goddi

Greetings, After I posted my previous Bungee-SloMo show, Tom asked how the bungee jumper was retrieved after the jump. I discovered I had a clip of a bungee jump from another angle and it shows how they are retrieved. This is a short video clip of a retrieval. The video is from a Hi8 tape that I digitized so the quality is not very good, but I hope it entertains. It is a good thing that they don't just drop them off at the bottom with the crocodiles! While creating this show, I learned a bit more for presenting videos by using the Video and Border menu. It was very helpful in trimming off the fuzzy edges that you get when you digitize Hi8 tape (at least it happened to me). Gary

Tom, Yes, the expression on her face made the video, in my mind. The pull them back up. I just discovered in another video that I have a sequence of them doing just that. I had forgotten that I had it and I wish I had included it. It's pretty neat to see them lower someone else and they let the jumper get right-side up and they both get pulled up. We did the white water rafting there (Victoria Falls, Zimbabwe) but I did not have the nerve to jump off that bridge! I am finding a lot of Hi8 video that I have digitized and PTE makes it fun to make a show with it. Putting music and text gives it a better way of watching the stuff. Not so boring... Thanks... Gary

This is a PTE show with only video. The goal of this production was to create a show with a slow-motion video clip that is inserted into the main video. I also wanted to see if I could do it with a fade-in and a fade-out of the slo-mo video. The slo-mo portion of the show was created in the trial version of ProDad ReSpeedr. I cropped out the logos that the trial version puts in. The video quality is not too good because it originally was a Hi8 video that I digitized. Just hope you enjoy it. Comments, of course, welcomed. Gary

Tom, I was just about to purchase Respeedr. The download site shows it to be a 64 bit program. There was a warning that HD and 4K video needs the 64 bit version. My desktop is a 32 bit system. But ProDad gave me a site to download the 32 bit program. So I downloaded their 32 bit trial version. I tried to run a video clip from my Nikon D7000 and my GoPro, but the 32 bit program would not take them. I got a warning that the 64 bit version was needed. See attached. I was able to process a video clip that I had digitized from an old Hi8 camera. It really worked well. So in order to used the 64 bit version, I would have to do an upgrade by installing the 64 bit OS, which would require me to re-install all of my programs. Not something I want to do at this point. I might put the 64 bit version on my 64 bit laptop in the future. But just a warning to others who might still have a 32 bit OS. Gary

Greetings, I had a strange problem when I tried to 'Change Video File'. I wanted to rename the video file used in several of my PTE shows. As expected, when I renamed the video file, I got the blue error message that it could not be found. No problem. I then used 'Change Video File' to swap out the old named video file with the new named video file. I had to do this to 3 different shows where I had renamed the video file. Each time, PTE locked up and I had to close it down and reopen. When it 'locked up', I could not do anything within the program. It just stopped responding. The first time, I got the attached error message. But after that, when it locked up, I just closed PTE and reopened it and the correctly named video file was there and it operated normally. I have not had this problem before when changing video files. I am using Ver. 8.0.5. Any ideas? Gary

Greetings, I recently purchase the Mercalli V3 SAL (standalone) for stabilizing my videos that I include in PTE shows. Still trying to learn the best way to use it. But it seems to have positive results. I just visited their site and took a look at another product they have called 'ReSpeedr'. I took a look at a demo/tutorial of it and it seems to be pretty neat. I think most of the discussion here has been for timelapsing still images. But for those who are also wanting to speed-up and slow-down video, this might do the trick. One nice thing is that you can place the effect (slow-down or speed-up) in the middle of the entire clip, so the clip shows the normal speed, then the effect, then back to normal. Take a look at this demo: Then, I am thinking. What if we put single images (perhaps intended for timelapse) into a PTE show, and outputted it as an MP4 or AVI, and then used this ReSpeedr to do the processing for speed-up or slow-down of the video? Takes care of not having to so a lot of math!!!??? Just another interesting way of dealing with images or video for PTE??? Gary

Very Cool! Here is a link that shows how to do Hyperlaspe the 'hard way'. I hope the Microsoft app will be easier! But interesting.... I've never heard of it before. But there seems to be a difference in the Hyperlapse mentioned in your link and the links I have posted. The 'Windows app' seems to be for already-taken video that takes out every 10th frame, and stabilizes it. This is different from the Hyperlaspe that these Youtube videos shown below where it is created in the camera, not later. Gary

