MPC-HC - Warning creating EVR Custom renderer

[s|b]

I've switched to Windows 7 64-bit and when I try watching an AVI (with
subs) I get this warning about EVR and outdated DirectX (I have 11.x
installed). The movie plays, but I get the same warning each time I open
an AVI. So far, Google can't help me...

A screenshot of the warning:
<http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/7176/mpchcwarning.png>

Anyone know how to solve this? (Without installing VLC.)

--
s|b

[VanguardLH]

"The movie plays" in WHAT?

So, without installing freeware, like VLC, how is your question
considered on topic to this *freeware* newsgroup? Just how is freeware
involved in your situation?

Help with Windows 7 is found in the following newsgroup:
alt.windows7.general

If the *unidentified* player is Windows Media Player, then ask in one of
the Windows Media newsgroups, like:
microsoft.public.windowsmedia.*

If the *unidentified* player is Media Player Classic (from
codecguide.com) then you might find one of their FAQ points address that
problem (http://www.codecguide.com/faq_mpc.htm), or you can ask other
users about the same problem over in the CCCP forum, like in the thread
at http://www.cccp-project.net/forums/index.php?topic=4221.0.
CodecGuide has their own forums and a search there found some articles:
http://codecs.forumotion.net/search?search_keywords=evr+custom+renderer.

However, since you're looking for a solution that doesn't involve
installing freeware, like VLC, then presumably you do NOT have the
freeware Media Player Classic installed (as part of one of the K-Lite
Codec packages). If the problem is with Microsoft's Media Foundation
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Foundation#Enhanced_Video_Renderer &
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms694916(v=vs.85).aspx)
then you need to ask in a newsgroup that discusses Windows Media stuff.

[s|b]

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 12:43:18 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

> "The movie plays" in WHAT?

Subject says "MPC-HC". I thought that was clear, at least, for the
people that I'm trying to reach.

> So, without installing freeware, like VLC, how is your question
> considered on topic to this *freeware* newsgroup? Just how is freeware
> involved in your situation?

Media Player Classic - Home Cinema is *freeware*.

--
s|b

[s|b]

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 18:33:43 +0200, s|b wrote:

> So far, Google can't help me...

Never mind. I just googled some more and found out that I could install
DirectX 9.x, even though I already have 11.x installed. No more nagging
error message, so I'm a happy camper again. :-)

--
s|b

[Ron May]

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 12:43:18 -0500, VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote:

> "The movie plays" in WHAT?

Pretty obvious (to me, at least) the question is about freeware Media
Player Classic Home Cinema. Grab a clue from the "MPC-HC" in the subject
line, the "mpchcwarning.png" in the link and the "MPC-HC" in the actual
screenshot of the warning box. It's a fair question for ACF, since it's a
good bet to find participants using MPCHC on W7-64 here. Having a bad day?

To s|b, sorry I can't help, but my wife frowns on me experimenting with her
W7-64 desktop. Maybe someone else can shed some light on your issue.

--
Ron May - may...@hotmail.com - Ubuntu/Vista Dual Boot
Registered Linux User #511161 - Ubuntu User #33236 (12.04 LTS)
ACF "Silver Lining": http://dl.dropbox.com/u/7365303/ACF/SL.html

[s|b]

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 13:38:30 -0500, Ron May wrote:

> To s|b, sorry I can't help, but my wife frowns on me experimenting with her
> W7-64 desktop. Maybe someone else can shed some light on your issue.

Not to worry, I already found an answer. It seems you can install
DirectX 9.x next to 11.x.

Now I have to find an alternative to Free Download Manager ("Free" as in
*freeware* >-), because it stopped working under W7, Fx 12.x, FlashGot.
I need to get it to work with Rapidshare (I have a Premium account). I
already tried the latest RC for FDM, Orbit Downloader and now I'm giving
JDownloader a try. It needs Java, so that's not really a plus... :-\ But
that's another story/thread...

