There sure is a better way of transferring data to Microsoft applications, of course: It's called OLE (Object Linking and Embedding) and that's what's implemented in Acrobat Reader: What you are suggesting is only a manual workaround to compensate for the improper OLE implementation in Acrobat Reader. However, it's not the correct solution to the issue. The only true solution is for Acrobat Reader to properly implement OLE. ... View more

I'm getting the same trouble here. And from the answers I got from Microsoft support, the problem is based in how Acrobat Reader renders itself within the Word document based on screen/printer resolution. Apparently, when rendering the PDF into a bitmap for printing/screen, Acrobat Reader doesn't correctly compute resolution or doesn't provide an appropriate clipboard format when an OLE application, like any Microsoft Office application, calls the OleCreateFromFileEx / OleCreateFromDataEx / OleCreateLinkEx / OleCreateLinkToFileEx / OleCreateLinkFromDataEx functions on the PDF file. So, the bad resolution is in fact based on a missing/buggy feature in Acrobat Reader. The bug may presumably be found in Acrobat Reader's implementation of the IOleCache interface. Adobe: Please fix. ... View more

Thanks, Will, for sheding light on this and sharing your knowledge with me! OK then, in the meantime I have also read this blog post by Todd... So I'd like to amend my wish from stating "yellow and red" to "anything that Premiere Pro recognizes as not being able to render in realtime in an acceptable quality, i.e. frame rate". Full resolution rendering would not necessarily be a feature required for automatically rendering previews in the background, because most of the time the preview window is just a small part of the full screen. If speed is an issue, Premiere Pro could provide an option to render previews in a two-pass process: Low resolution rendering first, then high resolution rendering when there's no more clip/effect left to be rendered in low resolution. Parallel processing should be performed, i.e. Premiere Pro should spawn multiple background rendering threads, one per idle CPU core. Just like Windows 7 is able to calculate a system performance rating according to some benchmark tests, Premiere Pro should be able to do the same at installation time in order to being able to estimate which of the clips/effects in particular whould require pre-rendering - depending on the built-in hardware. ... View more

Dave_Gish wrote: If you read my previous posts, you'll notice I'm using a GTS450, which is an unsupported card. You won't find any mention of the unsupported method in official documentation, precisely because its unsupported. If you're not comfortable hunting for information, then I suggest using one of the supported cards. Yes, Dave, you are right about the impact of my suggestion on CUDA cards... My suggestion tends to be kind of a general one, addressing all users of Premiere Pro, even those using ATI graphics cards, on-board graphics cards or other graphics cards... It would generally be a good thing if Premiere Pro would (optionally) automatically pre-render preview clips in the background, e.g. while the user is editing Premiere Pro effect settings, or creatively thinking about what to do next, or answering the phone... That's plenty of spare time for the machine to perform pre-rendering without requiring the user to actively trigger this process. And for the other issue: you are right again, Dave, because that's exactly my point: The documentation is misleading. And this fact needs to be corrected. So other users, who can't afford spending their time hunting for pieces of information they even don't surmise that they would be in need to know about, won't get into the same expensive and time consuming mistaking situation I got. Todd's blog post reads: "The official and up-to-date list of the cards that provide the CUDA processing features is here:" ... This sentence is - as we all know by now - technically wrong. There are other NVIDIA cards on the market providing "the CUDA processing features" indeed. Adobe can't possibly track all available cards on the market, so a "list of the cards that provide the CUDA processing features" provided by Adobe is basically irrelevant. BTW: I just went to the shop today to undo the GTX 580 update. I have re-ordered a Sparkle GTS 450 Passive and have them build-in that card again. Now I'm aspiring the same great results you get with your GTS 450 ... View more

Dave_Gish wrote: Huh?  I usually add 2-3 effects on every clip, and with CUDA there's no need to pre-render.  Yellow bars might as well be green.  The program windows runs smooth at 1080p, full playback resolution. Yes, presumingly this is the case when you're using a CUDA card that's supported by Adobe. But as you may have read from my previous posts, I am not using a CUDA card that's supported by Adobe yet. Dave_Gish wrote: To be clear, Adobe is saying that if you enable CUDA with a card that's not on their list, then they're not going to support you if you have a problem.  However, since many people are doing this, there's a lot of information on the web to help users resolve CUDA problems on their own. Can you please point me to this piece of information in the official documentation? I'm a customer, not an information scout. So: I'm paying, Adobe is supposed to deliver. No-one else, and not vice versa. ... View more

@Will: Thanks, Will, my wish would be that these yellow and red bars in the timeline would turn green so that I don't just see a still in the Preview window as soon as I add two or three effects to a clip. If CUDA cards won't do the trick, then Premiere Pro should run a low-priority thread in the background that automatically renders temporary versions of clips in the timeline, while the computer is running idle, to get these clips green. This thread should prefer clips in vicinity of the recently edited area, because these clips are most likely the ones to be watched in the Preview window. Currently, you have to actively trigger a pre-render, and after doing so, you have to   w a i t ... Tonight, when I'm back from the office, I'll add this wish... Thank you for pointing me to the right destination for such things. ... View more

