davegee

OK Peter, I agree, but these things don't happen without warning - forward planning? DG

Just a point arising out of Peter's last post: If, for instance, a 1024x768 show (Windowed Mode) appears in a viewing along with 1400x1050 shows (being viewed via a 1400x1050 projector) then surely the facility exists to OPTICALLY enlarge the 1024x768 show to the same physical dimensions of the 1400x1050 shows using the projector's zoom lens? DG

Thanks, Is it fair to say that you use it more for Graphics Layout than pure photographic? I use this site as a first stop when looking at monitors: http://www.dabs.com/category/computing,desktops-and-monitors,monitors/11109-4294957423#filters As you can see the price new (over here) is a little more than you suggest - that's always the case. What's also interesting is that the site categorises monitors as WIDESCREEN, NON-WIDESCREEN and some others. For whatever reason this monitor is classed as one of the "others".

Crossfade, That's a very interesting monitor with a comprehensive spec - it should be at that price! It seems to be a "one-off" at the moment - no other manufacturer making that resolution in LCD TFT (?). Care to share your experiences with it and reason for buying it (apart from the obvious)? I have some friends who are still using 1024x768 who argue that they can't see the icons on larger monitors - I wonder what they would think of that DG

Hi Barry, I still would like to see this poll as just an information getting excercise and not as a "which is best" poll. I fully agree with what you say about 1920x1200 because it puts more pixels on a "full screen" in 3:2 AR PTE shows but it doesn't have the projector or TV backup that 16:9 has. Our (minority) AV interests are never going to have the manufacturers rushing to provide us with what we want so I think that we are being "led by the nose" a little into a compromise. Just a little side question, again just for fun: If there were such a thing as a 3:2 monitor backed up by a 3:2 projector, which would you choose; 16:10 or 3:2? DG

Come on Guys (and Gals)! It would be nice to get 50 inputs to say that we really do have a representative poll. I will close it when it reaches that figure and then perhaps we can discuss what the results actually tell us?

+1 for Stu's suggestion - it has worked for me in the past.

Thanks Lin, There will always be a few who don't fit in with what a poll asks - no probs. WRT your worries about 16:9 - I think that you are coming at it from possibly the wrong direction. For the purposes of PTE it doesn't really have to be 16:9 permanently. It doesn't matter what format you use as long as it is 1080 pixels high. You just get black lines to the sides. Those who want to preserve their camera's 3:2 ratio images have no option but to have black lines somewhere? On a 4:3 or a 5:4 it is top and bottom. On a 16:9 it is to the sides. For those who like the 4:3 format Olympus is the way to go. For those who like 5:4 a Nikon D3 is just made for them. Now if someone would make a HIGH QUALITY 3:2 Monitor in a 1080 pixel high NATIVE RESOLUTION I might just show some interest. Thanks again - it's just a little excercise for fun - no more than that.

Many thanks Xaver.

OK John, I PROMISE - no more politics in a trade for no more sport. Thanks for participating.

Any more? Almost 300 views and just 27 votes. Does that mean that around 250 people don't know what their monitor resolution is or that they don't care to participate? The present result seems to suggest that wide screen is being used by twice as many people as non-wide screen and that 1920x1080 is the most popular AR. Remember that (just like in a General Election) the poll is not really valid if not everyone votes. (Wales has an Assembly because 25% of the population [plus 1 person] voted for it)..

Hi Peter, I have a (serious) question for you. Provided that a PTE EXE file complied with all other rules regarding FILE size etc how would the people running a (for instance 1024x768) competition know that it had been made using 1620x1080 images in a 1620x1080 "Fit to Screen" mode show? Secondly, would it make any difference? My point is: Why stipulate the resolution of a show these days - is there any point? The same argument applies to single image competitions (IMHO). DG

With Create ISO Image the ONLY one ticked you only need to tell it where to save it and give it a name (Project name). It will save the ISO file wherever you tell it to and once that is done you use your own Burning Software to burn to DVD. I just double click on the ISO and the correct module within ROXIO opens up to do it. DG P.S. did you edit while I was writing? I'm sure that I was answering a different question which contained a reference to ISO Image!!!! Yes - Use NTSC - (if you have a modern DVD player it SHOULD play both PAL and NTSC). Your edited post tends to suggest that you might have HDD problems - insufficient disc space.

