lathompson

Actually Colin, I confused my answer to the first question by saying my slide show would be made 25% larger. I meant to refer to the size of the photo images used in a show. My show sizes are chosen from the choices given in PTE. Unless I'm given another dimension. You have opened my eyes however. I have ignored some very basic projection information thinking it didn't matter. After all, I don't use a projector, I just do shows for people that do. I guess I've been lucky so far. I must begin to emphasize the importance to my clients. I have simply relied upon my client to tell me what he wants and to date, that has apparently worked out. I get repeat orders quite often. But then, many of my customers are basic consumers with no AV knowledge at all. They are putting on special shows at their weddings and anniversary parties..... that's a different thing and many have simply relied on my suggestion of 16:9 because they don't know if their venue will even have a projector, much less understand it's properties in advance. Half of those clients don't even know what a digital projector is. Yes, this is very interesting! I think I'm going to embark on a journey into the world of the projectors now! larry

Colin, I can't really answer your question with authority as I have always assumed that over sizing was simply better than under sizing. I have never considered that the image would be jeopardized by being slightly larger than needed. That a playing device would degenerate an image that is larger than needed and make it a lessor image is something of a surprise to me. So, you're suggesting that I should make my image exact? I have no problem doing that if necessary. That's very interesting. Does anyone else share that thought? The idea of making them 25% larger than needed was to simply be safe. Colin, your statement is interesting. Larry

Late to the discussion, but here's my answers: First, my qualifiers...... I produce shows for clients. I do not always shoot the images myself, but if I do, I shoot in the landscape mode and crop to a width of 3000 px. leaving the height in proportion with my camera format. I use different cameras with different ratios. Cropping in camera is loose for last minute crops to fill the viewing frame. Many times I use the client's images. Many are poor quality, many are not focused professionally and many are from submitted photographs of various sizes. On top of that, most are not photographed for the cropping I want to use. Every client image gets close scrutiny and custom cropped with a sign-off from the client sealing the deal. I crop verticals with as much aggressiveness as I can get away with. Shows are customized to the client's intended use. What size slide show should I make? I would make the show's resolution at least 25% larger than the resolution of the tv monitor screen or digital projector to be used. I don't utilize much pan or zoom in my shows. I use it, but keep it subtle. If heavy movement is requested, I customize per image. If the show is for a client, I ask them to find out the monitor's size and resolution in advance as that will be the basis for the show. If they do not know, I suggest making the show based upon a 16:9 ratio and tell them it may or may not match the screen when played. And then Why ? The purpose is to produce a result for one particular client or situation to fit an exact need. Satisfying more than one ratio pattern means doing another show for that resolution. If the client only wants the one sizing, I do let him know that it will show differently on different resolutions and to expect that to happen. I do not get into a learning session with them and I do not make decisions for them. Sounds cold, but softly delivered, it never causes waves or damages customer relations. A/V classes are available for a fee. As a secondary point, do you like to fill your screen with the slide show, irrespective of the resolution of that screen? I prefer filling the screen. No white or decorative trim are in my shows, unless it is a specific effect requested. If an image does not meet my minimum specs, the client makes a decision on whether the image is in or out. If I make that decision, it's out. Larry

Yeah, that makes sense and totally avoids the DVD altogether. I wasn't thinking of AVIs.

That's a good question by Swede, but I don't understand your answer, Ken. Does sending the show via internet override the need for a regional code? I know that some of my authoring software does ask about regions, but as I recall, when burning a DVD of a PTE show, this is not a choice. So, if Swede burns it to a disc in NTSC form, does he need a regional code also to play the disc in another region?

I generally don't get into these types of threads but I had to post one here. I just don't understand why I have no problems with any versions. I would be interested to have a copy of any show that a member is having problems with. Not just the pte file. The whole thing. I could play it on my equipment and see if I had a problem with it. Wouldn't this be the best way to test for the origin of a problem?

I got mail from this *person* too, but with a twist..... It came through my regular email, not through the forum and it invited me to a site called [ nch.invisionzone.com/index.php?act=xxxxxxxx=xxxxxxx=xxxxxx (my x's) ] I did not click on it. I eliminated the mail as junk, then opened a new browser and visited the invisionzone.com site. It was a webpage for a what appeared to be a web hosting company. The [ nch ] portion of the link must go someplace else. I didn't go any further. I have no messages through this forum.