Greetings Jose, Yes, I used the PTE's MP4 just for measurement purposes. It is too bad that my main PC is 32 bit. All of this adds to the amount of time needed to produce a good slideshow, but the stabilization of videos with even the slightest movement is really necessary. Makes a big difference. Mercalli seems to work pretty well so far. Thanks... Gary

I did a test with my new Mercalli 3 SAL. I opened a PTE MP4 file in Mercalli. Mostly still images with some video clips. Yes, that does not make sense but I wanted to see how long it would take for it to analyze and to export a long 'MP4 video file' in a 34 bit OS (Win 8.1). The PTE's MP4 files is 8 minutes. Mercalli took 8 minutes to analyze the file and 8 minutes to export it. So it seems my fear that a 32 bit OS would take an excessive about of time to process a video file in Mercalli does not seem to be a concern. But, it is interesting that the original PTE MP4 is 234 MB, with a bit rate of 3.8 Mbps. The Mercalli exported MP4 file comes to 706 MBs (at medium quality) with a bit rate of 12 Mbps. The Mercalli exported MP4 (at low quality) export is 263 MBs and a bit rate is 4.5 Mbps. I don't see a difference between the 'low' and 'medium' quality MP4 export. I also took a screenshot of a frame of the video. I have attached a screen shot of the original (shown Windows Media Player) and then a screen shot comparing the same frame as it shows in Mercalli and also after it was exported (shown in Windows Media Player). I think the exported screenshot does show a little softening of the image...but just slightly. If anyone can do a similar test using a 64 bit OS, I'd be interested to hear if the analysis and export will take half the time, or not. So far I am pleased with the results from Mercalli 3 SAL, especially with video that does not have excessive shake. Gary

Tom, The Mercalli person said it only difference between the 64 and 32 bit OS versions is a matter of rendering time. Also, the 64 would be able to handle the high res video like 4K. My video clips are usually short and I'm not into anything real fancy yet, like 4K. So I hope my 32 bit desktop will do the trick. I am a bit puzzled so far with how to select the settings but I will search around for Youtube videos that will show how to use the program. I saw one but I have to go back and find it to watch it a few times to get it to sink in. Let us know how you get along with the 4K stuff. Should be lots of fun! Gary

...I am testing Mercalli software. VirtualDub with Deshaker does the same thing and is free....Thanks, Tom =========================Tom, I just purchased Mercalli V3 SAL (standlone). I got the download version for $109. The 'Buy' link send you to Amazon. What is interesting is that this download version is only 64 bit. Since my desktop is 32 bit, I called them up and they said that the compiling of the video would take a much longer time with a 32 bit versus a 64 bit OS so they don't even show the 32 bit version. However, I purchased the download 64 bit version and they sent a link to download the 32 bit version, too. So I can put the 32 bit version on my desktop and the 64 bit version on my laptop. He also said he will send me a CD with both versions on it. The same install code will work on both versions. He said that I would not be able to do 2.7K or 4K video with 32 bit, and using the 32 bit version will really be slow when compiling the 'regular' videos. At the present time, I only shoot videos from my Nikon DLSR 7000 and a GoPro 3 (1920x1080). Can you tell me what your experience is with all of this? Will using the Mercalli 32 bit version be OK? Testing some clip with the trial version did not seem to take too long to process some video but they were just short clips. It seemed to work pretty well. Not sure how to understand all of this. Thanks... Gary

Lin, Oh...I just realized that I was looking at the Mercalli Easy version. I'll go back and try out the non-Easy version. But I looked at the PD and it does have 'rolling shutter compensation'. It also has 'fish eye removal'. Wonder if is the same as the 'distortion' correction you are talking about. I have no idea what all this is, but I am just learning about these programs. At this point I just want some 'stabilization' program that I can understand. I'll take a look at Mercalli again. Lots to learn. Thanks... Gary

Greetings, I just gave both the ProDrenalin and Mercalli's demos a try. I like ProDrenalin more. PD seems to offer more adjustments than Mercalli at a lower price. PD goes for $49...on sale 'till 7/31 for $35 (http://www.prodrenalin.com/prodrenalin/), looks like a good deal. Thanks all for the info. Gary