Good advice from both Peter and ken. A good alternative to a CD is a memory key. They rarely (if ever) fail. Dragging the EXE files from CD to Desktop should do the trick. DG

Thanks Guido.

Thanks Den.

Hi Barry, I must take some of the blame for persuading you to go with 1920x1200 when you upgraded a couple of years ago. We had a long drawn out discussion and if I remember correctly you opted for the Dell 27" 1920x1200? My reason for choosing 1920x1080 when/if I change in the future is that it is completely compatible with both TV standards and projector standards. I mostly make PTE shows in the 1920x1080 (or 1080 high) resolution for showing on TV via HDMI and I have yet to see a better finished product than that. Our club's projector is 1920x1080 and as Maureen hinted in a recent post it is the standard that all clubs should be aspiring to and adopting asap in order to progress. Individuals with healthy Bank balances may also join in. I can't stress enough the importance of being able to use HDMI (or DVI with separate audio leads) - there IS a difference in quality and this is what is uppermost in my thoughts when making any decisions along these lines. Taking PC World as an example, they appear NOT to be selling any Desktop PC/Monitors or Laptops that are anything but WIDESCREEN so maybe that, in part, will answer the second part of your post? I might be wrong but I think that it is beginning to be more and more difficult to buy anything other than widescreen? Yes, you can buy 4:3 and 5:4 now - but for how long? PLEASE everyone, don't turn this into an argument about monitor aspect ratios - it's just a survey - no more - no less. Thanks for joining in. DG

It might be interesting to see the outcome of this - maybe some use can be made of it by someone? If you have to use one of the the "OTHER" choices please indicate the actual resolution in a reply below? My monitor is 16:10 1920x1200 but if/when I'm in the market for a new one at any time my current thinking is that I will get a 16:9 1920x1080. DG

Thanks David, They won't load in either Audition or Soundbooth. They won't play in Windows Media Player either. DG

Hi David, Which software, apart from PTE, supports .ogg files for editing purposes? Nothing on my computer appears to support this extension. DG

Dick, DavidP has provided an example here: http://www.picturest...showtopic=12006 While he was working on that I devised a little test which allowed me to see / hear what was going on during a Crossfade. To cut a long story short, if you have two MP3 files in a track you need only apply Crossfade to the second file. The type of waveform applied appears to be LINEAR. Applying Crossfade to the first MP3 merely fades the music in for the duration of the set (crossfade) value. (Crossfade only applies to the beginning of the MP3). If you insert more than one MP3 into any given track they will play consecutively and applying crossfade to the second and third etc provides an overlap. If you insert MP3 files into different tracks then the OFFSET is required to give the correct placement of the second, third etc MP3s. DG

Some software allow you to turn off Tool Tips - so you have a choice. If you are in need of help turn them on. If you are an hexpert turn them off. I'd leave them on. DG

I quickly added a template folder to my Vista Laptop Desktop as a trial and was able to get right down into the folder to see all files (beta 7). DG P.S. Sorry, can't agree with your suggestions - they make perfect sense the way they are. Tools tips are a GREAT idea. I'll second that.

Hi Dick, I'm not sure that I can figure out what Igor's version of Crossfading actually does. I have demonstrated above a LINEAR CROSSFADE using the Fade In and Fade Out sliders. True crossfading would attempt to keep the volume constant throughout while the first piece ends and the second piece begins and a number of different curves could be used to achieve this i.e. Linear; Sinusoidal; Logarithmic. Maybe someone else has some knowledge of what Igor's version of Crossfading does. I have tried a variety of combinations and none of them appear to make any sense given my definition of Crossfading. The only thing I know for certain is that if, for instance, you inserted two pieces of music in a track the first piece being 4.36 long and the second 2.57 long, by adding a crossfade of 33 secs to both tracks the total time for the track becomes 7.00 long. I'm struggling a little to define what happens (and how it happens) during the 33 sec Crossfade. DG

Peter, Re Start Time. If you add a piece of music of X minutes length and use a Start Time of 10 Seconds with a fade in of 5 Seconds the Track will ignore the first 10 seconds of the MP3 and start to fade in 10 seconds into the music. 0 seconds on PTE Track = 10 seconds in on music track. DG