--
s|b

[Bear]

"s|b" <m...@privacy.invalid> wrote in news:jnk0iv$r91$1...@dont-email.me:

Good job. As for VanguardLH...-10

--
Bear
http://bearware.info
The real Bear's header path is:
news.sunsite.dk!dotsrc.org!filter.dotsrc.org!news.dotsrc.org!not-for-mail

[Poutnik]

In article posted Sun, 29 Apr 2012 22:18:59 +0200 to alt.comp.freeware,
s|b posted this..

>

> Now I have to find an alternative to Free Download Manager ("Free" as in
> *freeware* >-), because it stopped working under W7, Fx 12.x, FlashGot.
> I need to get it to work with Rapidshare (I have a Premium account). I
> already tried the latest RC for FDM, Orbit Downloader and now I'm giving
> JDownloader a try. It needs Java, so that's not really a plus... :-\ But
> that's another story/thread...

Well, being in java it disqualifies it itself in your eyes,
but there is great FreeRapidDownloader .

It is designed especially for dozens sites like Rapidshare
to avoid as much clicking as possible,
often even avoiding captchas.....

http://wordrider.net/freerapid/

I know there are also some FF addons with similar purpose..

--
Poutnik

[s|b]

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 22:39:47 +0200, Poutnik wrote:

> Well, being in java it disqualifies it itself in your eyes,

It seems I need Java as well for filling my taxes online, so JDownloader
is still an option.

> but there is great FreeRapidDownloader .
> It is designed especially for dozens sites like Rapidshare
> to avoid as much clicking as possible,
> often even avoiding captchas.....
>
> http://wordrider.net/freerapid/

I think I came across this one; it uses Java as well:

<quote>

FreeRapid is an easy to use Java downloader

</quote>

> I know there are also some FF addons with similar purpose..

I found one, but it wasn't compatible with Fx 12.x and I think it was
only meant for free RS download. FreeRapidDownloader can be used to
download Rapidshare Premium, so it's a candidate. Another plus would be
if it could be used with the FlashGot add-on: <http://flashgot.net/>

I'll try JDownloader tomorrow...

<http://jdownloader.org/>

--
s|b

[Poutnik]

In article posted Sun, 29 Apr 2012 22:51:55 +0200 to alt.comp.freeware,
s|b posted this..

>

> FreeRapid is an easy to use Java downloader
>
> </quote>

FRD has also advantage of more parallel download from Rapidshare,
in opposite to non premium downloads.

I personally do not mind java,
as I use a bunch of various great java applications.


--
Poutnik

[Poutnik]

In article posted Sun, 29 Apr 2012 23:01:42 +0200 to alt.comp.freeware,
Poutnik posted this..

Sorry, it could be other site than Rapidshare.

--
Poutnik

[VanguardLH]

s|b wrote:

> On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 12:43:18 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:
>
>> "The movie plays" in WHAT?
>
> Subject says "MPC-HC". I thought that was clear, at least, for the
> people that I'm trying to reach.

No one is there to see at what you are pointing. Acronyms have meaning
within a context and MPC really isn't that specific even in a freeware
newsgroup.

http://www.acronymfinder.com/MPC.html
plus
http://www.acronymfinder.com/HC.html
equals
lots of possibilities

You knew what you meant because you're involved in the situation.

>> So, without installing freeware, like VLC, how is your question
>> considered on topic to this *freeware* newsgroup? Just how is freeware
>> involved in your situation?
>
> Media Player Classic - Home Cinema is *freeware*.

Their FAQ mentions some workarounds for the EVR renderer error but you
don't mention if they helped or not.

[VanguardLH]

I have to wonder then if the problem was codec sourced. One of the FAQ
articles at CodecGuide for Media Player Classic says:

You need to use a compatible video renderer: VMR-7 (renderless), VMR-9
(renderless), or EVR Custom Presenter.

Another FAQ article says:

If you are using an old version of MPC that doesn't have the EVR
option, then choose "VMR-9 (renderless)".

They don't say before which version is an "old version" that doesn't
have the EVR option. Also, they mention:

It requires some DirectX components that are not included with
standard Windows installation. Run the DirectX Web Installer to get
the required DirectX updates.

