Premiere Elements 8 Unresponsive & Unusable

Question

I have received Premiere Elements 8 for reviewing and installed the package with both Photoshop & Premiere Elements on a newly installed Windows Vista Premium system. The computer has Adobe CS4 running on it with no problems so I am pretty sure it can handle Premiere 8 but does have an NVIDIA graphics card, Zotac 8800GT. This system also has Intel Quad Core Q6600 @ 2.99 GHz, 4 GB Ram and Zotac 8800 GT.
This should easily run Premiere 8 but when I start up the program after a succesful installation and updating it does the rendering in background where I cannot use the program at all. If I do anything in Premiere Elements it will go to an opaque white like the usual not responding in Windows Vista for awhile and I cannot do anything in the program. It has not crashed but just sits in the background rendering and i cannot really use the program at all.
The videos I have imported and tried to use in a project are small two to four minute AVI clips that I want to work with but the program takes a long time with background rendering. Is Adobe seriously saying I need to do a bunch of driver uninstall and install older ones or other things to get a less expensive video editing program to work on a known good system that I can render video and audio in using other programs with no problems.
I review products routinely and this system along with another, Windows Vista Business, AMD Dual Core @ 3.0 Ghz 2GB Ram, does not run Premiere Elements at all without the rendering in background that I could ever get through. Both systems are fully up to date and do not have any problems running other things like Flash, Dreamweaver and other CS4 programs as well as a host of other things like TV on PC using PCI cards.
This is a Vista program that should run fine, is anyone else having problems like this?
I also tried disabling the background rendering and turning off the analyzer in the organizer but it does not seem to have any affect to my problems.
Is anyone else with a Windows Vista and NVIDIA graphics card having problems like the program is rendering in background and not being able to be used in this mode until it has finished?

