davegee

Hi Ken, Try this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_resolution An example of pixel shape affecting "resolution" or perceived sharpness: displaying more information in a smaller area using a higher resolution makes the image much clearer. However, newer LCD displays and such are fixed at a certain resolution; making the resolution lower on these kinds of screens will greatly decrease sharpness, as an interpolation process is used to "fix" the non-native resolution input into the displays native resolution output. DaveG

HI KEN, NOW GIVE US A LINK TO A DISCUSSION ON THE PROS AND CONS OF USING MONITORS AT HIGHEST RESOLUTION AS OPPOSED TO A LOWER RESOLUTION? DAVEG

Hi Barry, I also liked the show. Regarding the resolution issue, I personally cannot understand how anyone can run a monitor at anything LESS than its full resolution. All that interpolation going on BEFORE even starting the show. I notice that you have stopped offering two options of resolution - maybe you should think about this again? What will you do when everyone upgrades to 1400x1050 projectors - will you offer a third option? I try to remember to put a little note at the BEGINNING of my humble efforts saying: "THIS SHOW IS OPTIMISED FOR 1280X1024". This way the viewer knows what to expect. Keep up the good work. DaveG

Some things to consider: With a monitor as large as 1920x1200 if you intend to fill the screen with your PTE creations (and I am a fan of FILLING the screen) your images are going to be 2.3M (ish) pixels. Convert that into a JPEG and you are going to be looking at LARGE JPEGS. So you will need a MIGHTY powerful graphics card, especially for those PZR effects. The next generation of projectors (I hate the word Beamer!!) is going to be 1400x1050 for some time so that could be a consideration. Why have bigger than 1050 pixels high if you are not going to project at that res? If you are lucky (wealthy) enough to own a 1920x1080 projector then you will find that the aspect ratios do not match up anyway. If you decide on a 1200 pixel high monitor and make your creations at a lower res then you are faced with a small (ish) show in the middle of the screen. BB has gotten around this with an elegant solution and it is worth a look. I am going with a 1050 high monitor for the time being. DaveG

Try downloading SONIC STAGE and use that to convert to WAV. It is an excellent and versatile converter and it will give you a data base of all converted files. DaveG

If you can channel your cassette output through something with an OPTICAL DIGITAL output such as a MD Deck then EDIROL make an OPTICAL TO USB adaptor which I use to eliminate MOST problems. Tape noise has to be dealt with by either Audacity or Audition noise filters. DaveG

The desktop problem is easily solved - take a look at some of Brry B's recent shows. DaveG

Opinions wanted on an idea for Igor to consider. We have Fit To Screen and View In Window. What about a third option IF IT IS POSSIBLE? The third option would be to fit to screen on monitors of the desired resolution and less and view in a window on monitors which are above the desired resolution. My example: If I make a show (no PZR) with 1280x1024 images then my third option would fit to screen on monitors UP TO 1280x1024 and view in a 1280x1024 window on monitors above 1280x1024. Maybe it is asking too much of IGOR but if it is possible is it what you guys would like to see? - I certainly would. DaveG

I can see where you are coming from, Ken. I looks as though 1400x1050 will be the new standard for Digital Projection in competition work over the next few years so I am now in the market for a new monitor which will be 1050 high. I may be wrong but I don't think that there is a 1400x1050. (Before anyone jumps in - I insist on running my monitor on ITS maximum resolution so a larger res monitor running at 1400x1050 won't do for me). Once I have the monitor, which could well be a wide screen, I will then have to think about upgrading my shows to that res. DaveG

Sorry, I did not want to bring the old arguement up - the point I was making is that it was / is a redundant step in Almark's Action. This is basic stuff - it does not need to progress into a full scale debate. Just look at what happens when you alter settings in "Image Size" with Resample turned first "OFF" and then turned "ON". "Bigger is better"? - That depends on whether your Graphics Card is up to it and whether or not you are using PZR, surely, Ken? DaveG

Hi Almark, Just one point - there is absolutely no point in converting to 72ppi as part of this process. The end result is exactly the same if left at 300ppi or indeed if changed to 3000ppi as long as you do not resample during the process. If you enter photographic competitions you will find that the 300ppi JPEGS are specified as a requirement, but this is for a reason and, I believe, to prevent confusion at the printers if your image finds its way into a catalogue. So, perhaps it is better to leave your images at 300ppi when saving as JPEGS? Otherwise, I applaud your initiative. DaveG

Stu, Old habits die hard!! There's more than one way to skin a cat!! Etc, etc, etc DaveG

Set the time for all slides to a high value (minutes) and "Permit control of the show" in Advanced Options.

Thanks for the replies. Just to clarify, what we are talking about here is images and not PTE shows. (I said it was off topic). For some reason, the Laptop does not allow me to use the Function control to set "Projector only". The main problem is a rule that insists that there shall be no compression or interpolation of an image anywhere in the computer projector chain. This makes sense because as an author I would not want my images altered any way prior to or during judging. If anyone out there is using a similar setup - laptop with 1400x1050 projector and has managed to solve the problem of having the laptop at THE SAME RES AS THE PROJECTOR, I would welcome some input. I realise that this is not possible with a laptop whoes max res is 1024x768 so it looks as though a new laptop is required. Thanks in advance. DaveG

Could anyone help: Here's the scenario - Laptop with resolution set to 1024x768 - Projector with maximum resolution of 1400x1050. When projected, the laptop screen is projected at the full height of the screen. Where is the interpolation taking place - graphics card or projector?

Thanks Gilio, I think I understand and this will help in the near future when we are trying out new projectors in 1400x1050 and 1920x1080 formats. I will report back in a seperate thread. DaveG

Gilio, Many thanks - I am interested because this is relevent to something that I am working on right now. How can you project your 1400x1050 show from your 1280 laptop? Is your show "Fit to screen" or in a 1400x1050 Window? Does your 1400x1050 show project in part of the screen of fill the screen? Do you not need a laptop which is equal to or greater than 1400x1050 resolution to avoid interpolation of the show and therefore degredation? Best wishes, DaveG

Gilio, I would be interested to know: 1. Your monitor size? and 2. Did you try the PTE "rasterize text" feature? DaveG

Gilio, I liked the show - great! However text is cut off on right hand side - Music by:John Lome......... seems to be cut off (or is that it?). This happens on both 1280x1024 and 1024x768 monitors. If you have a 1400x1050 monitor (or are assembling to suit a 1400x1050 projector) then that could be the reason? DaveG

Hi Ken, The Mediafire link worked OK. Many thanks, DaveG

I downloaded the zipped folder from the MORTURN site and get: "Please insert the last disc of the Multi - volume set and click OK" ???????????????? DaveG

How about a New Year resolution for everyone here namely not to copy and paste everything that someone has written, before giving your answer/opinion. Some of the posts on the forum consist of 30% information and 70% quotation, and perhaps it's my grumpy old man side but I find it's turns reading otherwise interesting threads into a very tedious business. Grump over very Happy New Year to all. This counts as a second heartfelt vote!! DaveG

Perhaps you could use the time to take some more great images and make another show for us - using PTE, of course. Have a good vacation. DaveG

I looked back at the previous problem (Beta 10 or 11) and found that, at that time, the start-up window was larger than monitor size making it impossible to click on buttons which were off-screen. Igor recognized a problem and said he had corrected it. However, I don't use Start-up Window and did not realise that it has been the way it is now since Igor "corrected" it. Having spoken with some people who DO use it the concensus is that it would be nice if it did fill the screen. Sorry about the confusion. DaveG

Jeb, See my post above? DaveG