davegee

There are a couple of possibilities, Barry. One - Nobody uses it. Two - Because of One nobody has realised that there is a possible bug and has not reported it. UNTIL NOW. DaveG

bjc, Can I just add that, amongst other reasons for my beliefs about the 1920x1080 format, the increased definition available (through more pixels) to those who wish to use the 3:2 format of DSLRs is a deciding factor. On a 1400x1050 projector the best I could do is a 1400x933 image. On a 1920x1080 projector the best I could do is a 1620x1080 image. That's 34% more pixels, which in a single image competition, is a LOT of extra definiton. The figures for those wishing to enter a 16:9 image the figures are: 1400x788 for the 1400x1050 projector and.... .... not surprisingly 1920x1080 for the 1920x1080 projector. The difference in this case is a WHOPPING 88% more pixels/definition. At least two members of this forum already have a 1920x1080 projector and a third is "saving up" his/her pennies. DaveG

Limey, You are, of course, correct! I did a couple of tests this morning and found that the TV Safe Zone needs to be taken into account even with flat screen HD Tvs etc. I gave up on DVD a while ago when I became unhappy about the quality available from DVD when compared to connecting a suitably equipped laptop to my TV monitor via HDMI cable. I can now construct my PTE show at the same resolution as my TV screen (1366x768) and not have to worry about "Safe TV Zone". Putting a white line around a show proves this to be the case - it is always visible at the edges (no black bands at top, bottom or sides) and shows that nothing is being "discarded". I also looked at the MPEGs made for making DVDs and regardless of format, resolution etc they are always 720x576 - PAL. DaveG

I think that there might be another reason for that - if you are able to, try connecting your computer/laptop to your TV. D-Connector or preferably HDMI. You will see that if you set your PC to the same res as your TV there is NO TV safe area required. Read the TV manual though - if you use a D-Connector it limits you to (in my case) 1280x768 instead of the 1360x768 I can get with HDMI (26"). DaveG

Hi Ken, I thought you guys over there were the world leaders in this sort of thing? DaveG

Don't forget that when you create a DVD the PTE show is converted to PAL (or NTSC) and then interpolated back up to your TV screen resolution. In PAL terms that's something like 720x576 (someone will correct if wrong, I'm sure) so your 16:9 image will be downsized to 720 wide and then upsized to 1920 on playback. The best way to interface between a laptop and a HD TV is via a HDMI/DVI cable - using the D - connector will limit the width of the image. At least that's my experience with a Sony (HDMI Equipped) laptop and a Sony wide screen HD TV. Doing it this way your 1920x1080 will show full screen in stunning quality. See: http://www.picturestoexe.com/forums/index....38&hl=daveg DaveG

Royo, Please keep us updated with what you buy and specs of the monitor. I would be more concerned about the RESOLUTION of the monitor than its size in inches. Can I ask if you will be using the new computer with the projector? ....and what do you mean by "Aspect ratio 4:3 support 16:9 "? DaveG

Is it still required?? With the advent of flat screen (LCD) TVs, surely, nothing is now "hidden" by the tube surround. What you see is what you get (or something like that). DaveG

Royo, In order to advise best for you - please tell us: Do you have a Point and Shoot Camera or a DSLR? The first is a 4:3 aspect ratio and the last a 3:2 aspect ratio. If you have the former a 1600x1200 would be great. If the latter then something wider would be preferable - not necessarily wide screen. P.S. Do you use a Projector to do your charity shows? If so what resolution? DaveG

Lin and Jeff's guide says: "The "Perspective Correction for Zoom" block lets you essentially simulate a movie camera zoom. It's best to experiment with this along with linear and non-linear zooms to get the desired effect" It's to do with the way we "see" when a zoom is applied - without the Perspective Correction the zoom is linear and therefore unnatural. With the Perspective Correction it is non-linear and more natural to the eye. Slowly at first , then faster as we zoom in. Or is it the other way around? I we ask Ken VERY nicely I'm sure that he can point us to the original thread which brought this function into PTE? DaveG