No, I don't. Finding quality music and getting to use it without requiring a fee is not exactly a trend in the world. I make it a habit to spend 15-20 minutes a day searching for pieces of music and have a healthy number of sites that I find good stuff. Trouble with this is, you really have to go through thousands of bad music tracks in order to find the great ones. Here's a list of RF sites. None are free, but prices are good. http://www.beckhamdigital.co.uk/royaltyfreemusic.htm http://www.amylaurenpiano.com/ http://www.gregmaroney.com http://www.freeplaymusic.com/ http://magnatune.com/ http://www.music2hues.com/ http://www.uniquetracks.com/ http://www.shockwave-sound.com/ http://www.davenportmusic.com/ http://www.stock20.com/commerce/index.php Good luck! -larry

Betsy, here's a site with 30 or so piano pieces. Mr. Cushman is a very talented pianist and will allow you to use his original music without paying for it. Give a listen. http://ghostnotes.blogspot.com/ He adds new pieces from time time but it has been some time since his last entry. -larry

Had to wait for loading of show as it plays faster than it was downloading. I suspect that this was due to the fact I have a slower DSL connection. After allowing download time, the show played as perfect as I could ever expect. Transitions were smooth. PC INFO: eMachine 2.00 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64 2432 Megabytes Installed Memory 128 kilobyte primary memory cache 512 kilobyte secondary memory cache Board: MS-7093 Bus Clock: 199 megahertz

I'm with Dave on this one. Using a freestanding mixer allows you to not only work worry-free of dealing with MS issues, but it also protects you from keyboard/mousing mistakes while the show is running. A basic mixer is a great tool for this. And, if you don't want to buy one, you can probably rent one pretty cheap. Larry

Ron, isn't that an automatic update only and doesn't it just download and install without intervention? I don't recall having the opportunity to save it as a download.

That's a unique point of view, Barry. I understand what you are saying, and pretty much agree with you, but there is a vast grey area between regular music and computer generated music. Sony's Acid is one of those alternatives. Actual musical loops, but left to the end user to make magic with them. On their own, they are just loops. In the hands of an artist, they are potentially great. In real life, there are not many good users out there, but there are a few. In life, perhaps 1 out of a thousand can make really good use of a loop program, but it can be done. Smartsound is a similar alternative, but uses complete musical scores, produced by actual musicians, and once done, someone takes a computer and breaks all the music into many smaller bits. Each instrument is recorded separately and you have the ability to change on a whim. Likewise, you may dictate the length of a piece and how it ends. And the tempo too.... the opportunities are vast, the variables are plenty. Easy? Again, great talent, great results. No talent, no results. So, I agree. Computer generated music is a poor choice. Actual music is best. RF music is 99% crap, but enough time and effort, looking for the right piece, somewhere it exists. Patience is rewarded in the search for the right RF music. And while looking, an inquisitive artist might find solace in one of the programs that allow him to manipulate actual music. Not computer generated, but actual music.

Barry, the Cinescore is very much like SmartSound, which I use. Same idea. Start with a basic piece of music in a classification & style, then work it into what you need, both by mood change and precision runtime.

The Acid loops are great for someone that likes to tinker. Good suggestion. There is another great value out there. Take a look at SmartSound products. http://www.smartsound.com/. This is a combination of high class musical pieces with software that allows you to change the music to fit the mood. With their most advanced music, you can virtually recreate the tunes. Change tempo, change length and the software makes sure that it sounds totally natural. It appears to be an expensive way to go, but they have many cost saving coupons, giveaways and deals, the bargains are there. For me, a tin-ear type of guy, this is the only way I can create original stuff. -larry

Peter, every time I get the mental thought that maybe it's time to do a "level save" as I call it, I do it. If I get up to go get a drink of water or just take a break, I do a new save. It's too easy, it's safe and it's just part of the work flow. Besides, there are never too many... I can always erase them at any time. If I were to want auto saves at all, I would prefer that it do each one like mine, as a numbered save, so different levels exist. Of course, I don't think this feature is necessary to be built in to the program. This manual method keeps me aware of what I'm saving and at what point. An automated save for me would be the simplest of safety nets, whereas, the way I do it now, I'm controlling the saves at more significant points. So, I say keep automated saves for basic safety, yes, but relying on it for great work flow protection, no. - larry

My ideal way to safeguard work is to save in steps. Every time I do something that is a major step, one that takes more than 4-5 minutes to set up, I like to "save a version" on the spot. So, at the end of a laborious slide show, I might have 12 to 15 different levels (versions) that I can go back to. Sometimes I might go back 5 or 6 levels and go a different direction. I keep all versions for a few weeks, then delete them at some point. I don't know if that's something that needs to be automated into the program however, as I have formed the habit and thus don't really see a need. Auto save is a good thing for those that rely on it until a situation pops up that auto save interferes with. That might never happen. I spend a lot of time on some of my projects and I like the ability to choose what level I want to return to. - larry

All too often life can be cruel to the wrong people. Judging by the many well wishers here, you have a lot of prayerful thoughts going your way. There are really no words that will make this any better, I know, but silence is so deafening. Here is another prayer for a speedy recovery for your wife. At the same time, you take care yourself. We will miss you on the forum. -larry

I have a new machine. One week old, has vista home premium. 5.6 works perfectly.