The "DirectX Web Installer" is a link to Microsoft's download page. So
it looks like from your other post that you did what they suggested
whether you read their FAQ article or not. The link goes to:

http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=35

The "runtime" means libraries or components. So it looks like Windows
doesn't include all of them and it is expected any software that
requires them will install them. Guess that's not the case for Media
Player Classic (unless it assumes you installed it along with the K-Lite
Codec Pack).

Did you install the basic, standard, full, or mega variant of the K-Lite
Codec Pack (with includes Media Player Classic and how many users get it
although, I believe, you can opt-out in a selection list during the
install), or did you just install Media Player Classic by itself? The
mega K-Lite Codec Pack has codecs not included in the lesser variants.
I thought everyone got the Media Player Classic by getting K-Lite.

Download sites, like Softpedia, still list just Media Player Classic
(http://www.softpedia.com/get/Multimedia/Video/Video-Players/Media-Player-Classic-for-Win2kXP.shtml)
but the gabtest.org site doesn't exist anymore (it's a parked domain).
Looks like Media Player Classic has moved over to Sourceforge
(http://sourceforge.net/projects/mpc-hc/) but the download sites still
show gabtest.org as the home page.

Media Player Classic (and K-Lite) do not provide update notification or
an auto-update function. You have to go check yourself, uninstall the
current stuff, and download and install the latest version. You didn't
mention which version you have of Media Player Classic. The latest
version from the Sourceforge project page is 1.6.1.4235. Yet CodecGuide
lists 1.6.2.4485 included in their standard, full, and mega variants of
their K-Lite Codec Pack (it's not in the basic variant). Maybe
downloading and installing the latest version would've fixed the
problem, too, or getting it as part of K-Lite would've included the
necessary Media Foundation runtimes that aren't bundled in Windows that
is expected to get delivered with any program that requires them. I
remember running into several programs written in VisualBasic or C that
won't run until the user separately installs the runtimes on which those
programs depend upon.

[s|b]

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 22:53:18 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

> Did you install the basic, standard, full, or mega variant of the K-Lite
> Codec Pack (with includes Media Player Classic and how many users get it
> although, I believe, you can opt-out in a selection list during the
> install), or did you just install Media Player Classic by itself?

I installed MPC-HC by itself. No K-Lite Codec Pack. I downloaded it from
here: <http://mpc-hc.sourceforge.net/>

This is version 1.6.1.4235. I chose the installer and afterwards I
unzipped the beta (?) that I found here:
<http://www.xvidvideo.ru/media-player-classic-home-cinema-x86-x64>

ATM that is version 1.6.2.4360.

The site has a warning that I initially ignored, because I knew I had
DirectX 11.x installed. The warning:

<quote>

In order for the program to work correctly, you need to install DIRECTX
End-User Runtime to the version 9.29.1962 ( 2010.06.07 ) .

</quote>

They provided a link, so I downloaded and installed. No more warning
messages after that.

> Media Player Classic (and K-Lite) do not provide update notification or
> an auto-update function. You have to go check yourself, uninstall the
> current stuff, and download and install the latest version.

I only install the "official" version. Once that is done and there is a
new update at xvidvideo.ru, I simply download and unzip the file in
C:\Program Files\Media Player Classic - Home Cinema.

> You didn't
> mention which version you have of Media Player Classic. The latest
> version from the Sourceforge project page is 1.6.1.4235. Yet CodecGuide
> lists 1.6.2.4485 included in their standard, full, and mega variants of
> their K-Lite Codec Pack (it's not in the basic variant).

K-Lite now offers version 1.6.2.4518. I wonder where they found that
version. (?)

--
s|b

[s|b]

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 22:30:36 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

> > Subject says "MPC-HC". I thought that was clear, at least, for the
> > people that I'm trying to reach.

> No one is there to see at what you are pointing. Acronyms have meaning
> within a context and MPC really isn't that specific even in a freeware
> newsgroup.

My message was aimed at people who are familiar with mpc-hc, not at
posters who don't even know what the acronym means...

Anyway, my problem is solved. Case closed.

