davegee

Hi Xaver, Well done!! EDITED: If the child stays in the same place relative to the parent frame then no acceleration is seen. But if the frame is moved out of black area and the child brought back in to its end position and an intermediate keyframe added, by making the first part of the child's speed option linear and the second part accelerated a diiference in speed can be seen. DaveG

Hi Peter, Within the present setup in 5.6 you can only have two speed options between two points - slow start - level off - slow finish; or variations on that theme. The diagram shows what I think would work if a way could be found to define the point at which two different versions of the same image would converge if one one was Linear motion and the other Accelerated. Earlier I suggested moving the START point of the Accelerated version. On rethinking you might have to move the END point of the Linear version AND the START point of the Accelerated version to get the point of convergence where you want it. Good luck!! DaveG

Hi Xaver, Have you tried that? DaveG

Peter, My initial reaction was that this COULD be possible by having two images - the real one and another SHADOWING the real one in zero opacity. The REAL image would be in LINEAR or whatever and the SHADOW would be in ACCELERATE. At the point C where you want the change over you could drag the end keypoint to 1 unit away and change the REAL image from 100% opacity to 0% and, in a similar way the SHADOW image from 0% to 100%. The FLAW is that, because of the different modes the real and shadow images are in two different places at the instant that you want the change to take place. If you can make their paths coincide with their pan and zoom settings as you want them it would work. To do this you would need to bring the start point (keyframe) of the SHADOW closer to the point at which it is going to take over. I'm close, but not exactly there at the moment. It might be a case of "bring out the spreadsheet"? DaveG PLEASE Igor - is a speed option like this possible?

It sounds as though you have more than one problem here. Take the music out of the show and see how much of the problems disappear. The fading of colour COULD be down to the wrong colour space? RGB JPEGs do not look as good as sRGB JPEGs in a PTE show. Does that ring any bells? What do you mean by full resolution? Full resolution out of the camera? That's a recipe for disaster. Re-size to the resolution of the images in the show. If your images are going to be seen at 1920x1080 resolution in a PTE EXE then they need be only 1920x1080 to begin with. Anything higher is going to cause problems. You also have to consider the specifications of the two computers - RAM, Graphics RAM etc on each computer. DaveG

If you go to a local music shop or market stall specializing in electronics you MIGHT be able to get a small, inexpensive mixer with volume controls to insert between the laptop and the incoming lead with mini jack. Also get a mini jack to 1/4 inch adaptor if the mixer has 1/4 inch inputs as well as a suitable lead/adaptor to go from the mixer to the laptop. You can then control to signal without having any sign of it on screen. It should not be too expensive and will come in handy for the next time. Hum COULD be a problem but it's worth a try - mine's a Roland/Boss 6 channel stereo mixer but it is overkill for the job. DaveG

Xaver, What you have said above is basically what others have said elsewhere. I am trying to look at this from a different perspective and get some insight into WHY there is a need to keep 4.49 and why a newcomer to PTE could not do the same things with the BASIC features in 5.6 as with 4.49? Would you like to take a fresh look? DaveG

Arising out of another thread, this is an invitation to discuss: Do you feel that using BASIC Version 5.6xxx is easier/harder than using Version 4.49? WHY? By BASIC V 5.6xxx, I mean WITHOUT the Pan, Zoom and Rotate features. Is it, in BASIC use (WITHOUT PZR) any more/less memory intensive than V4.49? Is it more/less intuitive to get a slide show on screen straight out of the box without help? WHY? Do you consider it necessary to keep V4.49 as well as V5.6xxx? WHY? It might help you if you have the ability to get both versions in view at the same time if you have, for instance, desktop and laptop PCs available. DaveG

This is as good as it gets !!!!!!! DaveG

Quite right Mike! But before we do could we ask Brian elaborate on what he means by "left on the books"? Does he mean available to download by those who already have a reg key or...... Available to purchase as a basic programme (complete with reg key)? DaveG

RUGBY UNION. It's played by big guys with funny shaped balls. DaveG

Congrats to Ireland - after 61 years they have something to celebrate this weekend!! DaveG

So what you are trying to get is your 500x400 images (in original size) in a 1024x768 show with text comments and a Nav bar? Could I suggest that you use an older version - 5.1 will do what you want (you probably knew that). In Project Options / Screen tick "Disable Scaling" and click on "Set for existing slides". The loss of "Original Mode" has been the subject of MUCH discussion and your application is an excellent example of where it is needed most. There is another "workaround" which you could use (in 5.6) if you are sufficiently adept at using actions in Photoshop. Write an action to place your images in a 1024x768 (or whatever) black background and batch process all images using that action. That way your new 1024x768 images with 500x500 images inset would fit to screen in a 1024x768 show and maintain the 500x500 image size you require (and allow for the comments and nav bar). If you use black as a BG colour in PTE it would still allow for panning and rotating if you wish to use it. DaveG

OK - you're in good hands now - I'm out. DaveG

Use 500x500 for your "Fixed size of slide" (see my previous post) and that should sort you out. Your 500x400 and your 400x500 will "fit" to a 500x500 slide. "Fit to slide" is then the same as ORIGINAL. DaveG

Debi, It is not altogether clear what you are trying to do - could you be specific? Are you trying to insert xxx number of slides all of the same resolution? Are they all different resolutions? If they are all the same then, in OPTIONS/SCREEN, you can set the size of slide to be equal to your image resolution and tick the "Fixed size of slides" box. That should enable you to insert xxx images at the set resolution as before. DaveG

What is your screen's NATIVE (MAXIMUM) resolution? What was/is the resolution of the WINDOW which you say runs smoothly? Create another project with the same images and NO PZR effects and then - do you get smooth transitions in Full-Screen Mode? DaveG

What is your screen's NATIVE (MAXIMUM) resolution? Is your screen running at its NATIVE (MAXIMUM) resolution? If not - what? (It SHOULD be set at its NATIVE (MAXIMUM) resolution. What was/is the resolution of the WINDOW which you say runs smoothly? Create another project with the same images and NO PZR effects and then - do you get smooth transitions in Full-Screen Mode? DaveG

I think that the point to consider here is whether v4.49 is a different product or an earlier version. Microsoft, for instance, do not support earlier versions of their software although some are still in use i.e. Windows 98. If you were to persuade Igor to keep 4.49 available as a different product then he would have to support it? My opinion is that he would not want to do this and wants to move on. (I could be wrong). DaveG

Ronnie's probably right about the number of people using 98 and 2000....... .....but Brian is also correct in that, if what he says is true, then it should be written into any instructions as an exception. DaveG

Click on OPTIONS / Display Mode / STANDARD DaveG

Dom, Version 2 plays fine on a 1920x1200 screen - no jegged edges. A question - What is the resolution of the original full screen images? DaveG

From post #20: "I see no reason why the village hall who are requesting this would not be right in asking for it. Some do and others are not as aware of its implications. It is a bit like having your projector/laptop MOT'd annually - it is not invasive and takes literally minutes". DaveG

If I understand you correctly - Slideshow.exe plays OK on your XP machine and you have burned it to a DVD? The DVD cannot be read on the VISTA machine? I think that you could possibly try to transfer the slideshow.exe to the Vista machine by some other means - memory key or USB drive - to see if it is the exe or the DVD which is causing your problem. DaveG

Can you translate from the Finnish as accurately as possible? DaveG