JRR

Anthony: Yes that certainly sped things up !!!! I checked with a computer service person, who recommends AVG to all his clients, he has no issue with the settings you opted for, assuming of course that you have done an initial virus check on any files that weren't yours (downloads, copies from friends etc etc)

Eric: Glad that worked for you. I have cases where the E-mail client rejected the zip file that contained an .exe file. One way around it is to change the extension to something other than .exe and just have the recipient change it back at the other end. I frequently use .P2E as the extension

I have noticed the issue too with slow "loading" of .exe files when in EXPLORE. I don't remember the issue when I used to use Norton for anti-virus, but I have it in spades with AVG. I have tried turning AVG off while opening the folder, but that didn't seem to help. (I had fewer exe files when I was using Norton) While I tend to keep the exe file in the folder with each show, I have one folder with all the exe's in it for quick copying of individual shows for a presentation of a group of shows. There is no problem with the one .exe per folder, but the all encompassing folder is an issue and as I have less patience as I progress in age, I solved it to some extent, by grouping them in subfolders with 4-5 .exe file in each subfolder. Sure hope someone comes in with a simple "fix"

Thx Dom Support added to posting in "Ideas and suggestions" In meantime I will carry on using PhotoShop for my titles. It allows me to have perfect registration when I use the same text on one slide to the next.

See: posting here Hopefully the above change would look after using the drop shadow more effectively as well. Thx

Thanks Dom I had a thought that maybe if I dropped the opacity of the drop shadow to zero, when the text was set to zero opacity that would solve it. But then I discovered that changing the opacity of the drop shadow for one keypoint in the O&A changes it for all keypoints. I have attached a quick example. test text_Sep19-2009_18-08-40.zip

I normally do my titles and text in PhotoShop, but the discussion on the "How to change fonts globally" here set me thinking so I played with using adding text via the O&A approach a little. One issue that I seem to have doing text this way is when I change the default opacity of the shadow from 59% to 100% (or something close to that)and fade the text in from an opacity of 0% to 100%, the shadow seems not fade in as well. It stays at full strength. For example, in using a red drop shadow, the text fades in almost pink, then becomes white with the red drop shadow when the text is at 100% opacity. (And the reverse happens as it fades out.) I suspect I am missing something simple here (besides don't set the opacity of the shadow so high ) Any thoughts would be appreciated

Dave: There is another way that should work as as well. (There many ways to skin a cat in PTE) If you are not planning on any voice-overs etc using the ADD SOUND feature, then this should work for you: 1. PROJECT OPTIONS MUSIC: check “Don’t interrupt sound comment when next slide appears” 2. Then go to the appropriate slides where you want the individual music to start and add the music selection via the ADD SOUND at the top

Peter: (Haven't seen one of your productions for a while - I miss them) I project 1280 x 960 images on a 1400x1050 projector quite often. (But I am not using an O&A actions except on one image on one show) There is no problem for me. I have PROJECT OPTIONS set to not allow for re-sizing, so my shows have a black border to them as they do not fill the screen. But most people allow PTE to upscale them and as far as I know they haven't had any prfblems. I suspect you have a good number of O&A actions, so to be safe it might be better to get a "ruling" from someone else with your circumstances

Just a quick clarification: The two projector models mentioned above were the initial (and main) subject of discussion, but other projector models were mentioned in the thread as well

In addition to the advice above, you might want to take a look at a thread from a few months ago re projectors. click here However be warned it is a LONG thread - you may need several cups of coffee to get through it (or a bottle of scotch ) The bottomline of the thread was that check to see if your projector has a FRAME LOCK setting (or something like that) IN the thread we discuss two projectors: A Canon Sx50 - turns out it did not have a FRAME LOCK Setting A Panasonic PT-LB10U - turned out it did have a FRAME LOCK setting Both projectors exhibited different symptoms of problems with some O&A's (mainly pans) The Panasonic exhibited serious stuttering. The FRAME LOCK solved it. Might not be so "simple" for you.....

Doug: 5.6.3 I believe is a beta version, really just for testing, not for "live" shows. Do you get the same issue using the current release 5.6.0 ? I assume you have tried the sometimes successful scientific solution: re-boot and try again ?

yes some commercial labs work in sRGB, home printers (which I was referring to, but did not state) tend to use RGB Always check with your local lab Different strokes for different folks

Paul: sRGB is the colour space generally used when the image will be used in non-colour managed software. Computer screens best deal with that when not colour managed PTE is not colour managed, nor are most web browsers (I know there have been some attempts to do that - but generally most publishing to the web strips off the exif info that has the colour space info so it is a moot point) PhotoShop, Bridge, Adobe premiere etc are all colour managed of course. Thunbsplus is, I am not sure about ACdsee. Many people use RGB as there default colour space, some like you use Prophoto RGB as it is a very wide space. If you are doing prints, then it is important to use RGB, if not then many people tend to use eRGB as their default so they don't have to convert their images when being used in a non-colour managed space

Peter: Quality 8 version is at :mediafire It is 190kb. davegee: (so we are going to start a Canon vs Nikon rivalry ?? ) Shot on a Canon 30D, colour space sRGB. General: The samples have been downloaded 6 times and when I read that some people could not see a difference, I went back and looked at them again. The pixellation was not as bad as it was when I made up the files, but it was still there. When I made up the quality 8 file, I checked them all again and the pixellation on all the files were similar to what it was before. I looked at them at 100% and slightly smaller fitting my screen in photoshop. As originally mentioned this type of picture is an exception to what is usually used, but it would not be that rare when shooting pictures outside. I don't worry if the tree branches are pixellated as you would not notice it in the detail.