I'm no expert, however I'm going to stick my 2 cents into this. I think as long as you don't make a photographic print on paper, the difference is going to be negligible to most eyes. After all, our computers and television monitor settings are less than perfect without a lot of tweaking with specialized software and hardware involved. And even if we are tweaked to perfection, it would be likely that every time the show is seen on a different monitor or projected, you are going to get something slightly different. Where the setting is most important, is when you prepare an image for making a paper print using the Adobe RGB color space and the printing machine that prints it is optimized for sRGB images. There is a very large difference in this case. I recently found this out when an assistant changed my Photoshop settings. The images looked great on the monitor, but printed with very blue skin tones. As I said, I'm not a calibration expert, I'm simply passing on an experience. sRGB is a much better choice. In this case, I'm talking regular photographic prints, not inkjet or offset printing. That's a completely different subject and I definitely know nothing about those! larry

Until I run into a need for more compression, I will use the simplest, most convenient one, Winzip. This way, when I send zipped stuff to clients that have little knowledge of computers, they don't get confused. Most have PCs and decompressing is as simple as right-clicking and choosing to extract. I don't know, perhaps some of the other methods work the same way. I've never had the need to make a change and don't see why I should now. So, .zip is my choice. FWIW.... larry

Colin, does the music file play okay in MS Media player (or some other media player), for instance? If it does, I might suggest you re-make the music file or change it to another type through one of the many conversion programs available out there. I've had this happen on a couple of occasions and when I re-made the music file by ripping it again, it acted fine and normal when imported into Audacity. added: I just reread your 2nd post.... It happens with all of your imported tracks? In that case, I think the problem lies in a corrupt program. I would uninstall and reinstall Audacity. There's a new beta out right now. Why not try that? larry

The purpose of music in a slideshow is to be a compliment to the viewing experience. I would not think that it matters what kind of music file created the sound, as long as the final listening pleasure is achieved. If changing midi to mp3 doesn't make a change in the final listening experience, I would think that there is no problem. Conversion seems good. If this is what it takes to give the P2E experience to MAC owners, then why not? I'm for dropping midi. Go Igor, go!

Ken, I would like to draw that out a bit. I know it's been said many times before and most of us know it all too well, but here it is again, for Doug and other newer members to the P2E flock. For any show being produced for public viewing or commercial use, you should own copyright on the pictures, obtain a copyright release for any submitted images that are not yours and you should acquire model releases from all people that appear in the show. That's for commercial use; however if the you are commissioned to create a slide show for a family or for a client's personal use, from personal photos made by the client or his family & friends, it is not necessary to do this. The exception to that would be for all the client's pictures that were taken by professional photographers, like portraits or organized events that the pro was shooting for. The client must supply you with copyright releases issued by those professionals, for all photos of that nature. This is potentially a big risk. Pro photographers are extremely protective of their work and rightfully so. For old, old photos, without ID or ways to contact for releases, it is still not legal, but reasonable to use if you have the client sign a simple statement that every attempt was made to get the rights. And, as Ken has said, music is a large exception in it's own right and quite misunderstood by many people. It is illegal to copy and/or use ANY commercial music without extensive contracts and legal arrangements within the music industry; a project that is complicated and high priced. Having tried to negotiate on this in the past, I have found that most of the music industry won't even mess with small requests and ignores you or simply quote extraordinary rates far beyond practicality. For this reason, royalty free music is the only way to go to remain legal. Royalty free music is made available through many sources online. Finding the right stuff for a project can be very time consuming, but the licensing is quick & easy and at a fair and reasonable price. It is the only way to remain legally protected, regardless of how your final show is used. In the USA, violation of copyright is not just a civil problem, it is protected by FEDERAL LAW and if violations are severe enough, large fines and jail time can be in your future. Although many people use popular music in their shows all the time, it is largely ignored by the music industry when it's confined to small & personal use. That doesn't mean it's okay at all. It's a case of don't ask, don't tell for small, personal jobs, but if you do it, don't get caught! You may have big regrets. That industry just loves to make examples when they get the chance. larry

Thank you Ken! That was a good read. The translation required some concentration but the jest of the article was quite clear. The praise for those that made this great software is well deserved. larry