@Todd: Thanks, Todd, for sharing this link. I had read this article. But to me it didn't get clear on two facts: Only - and ONLY - the cards in the list will work (the article reads: "The official and up-to-date list of the cards that provide the CUDA processing features is here:" -- There is no note on the fact that Premiere Pro actively blocks CUDA cards not in the list, regardless of their hardware capabilities. -- "If you don’t have one of these CUDA cards ..." had been interpreted by me as: "So if you have one of these non-CUDA cards ...".) . An easy workaround is available to get Mercury use CUDA cards which are not in the list (If it's so easy, simple and harmless to activate a CUDA card that's not in the list, the workaround should have been mentioned in the article, accompanied with a note that Adobe makes no warranties on the result.) ... View more

Yes, I do feel better now, indeed. I was able to stop the shop from re-doing my machine and to cancel the order. I promised to buy the Sparkle GTS 450 and have them build it in again ...hoping that with the text file tweak it will perform better somehow in the end. But my post was not only about writing off my frustration. It contained some valid points of improvement suggestions: Mercury CUDA benefits should be listed at one place. Clearly. Easy. Simple list. Which tasks will be improved - which won't. . Hardware requirements should be loosened. Those who need a warranty on Mercury CUDA should be pointed to a list of tested hardware. All others should be able to try for themselves. -- I don't need a warranty from Adobe. Apparently others don't, either. Premiere Pro should query a graphic card's hardware properties and enable Mercury CUDA whenever it meets the minimum requirements. Leave the rest to your users. . Speed up transcoding! (I have contacted BaDaBoom, ETI only delivers to industries. They have forwarded me to BaDaBoom for a fast CUDA transcoder for end-users. Hopefully it integrates with Premiere Pro so far.) Thanks, Dave and Gary, for sharing your experiences with me (and others). ... View more

Oh, OK, thanks guys... I have just read about a "hack" being available to use other CUDA cards in Adobe Premiere Pro. After I have been going a long way now, I must admit that I'm angry about this hoodwinker information policy by Adobe: In the Adobe forums and articles I read that CUDA is the thing to speed up processing in Premiere Pro. So two weeks ago I bought a passive GTS 450 to speed up rendering. Then, after installing, Premiere Pro plainly refused to accept my new CUDA card. It just didn't provide the CUDA rendering project option... After doing some research why this could possible happen, I find a note that Premiere Pro only uses CUDA with some "premiere selection" graphics cards in the Premiere Pro specs... OK, in order to get my new graphics card refunded I immediately returned the card, went to a computer shop and bought a graphics card from the list... a GTX 580, plus a brand new computer case and a new power supply. I spent € 700 on this... And NOW, I accidentally read that there is some "hack" available, enabling Adobe Premiere Pro to go with my previously bought, silent (passive) GTS 450? I just have to enter the graphic card's name into some plain text file?????? I feel to have thrown € 700 out of the window just because some lazy programming team at Adobe decided to refer to some text file instead of sniffing the currently built-in graphics card's properties and decide dynamically whether to use CUDA for rendering - just like the GUPSniffer tool does that actually comes with Premiere Pro! The project setting's Mercury Playback drop-down box selection currently doesn't make any sense at all... Let's be honest: Who in the world, after having spent € 600 or more on a graphics card, would ever - EVER - select Software Rendering?? --- This drop-down menu only made sense if Premiere Pro would make an educated guess on the capabilities of the currently built-in graphics card and leave it to the user whether to try CUDA rendering if capability sniffing yielded a chance of successful CUDA rendering, or stick with software rendering if not. I feel frustrated and disappointed on Adobe's information policy regarding this whole rendering issue. I'm just a hobby user, using Premiere Pro just once and a while, e.g. after my vacations. I feel I have thrown € 700 out of the window for a noisy graphics card I never wanted to have, a computer case and a power-supply I don't actually need. Just because of a bloody text file.... ... View more

Todd, you are writing that Mercury/CUDA won't speed up encoding. In a thread the Intel forum they claim the opposite: That Mercury/CUDA actually will speed up encoding. I'm confused now... What's true? I have just ordered a GTX 580 because encoding of AVCHD videos takes 1:1 on my Quad core machine (DG45ID with on-board graphics) and timeline playback is glitchy. I was hoping to speed up encoding significantly... ... View more

I'm not acquainted with Flash too much, I'm afraid... Both paged didn't give any example I could leverage. I'm searching for something equivalent to something like this: document.getElementById("MyMoviePlayer").mute(); ... View more