John, I see your point but I believe that having TWO sets of USER PREFERENCES would be an unnecessary complication. Let's do it all in one place if it is possible and if Igor goes along with it. DaveG

Mode: Let's say, for example, that your monitor aspect ratio is 5:4 (1280 pixels wide and 1024 pixels high) and that you are using FULLSCREEN and 5:4 as your Screen Options. If you add an image which has an aspect ratio of 3:2 (same as a DSLR) and pixel dimensions of 1680 pixels wide and 1120 pixels high you would see the following: In FIT TO SLIDE Mode the image would show (in Objects and Animation) being fitted to the WIDTH of your screen area with blank space at top and bottom. (If the image was 1680x1120 in PORTRAIT format it would be fitted to the HEIGHT of your screen area with blank spaces at left and right sides). In COVER SLIDE Mode the image would show (in Objects and Animation) being fitted to the HEIGHT of your screen area with overlapping areas to the left and right sides which would not show in PREVIEW. (If the image was 1680x1120 in PORTRAIT format it would be fitted to the WIDTH of your screen area with overlaps at top and bottom i.e. in either case it would COVER the screen). In ORIGINAL Mode there would be OVERLAPS on all sides because the 1680x1120 image would be BIGGER than the screen resolution of 1280x1024. I like to think of ORIGINAL as the equivalent of ACTUAL PIXELS in Photoshop. (If your image was 1680x1120 in PORTRAIT format you would see blank spaces to the left and right of the image and overlaps at top and bottom because the image would then be TALLER than your screen resolution height but NARROWER than your screen resolution width). Please note that in both FIT TO SLIDE and COVER SLIDE Modes (using the above resolutions and image sizes) your image would be INTERPOLATED DOWNWARDS to fit or cover the screen by PTE. In the case of COVER SLIDE Mode and PORTRAIT Format (using the above screen resolutions and image sizes) the interpolation would be UPWARDS to fit the width of the screen in PTE. In the case of ORIGINAL Mode no interpolation would take place. Interpolation DOWNWARDS in PTE is acceptable but UPWARDS in PTE is not desirable. (But that's something for another discussion). DaveG

Igor, Would it be possible, in a future version, to have a PREFERENCES dialogue (similar to Photoshop's) which would allow users to change the default values for a given set of parameters? One that requires such a facility at this time is MODE in O&A/ Common. Of the three options available I find that the ORIGINAL setting (with its corresponding value of 100% for ZOOM) is the most logical. Others will prefer Fit to Screen or Cover Screen so the ability to tailor to the users needs would be a big step forward. Some of the settings in OPTIONS and CUSTOMISE SLIDE could be included in a PREFERENCES dialogue. Preferences would allow me to open, for instance, a New Project where the Screen Options match my display, the Time interval for slides defaults to my prefered setting and the Effects would be set to Fade in/out with a default value of whatever I decide. In addition the Mode would be set to Original and the Position to Pixels. All this (and others) would be my USER PREFERENCES. I apologise if this has been mentioned before and I have missed it. DaveG

Hi Lin, You have to admit that is neither logical nor consistent with other parameters within PTE where you can, for instance, set a zoom figure by highlighting the percentage box and typing whatever figure you want in? I use the slider. While on the subject of the grid, I have noticed that PTE "autosaves" the grid settings. If a PTE project is opened the grid settings changed and the project is then closed without saving PTE remembers the changes made the next time is is opened. It remembers grid on or off and the last setting figure. If this is normal, then wouldn't it be nice if PTE could remember that my prefered setting for O&A/ Common/ Mode is ORIGINAL and not Fit to slide? (See Jeff's posting elsewhere). DaveG

You are correct Jean-Claude - using the slider it is possible to set any value, but trying to type certain numbers in is impossible. DaveG