Ken: I didn't look at them over 100% and I was only looking at the pixellation in the blue sky....

I would agree with Barry and Peter that in general few people, if any, will see the difference in a quality 6 vs quality 12 jpg file. That applies when the image has lots content, detail etc in it. But I have found that is not necessarily the case when an image lacks detail and has areas of one colour. Wispy clouds, light smoke haze, clear blue sky at times etc can be problematic. I would fully agree that images such as these are the exception, but I have over time opted to err on the safe side and save my files (1280x960) at whatever quality gets me at least 800kb. I don't deny that may "waste" storage space on many images, but I would rather be safe than sorry. I have prepareed three images, all the same. All have been saved from the same RAW file separately so as to not introduce a possibility of degradation in re-saving a jpg. The file was converted in Adobe Camera Raw and the size was changed from 3504x2336 (from the camera) to 1280x853 before saving in each case. I saved as a quality 6, a quality 10 and a quality 12. Their resultant file sizes were: 128kb, 352kb and 926kb respectively. There is a definite degradation in the top one third of the quality 6 image, a much less degradation in the quality 10, but there is still some minor amount in the quality 12. I viewed these images on my monitor, I am sure if I put them on a 10 foot wide screen via my projector, the degradation would be MUCH more apparent. I have put the images in a manual PTE show. The zip file, which also has the three files separately is at: mediafire I have loaded the quality 6 one below (can't figure out how to load the other two on the same post

Oh ! A minor detail 20,000 sound files with 10 sec between them, assuming they are 5 second sound bites, makes 833 hours, that is one heckuva a wav file !! (Obviously much longer if not just short sound clips)

Hi Boxig Long time since we have heard from you Two possible solutions for you: 1. mix the sounds onto one sound track with 10 second intervals between them. Bring the sound track into PTE via PROJECT OPTIONS > MUSIC Depending what you want visually, use a black slide and add the text you want through PROJECT OPTIONS>COMMENTS or the O&A feature. Or make them up in PhotoShop. Add the text images to co-incide with the sound and place black slides in between 2. An easier way would be to attach the sounds individually to images via the "ADD SOUND" at the top of the PTE interface screen. Space the images 10 seconds apart on the TIMELINE. The same approach to image preparation applies under this option. Hope that helps

Andrew: Not sure if it is exactly what you are looking for, but I have a workflow for AV posted on our club website. Ed Overstreet has an other document along the same line. They are the top two documents found here You might find some of the other material of use as well.

Hey Ed, when I did 35mm AVs (like Paul did - glad he is lurking into digital now) I used to only use landscape mode (I told people the film would fall out of my camera if I turned it upright When I moved to digital AV, I thought the pixels would fall out of the camera, so I stuck to landscape, but since then I graduated to using a background equal to the landscape mode and put up the verticals (or multiple images) on the background. I like the look of the Fade to Black effect using the O&A, I just have to try it and see if I will use it sometimes. As you say different strokes for different folks Thanks for starting this thread

Barry I had completely forgotten about the Kia Power Show software !! Oh how far we have come....

Barry: I understand where you are coming from. When I first started using PTE I used 800x600 pixel sized images in the shows. In those days we were being advised to keep the image to about 100-200kb. Plus my monitor was not much bigger than that, and the projector I had access to was also that size. I still present the 800x600 shows, but they are relatively small on the monitor or projection screen compared to the current productions. I have gone back and redone some of the 800x600 shows by getting the original scans of the 35mm slides and cutting them down to 1280x960. I plan to do it to the remaining few in time..... These days PTE will easily run with full size images out of my current cameras (3300x2200 pixels). While I say PTE can easily handle that size, yes it depends on the computer as well. My main computer is about 4 years old, as is my laptop that I used most of the time - so they are not "cutting edge" but they work fine. (However my shows don't have the razzle-dazzle that some of the more advanced members have been demonstrating using the latest bells and whistles) I have been musing about going to a larger size than the 1280x960 I use now, but have not gone there yet, partially because of the size of the resultant exe file and the transferability of it. That is not a major consideration, but still there in my mind. Because I crop/size every image individually to get the best transition (or image out of the original) I would likely crop/size the original image to some large size and keep that as my master show. (then do a smaller version if I had to for some reason)

Peter: Not a technical hard answer, but my image files in PTE are 1280x960 and I run them through a projector at 1024x768 with no concern re lack of quality due to downsizing. But I admit that an LCD projected image, on a 10-15' screen may show a lack of quality compared to a good monitor. But I put that down to the projector, not the downsizing. I have a few shows at 1024x768, and some at 800x600 (that are not upsized) and haven't noticed an different quality than the 1280x960 run through the same projector. As I say not hard technical reply, anecdotal only

John: They are available in the "public domain" on the web, so yes use them as research material (or "as is" ) but giving credit to the source would be nice