Greetings, I am very interested in I.S. Shooting with my GoPro3 is frustrating because there is constant vibrations, whether using the suction cup on a car window or clamped to a bike, or just hand held. I took a look at the ProDrenalin site (http://www.prodrenalin.com/). Looks good. So I am wondering what the difference (pros/cons) might be between the ProDrenalin ($49) and Mercalli V3 ($149). Both, and others, are sold at the same 'ProDrenalin' site. At first, I thought they would be competitors. So I am confused. Both seem to have similar Input and Output formats. And they are having a 25% off sale.... If anyone has experience with these two, I'd appreciate any input. The ProDrenalin seems to do 'everything' but being less expensive than Mercalli, I just wonder about the results. Thanks... Gary

Eric, Mine shows up without being cut off. I am not sure how to fix it, but here is a place that might have an effect on the text size. I did not want to fool with mine, but take a look to see if this is where you can correct the size so that it does not get cut off. This is in Win8, so I am not sure where to look if you have an earlier version of Windows. Just a shot in the dark. See attached. Gary

Greetings, Peter just posted a suggestion on creating simultaneous publishing for PC and Mac. This brings up a pet-peeve that I find when trying to Publish for 'HD Video' vs for 'Exe'. When you re-Publish for 'Exe', it asks if you want to overwrite the previous file. However, when you re-Publish for 'HD-Video', it will automatically create a file with a '2' added to the file name. I have to remember to delete the existing file first, or I have to fiddle with deleting the file original file and renaming the replacement file to remove the '2'. Not sure what happens when you create a Mac file. But, it would be nice if all re-Publishing would be consistent and ask if you want to overwrite the existing file. Gary

Thanks, Tom. Gary

Greetings All, Apparently, there is something to the maximum 512x512 value. But I still don't understand why Igor put it as the maximum value. Yes, you can modify it. But this adds some confusion for people like me that might not be as far into the technical capabilities as other might. Yes, Lin, one day I might get more creative.Thanks all for your input. I have a broader perspective on this. Thanks... Gary

Lin, If it doesn't matter, I still wonder why Igor chose that number and made it the 'maximum'. If it didn't matter, I would think he would have left it blank for the user to just fill in something. So it must have mattered to Igor. Perhaps it is just a number he pulled out of the air. I think since that number apparently means nothing, he should make it so it does mean something and does matter. Not being a user of masks, probably because I haven't discovered a use for them yet, I am trying to understand the menu. If that number does not mean anything, then, perhaps others are a bit confused by it, too. Maybe it is just me. But I don't like to see something in the menu choice that 'does not matter'. I'll just leave it at that. Thanks... Gary

Ok...But why was '512x512' chosen for the mask rectangle as the maximum default? Why not 612x612 or 250x500 or ??? Just not sure what the '512' has to do with anything. Why not just have it blank and let the user input his own size? Why not have a list of normal ARs and a Custom input? Just wondering what '512' is supposed to relate to. Gary Gary

Dave, Yes, but wouldn't it be nicer to be able to set the precise pixel size you want when creating the mask? When you re-size/distort in O&A, you are going only by visual means, not exact pixels (unless I am missing something). The maximum of 512x512 just does not make sense to me. Gary

Greetings, I asked this question in another posting as a side issue but it didn't get any response. When you 'Add Mask', the 'Size in Pixel' default is '512x512', and that is the maximum size. I am expecting to be able choose more like an aspect ratio to fit the entire image's aspect ratio. So I figured that if I select '512x341' for a rectangle, I'd get the correct aspect ratio (1.50) for my images. Or be able to select '1020x768' or '1920x1080', etc. I know I can move the 'handles' to adjust the size of the mask but wouldn't it be better to be able to input the exact aspect ratio? Why does the rectangle only give a maximum '512x512' aspect ratio and not choices for normal aspect ratios? Gary

Eric, Yea...but I have not become a fan of the background image. I like to think the image can stand alone without the distraction. I am of the old school that think vertical images are 'ok', and somewhat help the show not to be too boring. Some prefer a background to those images...I don't think it is necessary. But, who knows? One day I might go there. Gary

Eric, There was a reason to my madness. The images were taken without a lot of space at the top and bottom of the images. If I had the images at 100%, there would be black bars on the left and right sides of the images. I don't like that look. So since I had no room at the top and bottom of most images to crop, I reduced the images to about 86% to get a black frame around the entire image. To me, it is a better presentation. Gary

Greetings Igor, No disrespect intended. I just wanted to have the title to be a little bit of a play on words or a bit of humor. Gary