davegee

Mike, I'm confused? You are on the thread with the link to 4.49. There was no 4.9 - there latest v4 was 4.49. Click on the link above? DG

DG

What is iFrame movie format? https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/51363 DG

Batch Cropping and Batch Re-sizing are not the same thing. Easy to get confused? DG

But I would leave it where it is. Perhaps I didn't explain properly - it needs a GLOBAL setting in PO as well as the current one in COMMON. That way when you look at COMMON it will default to whatever you set in the PO. It seems to me that if you choose the 16:9 aspect ratio, and you bring in a 1920x1272 landscape image, the left and right edges of the image would be placed at the left and right edges of the screen, as it does for the 1920x1080, and let the tops and bottoms extend past the screen. Only AFTER you press COVER (currently). The portraits would brought in relative to what the landscape images are. Giving left and right black strips only makes it necessary to include more steps to remove them. This is why the COMMON MODE would stay where it is - to cater for the anomalies. Alternatively, if the portrait image is 1080 high pressing SIZE in "Size of Parent etc" would sort that out. However, one of the problems with making Cover Screen a global default (at least how it works now) is that it is applied to portrait images the same way as it does to landscape images. The left and right edges of the portrait images are expanded so that the tops and bottoms are proportionally pushed out of the screen, making it useless. Also, it is all or nothing. You have no control over the results. With % of the slide to show main images, you can set the exact percentage and it is applied to each image (landscape or portrait) relatively equally. And you can always come back and tweak the percentage. The reason I think it is a better idea to make % of the slide to show main images the global default function (and moved to Project Options) is that you can specify the exact percentage you need to cover the screen for your particular images (that is fill the left and right edges of the screen, and let the tops and bottoms extend beyond the screen), so the portraits get enlarged (or reduced) by the same percentage you input. For my Nikon D7000, the 188% works fine; for my other cameras, I can use a different global percentage, or adjust certain images if different images are combined in one slideshow in the O&A/Animation/Zoom function. % of the slide to show main images is already a Global function in PO? DG

Re: the stop press. So now the question is, if I set the Q&A's aspect ratio to be 16:9, why does it not automatically fill the 16:9 screen to the left and right edges, regardless of the resized height of the image? If by this you mean the 1920x1272 images then you need to examine the definitions of "Fit To Screen" and "Cover Screen". One means that it fits INSIDE the screen (in this case) and the other means that the image COVERS the screen completely. You knew that? Now to my POLL - if Igor were to allow you to make "Cover Screen" a GLOBAL DEFAULT somehow it would allow you to insert your 1920x1272 images and get the same effect on all slides inserted (until you altered the default). I am still not absolutely certain that the 118% "workaround" is doing what you think it is doing. JMHO!! Best DG

We are getting into a different area here Robert. Fullscreen is the Normal Mode and 1920x1080 would fill your TV screen if you made an MPEG4 of your project and presented it to a suitable TV (with Media Player) on a USB Memory Key. DG

Hi Robert, Fitting 16:9 Images in a 16:9 project means that you will never see the Fit/Cover "problem". Try inserting a 3:2 image into a 16:9 project and then change from FIT to COVER in COMMON TAB. DG

Exactly Peter, I think that we have always agreed on this. DG

Robert: Example: A 3:2 image in 16:9 TV screen is an aspect ratio mismatch and will produce black lines at each side. Using Cover Screen will fit the image so that it fills the width of the screen - parts of the image will then be"lost" top and bottom and need adjustment by nudging upwards or downwards for best fit. Using Fit to Screen fits all of the image with the black lines. DG

Xaver, This Poll was driven, in part, by this thread: http://www.picturest...ow-main-images/ and if you read this post: http://www.picturest...dpost__p__93383 you'll see that I'm ambivalent about the result even though I voted Yes. Judging by the number of replies this ambivalence applies to most of the current forum membership. Let me offer you a scenario where being able to Globally set "Cover Slide" is an advantage. Let's imagine that I have just got back from a Horse Fair/Carnival with 500 plus RAW images out of my Nikon DSLR which I want to quickly turn into an MPEG4 to show on my TV. I could Batch Convert the NEF files to 1920 wide JPEGs in NX2. I could open a 1920x1080 PTE Template which has all of my favourite settings for KFSD, Mode etc and frame line around images and insert all 500 JPEGs in one action and create my MPEG4 with no further adjustments necessary. Some of those 500 would need (up or down) adjustment (at a later time) but for the purpose of a quick show of the images on a WS TV that's all I would need. If I were happy to accept black lines at the sides I could see the whole image by using the current default of "Fit To Slide" but some family members continually ask "Why have you got those black lines?" The same thing applies to those few die-hards who cling on to their 1024x768 or 1280x1024 monitors - making 3:2 images fit the AR of their monitors QUICKLY is an advantage sometimes. Personally, I would like to see Igor add a new TAB to the Project Options - DEFAULTS. This could be used to set the default states of such things as KFSD and MODE so that even better TEMPLATES of favourite settings for various purposes could be created. E & OE. Best wishes, DG

gary i feel that there is a possible contradiction here? i saw your 118% and jills 112% as a way of globally simulating cover screen? i will leave it like that and let the poll speak for itself. it matters not either way to me but i have voted yes. dg

