davegee

JP, I'm sure that everyone would like to see how the Cale method works on actual images. So yes please, will you post the templates? To clarify, these modified tests were done using 5.52? On the subject of the problems you saw in my full screen test at 1024x768. Could it be because I used monitors whose NATIVE RESOLUTION is 1024x768 and 1280x1024 whereas you are using the same 2048x1536 monitor to SIMULATE these resolutions? In my opinion, this is not the same thing. Tractor 1 works perfectly on monitors whose Native Resolution is 1920x1200, 1280x1024 and 1024x768. I only ever use Native Resolution on all of my monitors (3). DaveG

Your Graphics Card is always going to be a suspect here, BUT, the process you describe is IDENTICAL to the process I went through until I loaded a different MPEG4 CODEC. Read this thread: http://www.picturestoexe.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=8918 DaveG

As well as a fast Dual (or Quad) Core processor with as much RAM as it is possible to get into the machine, make sure that it has a good Graphics card with 512Mb+ of dedicated RAM. Can you upload a Template of the project to Mediafire or similar so that someone can look at it? DaveG

Hello Xaver, I have sent you a personal message. DaveG

Probably the best thing to do is to post a Template of the Project in a ZIP file so that one of us can take a look at your setup. We can also comment on how it performs and give you an idea whether you DESPERATELY need a new Graphics card - I suspect that you do. DaveG

Loukas' description is a little sketchy, but it sounds a little bit like the CODEC problem that I had during the first few days of 5.6 beta 1? Loukas, if you are still around please come back with a few more details. Which version of PTE - 5.5 or 5.6? If 5.6, which beta? DaveG

Jean-Pierre, I have posted the results of my tests here: http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=411ad3b...3a805876665040c May I say that tables of mathematical data did not convince me that there was a problem – I needed to see the problem with my own eyes with actual images. Manufactured demonstrations using rectangles are also unconvincing. So I set about constructing a test using actual images at “Actual Pixels” (equivalent to Original Mode) to see for myself what the problems are (if any). TRACTOR 1 The project is FULLSCREEN 16:10 and all images (assembled images) used are 1920x1200 (actual pixels on my screen). WARNING - Please be warned that the result is VERY memory hungry and works at the limits of my system - 3Gb of RAM and a graphics card with 512 Mb of RAM. The first slide shows an image which has been split into 10 strips being put back together using panning. The result is a pixel-perfect black and white image made up of 10 strips which seamlessly join together appearing to be a single image. This reverts to the original colour image in steps. The second slide shows the same 10 strips being joined using a combination of pan and rotate. Once again the 10 strips join together seamlessly as though they were one single image. The third slide shows the original image, split into 25 rectangles each of which can be rotated and returned to the original state to form a seamless montage. The centre image also zooms – I have used this on just one image to avoid overtaxing my graphics memory which is already stretched to the limit in this test. On the basis of this test I could not fault the programme. It did all I asked of it with no visual imperfections. The resulting EXE file runs perfectly on three computers with differing resolutions/aspect ratios, albeit with some jumping and stuttering due to the size of the project. At this stage I began to notice minor problems at the extreme edges of the frame during transitions. I brought this to Igor’s attention and he said that he had failed to duplicate the problem suggesting that I update my video drivers. I was not convinced by this and have not done this so far. TRACTOR 2 - TV SAFE ZONE I now tried to create a version with a TV Safe Zone built in. I used the “% of the slide to show main image” feature to achieve this. As Maurice pointed out this can only be used if the “Level 1 Parent” has no keyframes and with this one proviso it seems to do what is required. A problem is immediately obvious in that children appear within the TV Safe Zone. There are ways of overcoming this and it probably would not be a huge problem because when the DVD is made and the TV Safe Zone percentage is chosen accurately the children would not be seen anyway. However, things now begin to fall apart and thin lines appear between the various strips and rectangles on a random basis. This led me to go back to the TRACTOR 1 project and try zooming the parent image while the assembly of the strips was taking place. Sure enough, the random lines began to appear. They also appear in the third slide where the 25 rectangles are zoomed and rotated. CONCLUSION On the basis of this test and the evidence of my own eyesight, Jean-Pierre, I agree with you and concede that 5.6 is flawed. Thanks to JP for his persistence. I hope that a solution is possible. Meanwhile, I will abandon testing 5.6 and continue to use 5.5 until a solution is found. DaveG

Maurice, Is that not the way that the "Cale" works - there must be a Cale on all images as Parent? DaveG

Xaver, JP's original is a 1.497076:1 project with a 3:2 image Are you seeing the red line in the Mini-Player or when you run Preview? DaveG

Xaver, I tried it again, just to be absolutely certain. Change to Fullscreen 15:10 No red line on my 1280x1024 No red line on my 1920x1200 On different computers. It is a Windowed Mode 1.497076:1 project with a 3:2 image! I would expect problems! Best wishes, DaveG

Xaver, I tried it again, just to be absolutely certain. Change to Fullscreen 15:10 No red line on my 1280x1024 No red line on my 1920x1200 On different computers. It is a Windowed Mode 1.497076:1 project with a 3:2 image! I would expect problems! Best wishes, DaveG

Hi JP, Many thanks for that. On point - I don't understand - If I change to Fullscreen 3:2 - Red Line Gone. Why use Windowed Mode?? I am making my examples show the same on ALL resolution/aspect ratio monitors. I thought that you wanted that too? Please wait for my example - in the next 24 hours. It has images - not rectangles - it has Pan, Zoom and Rotate of multiple objects - it shows the same aspect ratio on all monitors - there will be a version for computer and a version with TV Safe Zone for DVD (Globally changed) - ALL with no Visual problems. Best wishes, DaveG

