goddi

================== Peter, Igor... I concur that it is still not picking up previous settings, in Beta15. I did several searches for the 'apr*.ini' and I don't have any such file. Is this a problem??? Gary

========================= Igor, To give you some feedback on your Nearest2.zip example: The Nearest portion (right side) of the slide looks sharper than the Bilinear (left side). However, when the zoom starts, the Nearest side creates many fuzzy vertical (and horizontal) lines as it zooms. Gary

================= nobeefstu... I am slowly putting my brain in gear. In NGOptimizer, it has a place to tick to keep the original size of the image when I reduce it using '80'. I had totally forgot that that option does not actually work. Even if ticked, the image comes out as a 3 x 2 dimensioned image. So that is why the file size is so much smaller than InfanView, which keeps the original size of the image. Ok...with that said, PTE seems to be doing a fantastic job because I can not tell the difference between the small image and the larger image when displayed as an MP4 show on my 40" LED. No, I have not tried optimizing for the web in PS. NGOptimizer was just so easy to use. For what it's worth, I have attached the two images. Gary Two Images.zip

====================== Peter and Dave, While it is obvious that I can't tell the difference between apples and oranges, it is still a wonderment in my mind that PTE can show the same images that have different resolutions but appear to be identical in quality in the slideshow. You mentioned the pixel dimensions. I thought by giving the different file size of each image, that might be a clue. The pixel dimension for the 97Kb image is 1000 x 750 and the pixel dimension for the 854Kb image is 4000 x 3000. And both look identical in PTE. What else puzzles me is if both were reduced using the same '80' setting, why are both so different in final file size? I would think they would both end up the same size. Maybe each software has their own '80' algorithm? I would stick with my old software that gives me the smaller file size without any difference in quality when viewed in PTE when compared with the larger file sized image. But it seems that the different pixel dimension would give some kind of quality difference in PTE...but I don't see it. If none of the above makes any difference in the final quality of the slideshow, what does when you are trying to reduce the size of the final PTE slideshow (given the same image)??? Both were created in PTE at 1920 x 1080. I just created an MP4 of the slideshow and I could not see any quality difference between these 2 images when played on my 40" LED TV. Gary

Greetings, I have a question that has to do with reducing the file size of images I use in PTE. I have been using a program that is no longer available, but it has been an easy way for me to batch-reduce the file size of my images I use in the slideshows. The program I have been using is Net Graphics Optimizer. I use it to batch-reduce the images at ‘80’ and I tell it to keep the original dimensions. However, I recently discovered that, when I look at the image size in Photoshop, it indicates the image’s Document Size is 3.333” x 2.5”, not 13.333” x 10” as is the original size. I did a test using InfanView and also reduced the same image at ‘80’. But InfanView kept the Document Size at 13.333” x 10”. Both are at 300 resolution. So here is my question: I put both of these images in PTE and I cannot tell the difference. How can a 3.333” x 2.5” image (97Kb) be as good (sharp) as a 13.333” x 10” image (854Kb) in PTE? Thanks… Gary

==================== Dave, I had tried that because I had a problem before when the bar was moved too far to the left and it was hiding the Drive list, but Igor fixed that some time ago. I tried moving the bar to the right but it did not make the Drive drop-down list appear. It only appeared after I just happened to move my mouse over that area and then it showed up. You can now move the bar all the way to the left as far as it will go and you will still get the Drive drop-down window (after it showed up). So Igor did a good fix, but the Drive drop-down menu was not there after I first installed the Beta 14. Gary

======== Igor, I notice a little thing that still has to do with that thin red line in the floating waveform. When you have played the audio and the red line is completely at the end of the waveform, and then you stretch the waveform to the max, the red line is not visible on the far right end. If you already know how to find it, it might not be a big deal. But it might cause concern for those who are just starting to use it, and wonder where it went to. This is another reason for putting a red handle on the red line. It would really make it easier to find...and move. Thanks... Gary