I have decided on a 1920x1080 monitor which will cover all aspect ratios and projector resolutions up to and including 1920x1080. The current state of play with projectors is mostly 1024x768 but I expect this to change to mostly 1400x1050 within the next year. Following that I expect that there will then be a change to 1920x1080 projection very quickly. I want a monitor which will allow me to see PTE shows at "ACTUAL PIXELS" at all projection resolutions. I have proven to my own satisfaction that the most "efficient" aspect ratio monitor for AV shows is the 16:9. When making shows of 3:2 aspect ratio (same as camera) or wider it allows you to put more pixels on screen resulting in greater definition etc. DaveG

Jeff, If you are resizing to 1024 high then why not use "Disable Scaling...." - that gives you the cover slide that you require and sets Original in O&A/Common. Original, in your case, is the same thing as cover slide. DaveG

Peter, Your "best of both worlds" scenario is, indeed, a workable solution, but I don't see the need to export. If the background music and the commentary are merged into one track, surely that then destroys the flexibilty of the system and any possiblity of tweaking slides along the timeline would, in some cases, be lost? DaveG

I have tried, three times today, to upload an EXE file to Media Fire in both zipped and unzipped format and in each case it was rejected as being a possible VIRUS/TROJAN. I wonder if they are using AVAST? I eventually uploaded to MyFreeFileHosting with no problem: Here's a link, it is worth checking out: http://myfreefilehosting.com/ DaveG

Xaver, The beauty of PTE is that it allows you to control your images in such a way that they CANNOT be resampled unless you want to allow re-sampling. Any automatic re-sampling MUST have an ALLOW or DISABLE switch to cater for those of us who want to preserve the maximum resolution at which images are viewed. I did once suggest a mode in which re-sampling would be limited to DOWNWARD re-sampling only and NOT ALLOW upward re-sampling to suit the viewer's monitor or PROJECTOR. DaveG

You are all, with the greatest of respect, saying EXACTLY what I said at the very beginning (in your own ways). You have to go back to an ORIGINAL of some description, be it RAW, PSD, TIFF, JPEG (or WAV) rather than open a previously edited and saved JPEG (or MP3) from PTE. What the original poster wants to do is open the SAVED JPEG and edit again - Argonaut is suggesting that LR ( I don't know the programme) saves a sidecar file so that the original JPEG can remain unsaved - if that is what it does - GREAT. But that is NOT what the original poster wanted to do. Opening a saved JPEG (MP3) and re-editing it, saving as JPEG (MP3) again involves a further step of compression which is avoided if working on the original. DaveG

Hi Argonaut, I think that we possibly have a terminological problem here. I agree that LR is NON-DESTRUCTIVE DURING the editing process (as is PS), but at some stage you have to SAVE your image at which point we have to consider what is NON-DESTRUCTIVE or LOSSLESS. (Once the file is saved the edits become DESTRUCTIVE). My criteria would be that in a LOSSLESS SAVE no compression is applied AND the original file is recoverable when the saved file is re-opened. RAW files satisfy both criteria. PSD files satisfy both criteria (albeit that you can't recover a RAW file from a PSD). TIFFs satisfy just the one criteria - no compression is applied - but you cannot recover the original file before editing took place. JPEGs satisfy neither criteria. So, in the spirit of the the original post here LR is no different to any other editing package. Opening a JPEG in ANY package, editing it and re-saving it is a LOSSY/DESTRUCTIVE process. DaveG

I asked for this as soon as Ver. 5 appeared. Igor seemed to think that it was too difficult at that time. DaveG

Hi Argonaut, Did you mean "The RAW is never changed, no matter what editing you do" because that is exactly what I argued right at the beginning of the discussion. Lightroom, ACR, NX2 are only "lossless" when working in RAW and even then there are limitations on what you can do. DaveG

Hi Argonaut, Might I (VERY RESPECTFULLY) suggest that your methodology is flawed because you haven't actually edited the files before successively re-saving? The whole point about the discussion is that it has been suggested that a JPEG be opened from within PTE to carry out an edit step. The two attached files are the original and sixth save in a procedure which actually involved edit steps. Both are actual pixels crops from the 1024x768 originals. When these are placed on layers in PS and the sixth toggled on and off there is a discernable difference between the two. DaveG