crystal
oscillators (because of the excessive heat inside the computer). If the time
base of the sound card drifts, you get into sync problems with the AV. In:sync
recommends Turtle Beach and Roland because these manufacturers are sensitive to
these issues.
—————————
Again, Jamie assures me that this product has been in the works for years, and
the latest version (1.0a) is very solid. If you encounter a problem, they want
to know immediately.
Well I hope this helps ease the mind of all. I wish manufacturers would not
keep us in the dark. Most of us are purdy educated and would be glad to
provide positive feedback if we worked together. [Join hands] We are the
world…(Spiral sweep wipe to Michael with a embossed displacement fade…)
byron
engineering arts
Byron,
>>I now feel very comfortable that I have invested my money and trusted my
business to an honest and capable company.<<
I also have had nothing but great experiences with IN:SYNC!! Jamie Carr and I
have been working since the release of Razor Pro, I met him at Comdex and he is
quite a character. The support of IN:SYNC has been some of the best in the
industry and I have worked with quite a few developers in the beta stage. I
don't think that Adobe Systems could keep up with type of support.
Just thought I would throw in my $.02 worth.
Mike Morgan, CAD Forms Inc.
Hi!
I have only recently heard about Razor Pro through this forum.. I do plan to
get a demo once the pro at the local shop returns, but before then, had a
question…
How closely does Razor Pro work with Project/Ani Files on the PAR card? Do
the files need to be transferred as Targas to the regular hard drive before
processing then returned, or can they remain on the PAR directory? Besides
sound (which is a great improvement as I was waiting for a comparable feature
to that of Studio 16/Amiga for the PC), is this a massive advantage over simple
editting using the PAR stuff (which is rough). Perhaps a FAQ like that for the
PAR would be useful. For reference, I have PAR/2217/TBCIV on a Digital XL560
16Meg w/1 G Main SCSI. While I do have problems with QEMM and the SCSI when
Stealth mode is set, I simply dont pursue that avenue. Plan to reinstall 386Max
soon tho.
Ok, more than one question, but probably universally helpful for those just
learning about this product.
— Karl
>>how closely does RazorPro work with files on the PAR?…
Karl, since I'm in the typing mood I'll jump in with my impressions. I've
haven't used it with sound yet, but have been playing with the RazorPro/PAR a
little.
RazorPro works very well with the PAR files. You do not have to convert the
files to TGAs before using them. I understand the extra $100 chip you have to
buy for the PAR contains data decimation logic – this in effect allows the
software to read just a tiny thumbnail image from the PAR hardware instead of
the entire file. The RazorPro docs claim a 2500% speed improvement over
reading the images as TGAs.
Once you have the clips in RazorPro, you can cut and paste as well as apply a
variety of transitions and effects. It is very easy to drag clips around and
apply effects. Once the composition is complete, the final step creates a new
ANI on the PAR drive. To do this, RazorPro steps thru each frame and extracts
the appropriate frames from the PAR or elsewhere, calculates the effects and
transitions, composites the images together as necessary, and writes a new
frame on the PAR. This takes a few seconds per frame depending on the
processing involved. It can be time-consuming for long files, but it's not
much different from normal reading and writing to the PAR.
>>is this a massive advantage?…
In my opinion, besides the sound issue, using RazorPro is a big advantage over
PAR.EXE if you need to do a lot of cutting and pasting with transitions and
effects. It is quicker and easier to be creative than the previous way I had
of doing this – Video Post in 3DS. It is also much easier then VP when working
with video clips captured with the TBC-IV and pieces of ANI files, since this
requires a lot of dancing with IFL flies. There may not be a clear advantage
over VP/PAR.EXE if all the transitions are cuts or simple dissolves, animation
segments are rendered to the length required, or if you do a bunch of
compositing with the alpha channel.
BTW, I use QEMM on a Gateway P5/66 with 36Megs & 1.7gig SCSI.
JKJ
Hi John:
I have been following the threads here on Razor Pro and have made the decision
to go with Premier 4.0 for my intro into this type of PAR editing. The price
was so low I couldn't refuse the Adobe offer which was the primary reason for
bringing it in. Also there has been little to no feedback here on the forum
about the product so maybe after some introduction I will be able to add to our
knowledge base. As I understand the RP product will be more efficient in some
aspects because of the hardware but the Adobe product is more widely accepted
in the industry. Understand that I'm not really serious in using this type of
editing for my clients yet as I'm really concerned about the PAR quality for
live video output to betacam SP. It maybe just fine in 3/4 or lessor formats
but not for mix with other footage in betacam. I'll keep you all posted after
I get the product installed and have a few days with it.
Great – I'm anxious to hear what you think of Premier. I was considering
getting Premier also just to compare it to RazorPro (oh the toys, the toys).
Also, it sounds like anyone, including Adobe, could make use of the PAR
hardware if they wanted to. Perhaps if they started getting calls asking about
support for the PAR they would add this code.
Don- I'm anzious to hear what you think of Premiere. I'm considering
picking it up myself. I'm a RazorPro user, and tend to share the
opinion of others here on the Forum that the product has potential,
but is really not quite ready for serious production yet. I was told
by my dealer that a new updated version and manual would be ready
after the first of the year, and needless to say, I'm still waiting
on it to arrive. I have been able to get it to work with the Par and
sound after d/l'ing the updates from the In:Sync board, and it is
pretty slick. But without docs, I feel like I'm probably only
getting a fraction out of the program that I could. The one thing
that is really a problem is the slow nature of previews. I kinda
takes the advantage out of NLE if you have to wait to see how your
edits are going to look. Granted, I'm only using a 486/66 w/ 32 M
Ram and I'm sure that it would speed up considerably with a faster
machine.
