davegee

We obviously were not trying hard enough. Well done Igor. DG

Once again Lin, it matters not what was done. the xvid codec produce a different (worse) result than the other Try again on Monday Dg

Lin, I fear that you misunderstand. To create the wireframe I use PNG made in PS at the intended final res. there is no interpolation involved. the final product is subjected to the same resizing when using xvid or mpeg4 h264 so how can that be an issue? DG

Hi Lin, As we are talking about PNG24 I am not sure where interpolation comes into it and since the XVID ans MPEG4-ASP versions were at completely defaultSettings for the same reolution they should produce the same effect with the same basic PNG files.We need 2 or more other testers and a more structured test.As for poor basic materials - you should know me better than that!! Best wishes, DG

Lin, I found that the XVID Codec is already installed on my new PC so....... I have been doing a little testing today on Video made three different ways: XVID Codec MPEG4-ASP MPEG4-H.264. Using the same project, which is the current project I am working on containing some wireframes which are admittedly not as taxing as the video that you described but nevertheless needing a good PC, my initial findings are as follows. Please bear in mind that my requirements are quality of picture above all else. With the XVID Codec some of the wireframes looked as though they were made from wire ropes? An aliasing type effect which was quite off-putting. No glitches - "smooth as butter" as Ken says. MPEG4-ASP - Wireframes were as smooth as they were expected to be when compared with the EXE file. No "rope-like" effect. MPEG4-H264 - Outshines the other two by a considerable margin. No comparison quality wise. Now, if I had constructed something as technically challenging as your example the "smooth as butter" result might be different, but on the face of it and judging by what I have seen I cannot say that the XVID Codec produces the same QUALITY of end result as the other two. I really would like someone else to chip in to this debate - it is of interest to all. DG

Everything appears to be normal here. DG

Gary, I realise that it is not a freebee but Premiere will do the fade in and out and trimming without having to resort to stripping out audio and all that it entails. If we want to use video we need to use the appropriate tools to do it (until we have it built in). The audio facilities in PTE are already more sophisticated than most people seem to realise but for some things we need to go elsewhere for the time being. But who knows what the next week or two might bring??? Uprights (portrait format): It has that jarring effect on me every time I see it. If it's done for effect then I suppose there is a place for it. To keep a project such as yours smooth flowing, I usually blur the previous (full frame) image and bring the upright in on top of it. Also, using a little 3D animation might help. DG

Making an MPEG4 file of the Project is as near to EXE quality as you are likely to get. It would have to be sent via DVD and copied to the computer (as per Ken's suggestion) but should not give any security problems. The MPEG4 has the added advantage of being useable on a suitable TV via a USB Memory Key. DG

Ron, Let's say that your project has 100 slides each of which is going to fade from B+W through Sepia to Colour and that each image is of the order of 1Mb. Doing it via PS (your way) the overall Project File Size (EXE) is going to be of the order of 300Mb. Doing it by using the "Ctrl+Shift+P" option (if you find the conversions acceptable) means that the Project File Size (EXE) is just of the order of 100Mb. Worth considering? DG

Peter, Please clarify? Are you sure that you do not need "TV Safe" when playing a 16:9 PTE show on a DVD into your LCD TV? DG

You do not need tv safe with mpeg4 but it is % of main image in the more tab (??). I have not used it for a while. DG

Thanks Stu, I was replying from my phone and could not remember what the "fixed size of slide" was called!! Steven, Put a border around your trial of a few pixels - can you see the border on the TV? If your TV has a USB input and Media Player you could avoid all of the "problems" associated with DVDs and increase the quality of the final product on the TV by making an MPEG4, transfering it to a USB key and playing it on the TVs Media Player. Obviously, if you need to send a copy to someone then the DVD is the easiest way to do that. DG

You need to untick the box below the resolution figures on the SCREEN tab of project options which might be causing a problem. You also need to set TV Safe Zone. DG

Agree Stu, My thoughts were to try this and also to compare KFSD and non-KFSD. It happens right across the board. Turning transitions off cures the problem. DG

Toggle Ctrl+Shift+P on an image in O+A. Put one version on top of the other and use Key-Frames to fade between Mono and Colour (or Vice Versa). DG

Unzip the Template Folder to your normal DATA drive. Double click on the PTE file inside the folder and PTE will open. Within the open PTE Project - Navigate to the folder containing the Template files to see the original images. DG

This one cures the "problems" that I saw in the one above. It works better on my 1280x800 monitor - I haven't been able to try it on 1920x1080. OLYMPICS 2.zip DG

Not masks Lin. Partials. It seemed appropriate yesterday. DG

My memory is slipping!!!! But it would help others if you included AR and Res? DG

Hi Ken, That means nothing without knowing the actual resolution of your WS Monitor. 1920x1080? 1920x1200? 1280x720? 1280x800? They are all what I would consider to be WS but it should only fill the screen on 1920x1080 and 1280x720. DG

It's a bit like spreading a PANORAMA split into 4 equal parts over 4 slides - if the duration of all four slides is equal then the speed of the overall pan is constant. If the duration of slides one and four is decreased then the panorama behaves something (but not exactly) like a SMOOTH speed option. Applying ACCELERATE to the shortened slide one and DECELERATE to the shortened slide four would make it exactly like the SMOOTH option (or a custom built SMOOTH derivative). DG

It's only an excercise based on a request that you made a little while ago. I learned a little from it - if I were to have the time and inclination to start again I would probably do it totally differently. DG

Peter, I think that Lin and I might be thinking along the same lines. You are, of course correct but it only shows the acceleration profile. I was thinking more of a visual which would show the shift in real time related to each of the movements. Linear is simple - acceleration is zero pixels/sec/sec but Smooth is totally different. Putting a DOT in the Centre of a Frame would show the kind of movement (within PTE) I'm thinking of for PAN but ROTATE and ZOOM are a little different. In PTE, if you place a DOT further away from the centre of rotation and rotated its frame through 360 using SMOOTH the the dot would accelerate between zero and 90 deg, remain at constant speed from 90 to 270 and then decelerate from 270 to 360 (figures approximate). It is not something that I want to spend time on - someone well versed in Excel could probably show it. DG

Ken, It was made with the latest PTE Version on W7 machine with MSE. Also played on Laptop - Vista with MSE. DG

Designed and built on 1920x1080 therefore will not play correctly on smaller screens - sorry - it's just an excercise. OLYMPICS.zip DG