--
s|b

[Dustin]

VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote in news:jnl10r$q85$1...@news.albasani.net:

> s|b wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 12:43:18 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:
>>
>>> "The movie plays" in WHAT?
>>
>> Subject says "MPC-HC". I thought that was clear, at least, for the
>> people that I'm trying to reach.
>
> No one is there to see at what you are pointing. Acronyms have
> meaning within a context and MPC really isn't that specific even in a
> freeware newsgroup.

MPC is (as far as I knew) a fairly commmon freeware video player. The
subject of the thread plainly states it. Next time, instead of the
holier than thou attitude, eat some crow silently. There was no need for
you to respond with this, "Whats MPC?" nonsense.

While no one is there to see what he's pointing it, the subject has been
there the whole time. This is another topic you should have just kept
your mouth shut in. That way, you don't step on your own dick so often.

> You knew what you meant because you're involved in the situation.

Seems everyone here did, with the exception of you...

>>> So, without installing freeware, like VLC, how is your question
>>> considered on topic to this *freeware* newsgroup? Just how is
>>> freeware involved in your situation?
>>
>> Media Player Classic - Home Cinema is *freeware*.
>
> Their FAQ mentions some workarounds for the EVR renderer error but
> you don't mention if they helped or not.

Nice apology, Vantwat.


--
Character is doing the right thing when nobody's looking. There are too
many people who think that the only thing that's right is to get by, and
the only thing that's wrong is to get caught. - J.C. Watts

[Dustin]

Bear <bearbo...@gmai.com> wrote in
news:XnsA0449C5F21987be...@130.225.254.104:

> Good job. As for VanguardLH...-10

Ehh.. I find myself in agreement with you. Let's not make this a habit
Bear! :)

[VanguardLH]

s|b wrote:

> On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 22:53:18 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:
>
>> Did you install the basic, standard, full, or mega variant of the K-Lite
>> Codec Pack (with includes Media Player Classic and how many users get it
>> although, I believe, you can opt-out in a selection list during the
>> install), or did you just install Media Player Classic by itself?
>
> I installed MPC-HC by itself. No K-Lite Codec Pack. I downloaded it from
> here: <http://mpc-hc.sourceforge.net/>
>
> This is version 1.6.1.4235. I chose the installer and afterwards I
> unzipped the beta (?) that I found here:
> <http://www.xvidvideo.ru/media-player-classic-home-cinema-x86-x64>
>
> ATM that is version 1.6.2.4360.
>
> The site has a warning that I initially ignored, because I knew I had
> DirectX 11.x installed. The warning:
>
> <quote>
>
> In order for the program to work correctly, you need to install DIRECTX
> End-User Runtime to the version 9.29.1962 ( 2010.06.07 ) .
>
> </quote>
>
> They provided a link, so I downloaded and installed. No more warning
> messages after that.

I see on their web site's download page the warning you mention. That
link goes to the same Microsoft web page that I mentioned and which I
got from CodecGuide's FAQ articles for Media Player Classic. It's the
same web installer for DX. It will add runtimes and components of DX
that are *not* included in a Windows installation. So MPC really should
include whatever components or runtimes upon which it relies rather than
hope their users already have them installed.

Alas, there is lots of software that does this: their install is
incomplete as they rely on something else to be or get installed but
they don't provide it. Many of the PDF printer utilities rely on
Ghostscript but don't include it in their download and don't have their
installer go get it for you. I remember in the past that there was a
separate codec package for DX9 that you had to download to get those
other codecs (they weren't included in Windows or the DX9 installer).

>> Media Player Classic (and K-Lite) do not provide update notification or
>> an auto-update function. You have to go check yourself, uninstall the
>> current stuff, and download and install the latest version.
>
> I only install the "official" version. Once that is done and there is a
> new update at xvidvideo.ru, I simply download and unzip the file in
> C:\Program Files\Media Player Classic - Home Cinema.
>
>> You didn't
>> mention which version you have of Media Player Classic. The latest
>> version from the Sourceforge project page is 1.6.1.4235. Yet CodecGuide
>> lists 1.6.2.4485 included in their standard, full, and mega variants of
>> their K-Lite Codec Pack (it's not in the basic variant).
>
> K-Lite now offers version 1.6.2.4518. I wonder where they found that
> version. (?)

