Log in

View Full Version : CCE 2.69/Rebuilder 0.45 Problem


Balthazar
1st May 2004, 16:32
I was originally having problems with VBV errors all the time in CCE 2.67, so CinemaCraft customer support told me to try the new CCE 2.69 Basic. Well, I no longer have VBV errors, but I can't get Rebuilder to complete a single build. When I get to the Rebuild process, Rebuilder gives me an error stating that the Prepare and Rebuild is not the same as it expected. Now I have found other posts where someone has run across this, but I don't know what to do about it. I am a newbie to video encoding and could really use some help.

Thanks

DDogg
1st May 2004, 16:56
Remember, the newest version of CCE basic has only been out a short time and just came to jdobbs attention in the last few days. He said he would be looking at this issue (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=75350). Since he is a big fan of CCE basic, I expect it will be working shortly :) Be patient.

robw
1st May 2004, 20:08
Originally posted by DDogg
Remember, the newest version of CCE basic has only been out a short time and just came to jdobbs attention in the last few days. He said he would be looking at this issue (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=75350). Since he is a big fan of CCE basic, I expect it will be working shortly :) Be patient.

yes, be patient. I also had a problem with incosistent prepare/ build phases when using the new CCE basic 2.69.

DirtyAbdul
1st May 2004, 20:58
i thought i was the only one having problems with the new 2.69.01.04 version. suddenly i get those "9" subscript out of range errors. after reverting back to v2.67.01.19, no more problems... (and yes, of course i used the SAME film material).

as if jdobbs didn't have enough problems resolving bugs in his program, and now CCE has to add another pain the butt ;).

DA

Balthazar
1st May 2004, 21:37
Sorry, I have been perusing the forum for the past few days and didn't see anyone else was having the problem...I was starting to think it was just me :)

jdobbs
2nd May 2004, 01:40
Originally posted by DirtyAbdul
i thought i was the only one having problems with the new 2.69.01.04 version. suddenly i get those "9" subscript out of range errors. after reverting back to v2.67.01.19, no more problems... (and yes, of course i used the SAME film material).

as if jdobbs didn't have enough problems resolving bugs in his program, and now CCE has to add another pain the butt ;).

DA Man, you hit the nail on the head... I was about to post 0.46 -- and remembered this... I guess I need to wait until I run a job throught 2.69 first and figure out where it's dying...

quantum
2nd May 2004, 01:50
Or you could post it now and fix the 2.69 problems in the next version :)

jdobbs
2nd May 2004, 02:11
Originally posted by quantum
Or you could post it now and fix the 2.69 problems in the next version :) I may have fixed it anyway with something I'd already done. I just ran two jobs (small, in the 250MB range) using 2.69 and it seems to work fine for me.

jdobbs
2nd May 2004, 02:24
Originally posted by jdobbs
I may have fixed it anyway with something I'd already done. I just ran two jobs (small, in the 250MB range) using 2.69 and it seems to work fine for me. Well, I take that back... I just got an Error 0006, inconsistency between versions.... damn! I'm going to spend a little (very little) time on it to make sure it's not my code -- but I think this may be CCE's problem to fix, not mine. It only happens on this new version.

jdobbs
2nd May 2004, 03:01
Well... CCE seems to have tried to outsmart its customers... They don't mention it in their accompanying list of changes for version 2.69 but another "feature" they've added for "DVD Compliance" is automatically converting any 23.976 source to 29.97!!! So when you feed it a certain number of frames it comes out at 1.25x that frame count.

Isn't it nice when they make a dramatic change to their product that is different from every other previous version and decide it isn't important enough to tell you about it?

I can fix it by not setting the DVD compliance flag on...

robw
2nd May 2004, 03:19
Originally posted by jdobbs
Isn't it nice when they make a dramatic change to their product that is different from every other previous version and decide it isn't important enought to tell you about it?

I can fix it by not setting the DVD compliance flag on...

I'm always amazed how CCE keeps creating incompatibilities duing simple dot changes. Ultimately, the number of "compatible with CCE version xxx" needs to keep expanding. Did they ever hear of backward compatibility????

jdobbs
2nd May 2004, 03:27
I just sent them a complaint... hell, I'm a paying customer -- and I'm guessing I've been sending them some business lately with DVD-RB..

jdobbs
2nd May 2004, 06:29
I got a reply... they tell me that 23.976fps is not DVD compliant. :sly: I sent another EMail back telling them I beg to differ.

DirtyAbdul
2nd May 2004, 07:14
Originally posted by jdobbs
I just sent them a complaint... hell, I'm a paying customer -- and I'm guessing I've been sending them some business lately with DVD-RB..

heck, yes you did refer business to them: i'm one of those paying customers! you hopefully mentioned this forum/thread, did ya? :p

DA

ChickenMan
2nd May 2004, 09:15
Originally posted by jdobbs
I can fix it by not setting the DVD compliance flag on...
Is the DVD compliance flag turned OFF when only using 2.69 or for all versions of CCE ? I'm using 2.50 and would prefer it to be left on. Can I over-ride the OFF status some how if its for all versions of CCE?

CM

jdobbs
2nd May 2004, 11:13
Originally posted by ChickenMan
Is the DVD compliance flag turned OFF when only using 2.69 or for all versions of CCE ? I'm using 2.50 and would prefer it to be left on. Can I over-ride the OFF status some how if its for all versions of CCE?

CM It's off for all. But honestly it shouldn't make a difference (emphasis on shouldn't). I can put an INI entry in to force it on.

Well, I got another response that essentially told me I could take a flying leap -- in less clear "customer support" language of course. Sigh...

ChickenMan
3rd May 2004, 04:30
Originally posted by jdobbs
It's off for all. But honestly it shouldn't make a difference (emphasis on shouldn't). I can put an INI entry in to force it on.
That would be great, thanks.

CM