I think I have answered my own question to Igor. If I use "% of slide to show main image" I can change the Main image (Parent) from 100% to 90% at any time during or after the creation of the project to create a "TV Safe Zone". If the main image is always used as the Parent to ALL subsequent additions all of the children will be reduced proportionately. I have tried to create projects with the percieved inaccuracies brought about by the loss of ORIGINAL MODE and failed. I don't see a problem with 5.6. Andre, All of my trials will work on ANY resolution monitor and what I have written above will ensure that nothing is cut off when making a DVD. DaveG

Henri, I too, am saddened by Peter's decision. I used Original Mode 100% in previous versions but I see nothing in 5.6 which will change the end result of what I use PTE for. What will change is the methodology I use to achieve it. I believe that original mode can still be achieve in 5.6 - it is just the HOW that has changed. I also believe that the way forward depends on the answer to just one question to Igor: Can he provide us with the means to GLOBALLY change the percentage value of a first level object? This would solve the TV Safe Zone problem. Adding an object which is equal in resolution to the compiler's screen resolution at the first level (above the background) and setting its opacity to zero allows it to be used as a parent for the whole slide. If Igor can provide the means to globally change the percentage value of this first level object (in Project Options for instance) then the whole project can be reduced by a fixed amount to allow for TV Safe Zone. Problem solved? DaveG

JP, To convince me / everyone, can you produce a short sequence showing where these inaccuracies happen? An EXE along with a backup in zip would be great. My screen sizes are 1920x1200 and 1280x1024 so it would have to be in one of those resolutions for me to be able to comment. Many thanks, DaveG

Elegantly put Xaver, If the top level is a blank image with zero opacity (something like JP's Cale) then then percieved problem with "inconsistencies" in the display of pixel sizes no longer exists. The only remaining problem to my way of thinking is the TV Safe Zone and how to easily achieve it. I am tempted to suggest that all those who burn DVDs build it in right from the start but that would probably not please everyone. DaveG

Agreed!! Title suggests that it was made with 1920x1200 images and on my 1920x1200 monitor some of them just BITE you!! DaveG

Bob, Is this the spec of your computer or the spec of the laptop which is giving the problem? DaveG

JP, I truly respect your work, one day I hope to produce work which is just HALF as good!! I repeat what I have said elsewhere - Igor's statement was VERY important and I am prepared to change my method of working if it means that he can produce a better product. DaveG

JP, FULLSCREEN is probably the best description, if you understand the concept that on a screen with an aspect ratio different to the original aspect ratio it will either FIT TO WIDTH or FIT TO HEIGHT. I would not want that changed. I am happy with it. In fact I am happy with 5.6 the way it is - all that is necessary is a USER's MANUAL that explains it correctly in the simplest of terminology. Igor's statement is a VERY important document and should be read VERY carefully. If it is accepted then I see a way forward for everyone and any obvious problems can be sorted as they arise in a orderly manner. As it is now the "Tail is trying to wag the dog" - do you have a similar saying? "c'est une petite minorite qui se fait obeir" (?). DaveG

Hi Gary, The point I was trying to make (I think!) was that TV Safe Zone is only necessary for regular PAL/NTSC DVD Authoring. For making an MPEG for viewing on your computer it is not necessary? DaveG

Peter, Still thinking about this. Meanwhile I wonder if the meaning of Fullscreen on Project Options is being misunderstood. To me it means that the EXE will play Fullscreen on ANY monitor - it is not referring to the resolution/aspect ratio of the monitor being used to construct the show. It is where the chain of percentages starts - 100%, 50% 25% etc of the VIEWER's Screen - not the compiler's screen. DaveG

Peter, Think of it this way (look at the Animations Screen): In the first slide the White object is 6.4% of the Frame's Native Resolution i.e. 6.4% of 10000 by something. In slide 2 the White object is is 50% of its parent images' resolution (1280x1024). The above figures refer to my screen - they might differ on yours. DaveG

Peter, Something to consider: When posting an example in this way your figures are never going to be the same as the viewer's figures because of screen resolution/aspect ratio differences. For instance in your first line you mention the figures: (0,0 and 1280,1024) - on my screen (1920x1200) these are 0,0 1500,1200) This makes it difficult to follow your argument /reasoning to say the least. I will try. DaveG

Thanks Igor and Xaver, If I add a frame to a 16:10 blank project on my 1920x1200 monitor its size in "Size/Position" is 1920x1200 but its native size in Properties is 10000x6250. No matter what the aspect ratio of the project is the Native Resolution (in Properties) is always going to be 10000xsomething (the height will depend on the aspect ratio). To change the size of the frame I can grab a corner square and drag inwards etc. or I can alter its percentage value in Animations. If I add a 1200 pixel high image to the frame its height in "Size/Position" will assume the height figures of its parent frame (in native resolution terms) i.e. 6250 Pixels High. To change the appearance of the image within the frame I can use the grab handles or the zoom percentage figure in Animations. 50% Zoom will now show that the height in "Size/Position" is half of the Native Resolution Pixels of the Parent Frame i.e. 3125 I will continue this later. Continued: If I now add a 1200 pixel high Image to the Image as a child (does that make it the Grandchild of the Frame?) the grandchild assumes the pixel dimensions of ITS parent i.e. the 1200 height image in Native Resolution terms. If the CHILD is zoomed to 50% (when the grandchild is added) the GRANDCHILD will appear at the same PHYSICAL size as the CHILD with its pixel size in “size/Position” showing as 1200 pixels high. To get the GRANDCHILD back to 1200 pixels high (fill the height of the screen) change the zoom percentage in Animations to 200%. Thanks both, DaveG