Again, I think the product has tremendous potential, but there are two
major things I feel need to be added (if you are listening Jamie).
1) The ability to tap the Par's record feature and trigger a sound card at the
same time so that audio and video could be captured together at the same time.
It's a real chore syncing up audio with a talking head, mainly because of the
preview time. (BTW, I don't think Premier can do this either)
2) The ability to spit out EDL's so that RP could be used as a NL offline
system would be a major plus.
I'm really interested in Premier's ability to spit out a Sony or CMX EDL. If
you get a chance to use that feature, please let me know your opinion.
Thanks, -Mark
Hi!
Thanks for the responses on Razor Pro Info! I have been looking forward to
someone doing the "obvious" with the PAR/TBCIV setup — one of those high
quallity video secrets. And it is surprising Adobe hasnt caught on.
In one of the more recent messages, Jamie mentioned a minimum of 20 Mb RAM.
Is this Physical RAM exclusively or Physical+Virtual? I have 16 right now but
could budget 8 or 16 more if it made sense; the machine is not often used for
rendering. Most of my use with the PAR is editing CG animation from other
sources for demos and editting live video, often 1000+ frames.
Now, if you could tell me there are XAOS Pandemonium plug-in's coming, this
truly would be a perfect world! (g).
— Karl
>>RazorPro memory…
I'll bet he was talking physical memory. I'd go with the extra 16 megs,
especially if you use 3D Studio. I have 36 in one machine and 40 in the other
and seldom run out with the kind of stuff I do.
As yet I have not tried anything very long with the RazorPro/PAR – the longest
was about 20 seconds or so and without sound. To me, the PAR looks better with
video than with animations, probably since a video signal usually has a much
higher spatial frequency component then CG and hides the JPEG artifacting
better.
For the price, this setup has a lot of potential – and makes a GREAT toy!, er,
tool. (I better be careful – once I refered to something as a great toy and
someone took offense and blasted me for it. :[ )
JKJ
PMJI, but XAOS Penello plug-in for 3DS is available now! (FYI)
Karl,
>> How closely does Razor Pro work with Project/Ani Files on the PAR card? Do
the files need to be transferred as Targas to the regular hard drive before
processing then returned, or can they remain on the PAR directory?
When you buy RP you also have to buy a firmware upgrade for the PAR (PC PAR VX
Upgrade). Here's what the upgrade memo says "specifically, the VX upgrade
improves the performance of PAR video clip to AVI file conversion by more than
2,500%, compared to traditional TARGA sequence methods…As you edit AVI files,
the RAZOR editor can function at the full speed of Windows, enabling real-time
preview. After you finish editing, the AVI clip serves as an edit decision
list which RAZOR can use to recompile the video clip directly on the PAR at
full broadcast quality resolution."
>> comparable feature to that of Studio 16/Amiga
Razor Pro does not allow you to edit the waveform (like Studio 16) beyond
controlling the volume level. You control the volume of the waveform with a
"volume graph", which make it very easy to fade in/out/cross.
>> …is this a massive advantage over simple editting using the PAR stuff
Massive might be a little weak.
If you have been using the PAR software and Video Post to do your post
production work, you will think you've been working in the stone age.
byron
engineering arts
Byron,
As I explained on the phone, those problems that people are
having are generally not bugs but related to people's memory
configurations.
I will attempt to restate the position so that its clear.
When Microsoft came up with the virtual memory scheme it was
not thinking about the demands of working with video and audio
files because these weren't implemented at that time. Virtual
memory is a great concept for handling large files where you
only have to access parts of the file occasionally. A classic
for instance is the case where you want to load a large still
image. The machine can't handle the while thing so it pages
out the file to disk until it needs it.
With video and audio files it's different. The program needs
access to all parts of the files all the time. When we show
the filmstrips of the video on the Composition window we are
displaying parts of file from the whole sequence of frames.
Unfortunately this is where the memory scheme breaks down
because we need to access extremely quickly lots of different
parts of the file at the same time to get the video and audio
information.
In order to speed this process up incredibly we require 20 MB
RAM. We used to work in 16 MB RAM but with the new upgrade
this has now broken that barrier unfortunately. With this
much RAM we can do lots of things really quickly. However
this is where the virtual memory scheme gets in the way. If
you have a swap file which is larger than your physical RAM
then Windows thinks its OK to use your RAM in order to create
your huge swap file. But with RAZOR PRO thats a NO-NO because
then the program and the compressors don't have enough room to
operate.
I hope this answers your question as to why we recommend the
size of the swap file that we do.
We don't think that QEMM 7.5 doesn't work – we just think that
if you have an earlier version you should upgrade to the latest
version and then you won't have any problems.
I explained over the phone about the camera*.bmp problem. When
you load the image and it has a number at the end it knows that
its in a sequence and so treats that file as being part of that
sequence.
If you have any other questions please let me know.
Jamie Carr
in:sync
Jamie,
Thanks for posting the details of the Windows swap file. I normally try to
work out my own problems and use technical support as a last resort. If I'm
kept in the dark about certain issues, it's impossible to solve my own
problems. I appreciate you taking the time to explain the technical issues to
us.
Glad to hear about the upgrade and new manual. I've been playing with RP and
it's like when you first hook up the PAR – very exciting.
byron
engineering arts
Thanks for that more complete explanation on the virtual memory issue. From
your last post on this I understood you to be saying that Windows had a bug in
that it would allow larger swap files than the physical RAM. I have used the
large swap files without problems here for the purpose you used in your
example. I now understand you were refering to a specific use of the Windows
swap file for Razor Pro and not that windows had a bug in the swap file
process.