Yeah, I couldn't figure that one, either. They list a later version
than what is listed at the Sourceforge project site for that program. I
suppose it could be a typo.

I have an older K-Lite Codec Pack but it's only 2 minor versions ago. I
probably won't bother uninstalling K-Lite (and Media Player Classic)
until the next major version (when it goes from 8.x to 9.x) so I won't
know until then if it was a typo in the version string (but then MPC
will probably have a newer version by then, too).

[Bear]

Dustin <bughunte...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:XnsA0457AFADB74BHHI2948AJD832@no:

> Bear <bearbo...@gmai.com> wrote in
> news:XnsA0449C5F21987be...@130.225.254.104:
>
>> Good job. As for VanguardLH...-10
>
> Ehh.. I find myself in agreement with you. Let's not make this a habit
> Bear! :)
>
>

hobbits are what, 48 frames?

[s|b]

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 23:01:42 +0200, Poutnik wrote:

> FRD has also advantage of more parallel download from Rapidshare,
> in opposite to non premium downloads.
>
> I personally do not mind java,
> as I use a bunch of various great java applications.

I decided to try JDownloader first and it seems to work. A bit sluggish
for my taste though. Free Download Manager seemed a lot faster.

Anyway, I think I'm to register to yet another webforum to see if I
can't get FDM to work again. Meanwhile, I'll have JDownloader to work
with.

--
s|b

[s|b]

On Tue, 01 May 2012 15:24:22 +0200, s|b wrote:

> I decided to try JDownloader first and it seems to work. A bit sluggish
> for my taste though. Free Download Manager seemed a lot faster.
>
> Anyway, I think I'm to register to yet another webforum to see if I
> can't get FDM to work again. Meanwhile, I'll have JDownloader to work
> with.

Dunno what I did differently or if it's a bug in the program, but I
tried FDM again for the tenth time or so and now it works again.
Gremlins I guess... :-?

(I'm going to stop talking to myself now. |-)

--
s|b

[Poutnik]

In article posted Tue, 01 May 2012 15:24:22 +0200 to alt.comp.freeware,
s|b posted this..

>

Is that JDwonloader the same thing as FreeRapidDownloader ?

The latter is not suppose to be classical download manager,
but rathet anticlicker solution.

And regarding speed I have the opposite experience

FDM sems to me slower than normal FF download,
as my favourite sharing websites
seems to detect download manager
and trottle the bandwidth.

FRD is as fast as Firefox download,
but can faster in scenario I download more files simultaneously,
what the site does not allow for free account otherwise.



--
Poutnik

[Poutnik]

In article posted Tue, 1 May 2012 18:34:30 +0200 to alt.comp.freeware,
Poutnik posted this..

> FDM sems to me slower than normal FF download,
>

I mean not generally, only in context to some sharing sites.
I use FDM often for normal web downloads.

--
Poutnik

[s|b]

On Tue, 1 May 2012 18:34:30 +0200, Poutnik wrote:

> Is that JDwonloader the same thing as FreeRapidDownloader ?

I only tried JDownloader.

> And regarding speed I have the opposite experience
>
> FDM sems to me slower than normal FF download,
> as my favourite sharing websites
> seems to detect download manager
> and trottle the bandwidth.

I only use FDM to download RS-files via a Premium account. All other
downloading is done by Fx's own download manager.

--
s|b

[Poutnik]

In article posted Tue, 01 May 2012 20:54:13 +0200 to alt.comp.freeware,
s|b posted this..

>

> On Tue, 1 May 2012 18:34:30 +0200, Poutnik wrote:
>
> > Is that JDwonloader the same thing as FreeRapidDownloader ?
>
> I only tried JDownloader.
>
> > And regarding speed I have the opposite experience
> >
> > FDM sems to me slower than normal FF download,
> > as my favourite sharing websites
> > seems to detect download manager
> > and trottle the bandwidth.
>
> I only use FDM to download RS-files via a Premium account.

In such a case I agree it should be fastest.


--
Poutnik

[oda...@gmail.com]

Options > Output > DirectsHowVideo > default