============== Thanks, Igor, for the quick response. Gary

====================== Igor, It took me quite a while before I figured out where and how to click on the red line (in the yellow space) to be able to move it, especially when it was at the far left or the far right. Now, I get it. But my suggestion was to put one of those little 'handles' (in red color) that you have placed on the other lines, such as the Fade In line, to make it more obvious and easier to click on. I put the source files on Mediafire: http://www.mediafire.com/file/4voacmnnpfkdxmq/Kayaking The Soca_Jul20-2010_10-07-31.zip Gary

==================== Thanks, Peter and Yachtman, Yes, if my memory is correct, both are "2 ms.". Gary

================== Igor, I made a suggestion in another another very recent posting with a similar request, but got no response. It was not intuitive on how to move the red line back to the beginning of the audio clip. I finally figured it out but my suggestion was to put a 'handle' on the red line. Wouldn't this help make to more obvious and easier to move the red line? My other confusion with the audio clip has to do with the very end of the graphic, which I have posted but got no response yet: If I expand the waveform and look at the very end of it, I see that there is a very small gray section at the end of the audio clip. When I play the audio clip and watch how the thin red line moves, it stops just before this gray section while it is still in the 'white' section. Then, if I hit the play again, the thin red line moves to the right to the beginning of the gray section. Why does the thin red line stop before end of the 'white' portion actually ends? And why is there any 'gray' section at the end of the audio clip? I see this happening in two different audio clips I have. Image is attached. Thanks... Gary audio clip.doc

Greetings, I am thinking of upgrading my CRT to a flat screen. I am looking at a 23" Samsung XL2370 that is 1920x1080. My other choice is a 23" Dell SP2309W that is 2048x1152. I am not sure show their different screen resolutions will affect my PTE shows. I now make my PTE shows at 1920x1080. So I would expect the PTE show to be full-screen on the Samsung. However, what would happen on the Dell? If the show is created with the 'Fixed size of slide' checked, I am assuming it will be fixed at the 1920x1080 size and have a black boarder on the Dell. If I don't select the 'Fixed size of slide', then the show will fill the entire screen in the Dell? If so, will it be 'stretched' in proportion? Any opinions or suggestions??? (I like the Dell because the screen is more adjustable, up or down to your height. But I just saw today at Costco, they have the Samsung P2370 which looks to be exactly like the XL2370 but has an HD TV tuner for $279.99!) Gary

Peter, I just noticed a couple of other things I don't quite understand: If I expand the waveform and look at the very end of it, I see that there is a very small grey section at the end of the audio clip. When I play the audio clip and watch how the thin red line moves, it stops just before this grey section while it is still in the 'white' section. Then, if I hit the play again, the thin red line moves to the right to the beginning of the grey section. Why does the thin red line stop before end of the 'white' portion actually ends? And why is there any 'grey' section at the end of the audio clip? I see this happening in two different audio clips I have. Gary

Peter, Thanks... I had fiddled with the 'Offset' thinking that might do it, but it didn't seem to do the job. But after your instructions, I got it to work as you explained. I figured out also the problem I was having getting the audio clip to 'replay' or 'reset' back to the far left so it would play again. I found out that you have to click in the yellow portion of the 'Wave form and envelope tool' graphic to get the thin red line to move. And it is hard to 'grab' the red line when it is at the end of the clip on the far right hand side. I might make a suggestion to Igor to put a handle on the thin red line so it is more obvious where to grab it to be able to move it. Thanks for the quick response. Gary ==============================

Greetings, I am trying out the new Audio Clip Properties (Beta 12). I don't seem to be able to make it do what I think it should be able to do. I added an MP3 audio file in Track 1, using the Auto Spread function. I then added a 9 second wav file in Track 2, the sound of water in a stream. When played, both audio tracks start at the same time, right at the beginning, as expected. However, I want the Track 2 water sound to start 4 seconds after the start of the slideshow. So I highlighted this Track 2 sound clip in the Audio Clip Properties and changed its Start Time to 4 seconds. But the Start Time did not change so that Track 2 started at 4 seconds. Both audio files still started at the beginning of the slideshow. Shouldn't the start of Track 2 be delayed until 4 seconds after the start of the beginning of the slideshow??? Also, I noticed that after changing some of the times for Track 2, I can not get it to play again when I clicked on the 'play' icon in the Audio Clip Properties or in its floating wave graphic. Is this a bug??? What might I be doing wrong? Thanks... Gary