Please participate. A poll is only valid if everyone takes part. DG

Let me try again. There has been discussion over this feature in the past and, if I remember correctly, there were people who wanted "Fit To Screen" to be the default and others who wanted "Cover Screen" to be the default. I would argue that where there is a split in opinions about things like this the obvious answer is to make it a Project Options switch which when set would allow ALL images to be inserted in one mode or the other for the duration of the project (or until the option is changed). I would further argue that such options could then be set into a TEMPLATE which contained everything the way you want it: Resolution, AR, KFSD, Fit to Screen or Cover Screen etc etc etc. When I say "badger" Igor I mean gather enough support to be able to tell Igor - "this is the way it should be". Does that make sense? DG

Would it not be more useful to badger Igor for the facility to set either "Fit To Screen" or "Cover Screen" as Default in Project Options? It seems that this way you are badgering him to make a workaround easier to accomplish. JMTPW. DG

As long as your 3:2 image is 1920 (or greater) wide then there should be no quality issues.<br><br>However, you are paying a (small) penalty in using oversized images and adding to the overall file size of the EXE. (NBD).<br><br><br>DG

Hi Gary, I'm just an old stick in the mud who likes to prepare images in my Software of choice rather than in PTE. Regardless of whether I am going to zoom into an image or not I usually make it the same aspect ratio as the Project. If I intend to zoom the image will be the exact size to suit the amount of zoom with no excess unwanted baggage. i.e. 200% zoom = 3840x2160 or sometimes 3240x2160. If I am not intending to zoom then it will be the exact same size as the Project - again no excess baggage. If I change my mind it is a simple matter to go back to the RAW and crop again. I also like to prepare un-zoomed images with a frame in my Software of choice rather than add the frame in PTE. You could not not do that with what you propose. I'm not against what you propose - I just would not use that method if it becomes available. DG

It's a way of getting around an Image Size (AR) / Project Size (AR) mismatch where an image is converted from "Fit To Slide" to "Cover Slide". Whilst it might work it is not one that I would recommend either. DG

Pele, To produce a DVD from your 1920x1080 PTE Show it must be resized to fit within 720x576. If you play this back on your Mac Monitor at 720x576 it will probably look OK. If you try to fill the screen it will look like C**P. On TV it is never going to look like the PTE EXE or even the MP4 but it will look better than the Computer Monitor. I endorse Tom's suggestion. Create an ISO and burn the ISO in whatever software that you have. I use the equivalent of TOAST - Roxio 8. I also echo what he said about using the MPEG4 file at 1920x1080 directly into the TV's Media Player via USB (if possible). DG

1. Click on the arrow beside your login name and choose "my content". 2. Under the File, Publish etc Menu items you'll see the navigation icon showing C:\ or Z:\ etc. Click on it and navigate to your C:\ My Pictures. Add an image by dragging it from the image pane into the horizontal slide panel at the bottom. Click on "Objects and Animations" Button and you'll see the name of the slide that you added on the Right Hand Side in the Objects Panel. Make sure that it is NOT highlighted by clicking away from it. Right click in the Objects Panel and "ADD" an Image. In the Window that appears navigate to the C:\ My Pictures Folder and click on the image that you want to add. It will appear in the Objects Panel as a new "Layer" over the original image. If the second image is a PNG with transparency you will be able to see through the transparency to the Original Image below. If it is not a PNG you will need to investigate MASKS. Get as far as this and come back with further questions? DG

I had a CP995 before the CP5700 which led to the D70......................... I really enjoyed that little camera. P.S. Before that I was a C***n man, but please don't tell anyone. DG

I knew that you could do it better or bigger. DG

Anyone in the market for a 3250mm Lens Combo? http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/01/a-bit-of-3250mm-fun DG

Of course you are right! My comment was sort of tongue in cheek. When Igor brings out a "prototype" version of something there's always someone who wants it different or wants the default state to be different and it just goes on and on. I sometimes think it would be better to just present a feature and just let everyone play with it and when the dust settles there is usually a consensus about what needs to be changed (if anything). One thing I'm certain of - for PTE to "survive" and flourish it needs to be of use to both beginners and advance users and by beginners I mean those who have maybe just bought their first digital camera and are taking a course on how to use their newly bought computer. DG

Nikon has just released the latest version of the NEF Codec. Any Non-NX2/NX-D or Non-VNXi users can install to provide thumbnails etc of NEF files in image browsers. http://nikonimglib.com/nefcodec/ DG