Answer 1

"If a person wants to edit video they need DO need to grasp what a CODEC is."
This is utter hogwash, to use a nice term. No offense meant but I think you are wrong.
Other than the double word "need," you are totally wrong. The CODEC is the building block of video, just as ISO is for still photographs. I feel that it your aversion to CODEC's, that is clouding your impressions. Also, maybe the word "need" does need to be repeated, just not as I had done.
As has been belabored above, the CODEC is the keystone to AV files, and hence to editing. Whether one wishes to learn the rudiments of these, or wishes to sweep them under the carpet, is their own choice. Obviously one that you have made beforehand.
Installing Premiere Elements and importing video and editing it does not require any knowledge of what a CODEC is or even that it exists. I remember editing video when I first got a Panasonic camcorder using a simple Arcsoft editing program that came with the camera and had no clue what a CODEC was at the time.
Again, had you read, or understood, that was easy in an earlier time - back when DV-AVI from miniDV tape was the only real way to capture video footage, and then Capture it and edit it. Nowadays, there are many different CODEC's and how they work is very important. People want to do some form of capture of YouTube material and then edit it. People want to use programs like FRAPS, or Camtasia, and then edit the footage. People want to capture footage on various cell-phone cameras, or helmet cams and edit it. All of these are very different. They need to know what a CODEC is, how it impacts the prospects of editing the resultant footage, and what they can expect. To ignore this is foolishness, and will lead to problems, regardless of which NLE is chosen.
An NLE can only contain certain capabilities, and adoption of newer technologies (read CODEC's here) takes some time and coding. In the case of Adobe, they must first decide if a new CODEC is likely to be a big enough part of their install-base to warrant the engineering efforts. All possibilities cannot be included. Some newer ones come out, after a program is released. Some need to be incorporated in an update. Two good examples of this are the RED CODEC's and the recent Panasonic Intra-Frame CODEC's. Both were included in the recent CS4 updates.
Why you have such aversion to CODEC's is beyond me. Again, they are the building blocks of AV files and editing. They've been around for over a decade, and will be around for more. Maybe it's time that you learn what they are, how they impact video playback, editing and then Export. To ignore them is an injustice to anyone reading your reviews. Again, were I to ignore Megapixels in a camera review, or DOF in a review of a lens, or system, or to ignore CODEC's in my reviews of an editing system, it would be a disservice to my readers.
Now, in a perfect world, every NLE would be able to natively edit all possible sources (read CODEC's here), and all that are likely to come about over the next decade. The world is not perfect. No NLE can possibly handle even the list of CODEC's that are available at this exact moment in time.
I do not want to get off base with arguments about CODEC's, I'm simply stating what others here have said and it does seem like the wine snob is getting off track with CODEC's.
Again, and in my defense, these are the building blocks of digital video. To think otherwise is shear folly. To ignore them is a disservice to the readers of any review. Now, many may wish that they did not exist, but they do. They are very important, whether some wish to acknowledge that, or not.
What would you advise a user to do, should they have the TechSmith CODEC in a source file? What would you suggest, should someone hand you a RED CODEC file? What would you intimate would be a good workflow, should someone hand you a BlackMagic CODEC file? Same for Xvid, or DivX. Same for an Panasonic Intra-Frame CODEC. What would you suggest? Oh, I can guess that it would be, "ignore the CODEC, as they are meaningless." Is that correct?
The other programs worked with the same video so obviously my computer has the right CODEC's otherwise they would not edit the video in the other programs.
And this proves that those other NLE's support the particular CODEC's, and that they are installed properly on your system. It does not mean that CODEC's are immaterial, as you have repeatedly suggested. The Adobe NLE's are based on a DV-AVI workflow. They make use of other CODEC's, but that does not render CODEC's moot, regardless of what you might contend. As I stated up-thread, I use CyberLink's PowerDirector for some footage, that PrE and PrPro cannot edit natively. I use that tool (and many more) to handle the CODEC's, and then Export to DV-AVI for final editing in my Adobe programs. This does not mean that the particular CODEC is immaterial, but that some NLE's either handle one better than others, or include native support for some. Adobe programs are often a bit more limited. Does this mean that they are dreck? Not in my book. I use these various programs as tools. My art comes from my camera, and my skills as an editor. I might need to use several "tools" to get me to where I can create.
Are the Adobe programs perfect? No. Do they do a good job with the proper footage and CODEC's? Yes, at least in my book. I've had the luxury of using many different NLE's, so I have a lot of experience with other NLE's. I also have extensive experience editing 16mm and 35mm film. Maybe that makes me so grateful for digital editing. That also allows me to open my mind to what it takes to do great work nowadays. I know how it was in the film-only days. One of my films was nominated for an Academy Award, and it was edited on a six-plate Moviola deck. I cannot imagine how much better that film would have been today, edited on an NLE with digital material. One will never know.
I am not trying to say that I don't want to know or don't care about what a CODEC is, I shouldn't have to in order to use this program. I compare the box requirements to my system, I meet or exceed them so my system should be able to edit video from a compatible camera. Video from a camera that can work in less expensive and even free programs should easily work in Premiere Elements regardless of knowing what a CODEC is.
But that is exactly what you have said, over and over again. What you are failing to grasp is that digital video cannot exist without CODEC's. Why you choose this platform is lost on me. I've stated many examples outside of video CODEC's, but they have been lost on you.
Just to give you a bit of background, I have 393 CODEC's installed on my workstation, and 243  (266 now) on my laptop. Why? Most are to play various files with those CODEC's. Some are for just encoding, like the HuffYUV and Lagarith, so I can transport files in a lossless format between programs. Some are so that I can edit in various NLE's. Some of these, like RealMedia, Indeo and CinePak are for older AV material, that I still may have to use. I have 4 flavors of H.264, because all CODEC's are not created equally. I also only have CODEC's from the source, and no CODEC "packs," as I want the best that I can get for me, and for my clients. Amazing! If CODEC's were not important, why on Earth would I have 393 on my workstation and 266 on my laptop? Ignore them if you wish, but you are doing a great disservice to your readers. Still, that is you choice.
Please do not confuse the issue of CODEC's with a program that does not work as advertised for many. It seems to me that high definition video is the problem and the program may be a resource hog when it gets its hands on HD content.
Well, since most of the recent CODEC's are for HD material, I'm not sure how you propose to separate these.
Now, what Adobe's marketing department might state, all depends on the CODEC's involved. Maybe they should state that that some HD material will work perfectly, and that some will not. Again, this will depend on that evil word, "CODEC."
Going back up-thread, I was taken to task, after commenting on what the "average" consumer wanted. The following statement was on what those, who DID want to edit their footage would want. That is but a small subset of the "average consumer." I find that disingenuous, at the very least. What the "average consumer" wants is to display their footage on their TV for their friends and family. The next group up wants to also post it to YouTube, or similar. Then, the next group wants to edit it - a subset of the main group. Would you not agree, now that I have broken thing out? Now, it is quite possible that a majority of your readers DO want to edit the footage, but would you not agree that a great number could care less about that aspect?
Good luck with your reviews. I hope that you are able to get PrE running on your system and can write about it. Only suggestion that I would make would be to use files that the majority of your readers are likely to use, and report on that.
Hunt