========================= Igor, And while you are at it, please make it bolder or larger. I made this suggestion a long time ago because when you have many different music tracks, and you try to scroll to find where the beginning of any particular one is, it is too easy to miss the thin blue lines. Great opportunity to make it more visible. Thanks... Gary

Igor… I don’t understand why the ‘Auto spread slides along music’ functions the way it does. Let me explain and let me know if my suggestion makes sense: The way it works now, when you select ‘Auto spread slides along music’, the ‘Timeline’ and the ‘Waveform’ are greyed out and the slides are NOT spread along the music in the Timeline graphic. They are spread only according to what the default Time Interval was set to. However, you can still manually make adjustments to the slides along the Timeline in this greyed out mode. If you want to visually see the results of the Auto Spread function in the Timeline (while in the Auto Spread mode) you have to click on the ‘Arrange All Points’. It seems to me that if you can make adjustments to the slides in the Timeline even though the Timeline and Waveform is greyed out, the Arrange All Points should be automatically triggered when the Auto Spread function is selected. This would automatically give you the proper visual representation of how the slides were spread along the music in the Timeline graphic. If you want to go back to undo any adjustments to the slides you might have made under these conditions, all you have to do is re-select the Arrange All points and all the slides are reset. Another benefit of making the Arrange All Point automatically triggered when the Auto Spread function is selected is that, when it is played in the Mini-Screen and looking at the Timeline/Waveform (still greyed out), the transitions are visually where they are expected to be, and it plays correctly in the Mini-Screen. I am looking at this from more of the viewpoint of someone who would not be using the Timeline function. It makes sense to me to trigger the Arrange All Points automatically when the Auto Spread function is selected because it will give you a visual result in the Timeline that matches what you are expecting. I don’t think most beginners would understand that Arrange All Points would be needed to be selected to actually see the slides correctly spread along the music in the Timeline graphic, even though it is greyed out. I would suspect those who go straight to using the Timeline might not see the benefit of this suggestion. But the way it works now has always been a wonder to me since I am a heavy user of the Auto Spread function. Since it doesn’t affect the Timeline users, why not make it easier for the Auto Spread users? Gary P.S. I had forgotten but I now see that I brought up this suggestion back in April but it just died on the vine with no response from Igor. Well, let’s see what happens. Thanks... Gary

Igor... Thanks for the quick response. That did the trick... Gary ====================

========================== Igor, I am using Firefox 3.6.6. I have dumped the 'Pictures To Exe' specific cache item. Rebooted. Did this three times. I still get the 'Beta(2)' dated 6/29/10. At one point I thought I saw 'Beta(3) but I still got "Beta(2). I don't remember ever having this problem before. It it really me??? Gary

============= Igor... I have tried several times and still get 'Beta 9'. Is it me or...??? Gary

Greetings, We spent 3 weeks driving around Croatia and Slovenia. What beautiful countries!!!!! We pulled off the road for a few minutes in the Julian Alps and here is what we saw. Short 1:43; 9Mb; 16x9; 1280x730. http://www.beechbrook.com/pte/ Gary

Jeff, I am pretty sure I got the same error message when I inadvertently tried to open a PTE file that was saved as a Beta 8 but was opened in the earlier version, 6.0. Yesterday,I dumped the 6.0 version so I can not confirm this at this point. Gary =================

Ronnie, After seeing your post, I gave it a try. However, I did not receive any error message. I tried to Create with a standard preset and had no problem. I then tried a Custom setting, and again, no problem. This does not help your problem but just to let you know that it did work when I tried it. Let us know exactly what you put in as a Custom setting and I can give it a try, in case you think that might help narrow down the problem. Gary

Brian... I am using IE8. I checked and don't even have the Autocomplete in my IE8. Maybe that is why it did not show a similar problem. You never know what is lurking in the background that will eventually cause a problem. Igor came up with a good idea. The techs at Invision software didn't seem to care too much. I think they should have been more on the ball and wanted to look into it. They didn't even want to talk to me because I was not a 'client'. Everything seems to be back to 'normal' now!!! Gary ==================