Peter Coles
-
Posts
117 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Peter Coles
-
-
Peter
I am about as non technical as you will ever find in Photography and much of what you said about camera clubs I fully agree with, but this..No No No No
AV is all about presentation, image size and format is essential to that presentation. It is also very clear that this issue concerns people.
Anyway, this is the way of a forum and subjects often drift and become of interest to a wider audience, they peter out of their own accord when they are exhausted.
Relax
For me, Barry, all these "technical things" are only of interest if they contributute towards better communication. Quite often I find that "technical improvements" actually detract from better communication. If some clever trick or effect makes me think "That was clever", this is an interuption in any train of thought the author may have been trying induce. Any distracton which moves my eyes from where the author may have intended them to be in the direction of this distraction removes a few "brownie points" in my judgement; it may even prevent me from reaching the natural end of such a Sequence.
Peter
-
Colin
I have been making larger slide shows for almost two years now and I admit my style of animation is a lot more subtle than some I see. Having said that all our PC's handle what I make fine, but you could check your PC and monitor easily, by trying one of my sequences.
Go HERE and you will find that Everlasting Home and Botanical Artistry both have animation, see how one or both of them perform on your current Computer/screen setup
When I started this thread, I did not, for one moment, imagaine it would end up being this technical discussion. You know, I used to go to Camera Clubs where the discusssion was about such technical stuff, rather than about the nature of what was being produced (or in most cases not produced!),
My simple question received a simple and helpful reply for which I am eternally grateful. The rest may rest in peace, as far as I am concerned !
-
Having been involved in AV for many years (starting in slide tape days) and having been successful in some competitions I would like to add my take on AV competitions.
As others have indicated I also feel that it is what you produce thats important not necessarily how and with what. For example I have seen some good photography from a budget priced compact camera and I have seen some poor photography from very expensive equipment. I no longer belong to a photographic club but when I did it used to annoy me when the first question asked of your work was what camera do you use.
I appreciate that certain standards are required, ie sharp images (unless deliberate softness is required), correct exposure and image composition. We need good image manipulation software and in our case quality AV composition software, ie PTE. We need knowledge, which we gain from more experienced AV producers and this forum, but above all, including technicalities, we need the interest and love of our hobby to create something that not only we are pleased with but hopefully attracts other peoples attention. We can of course also try and push the boundries which appears to be frowned upon by some of the old school. Do it your own way and ENJOY it.
The most enjoyable things in my life, apart from my family, are photography and music. To bring these interests together and give my photography a purpose I compose AV sequences. Photography makes me see more of the world around me (good and bad) and music gives me various emotions.
I get as much, if not more, pleasure when I show my work to friends and acquaintances and get feed back such as 'I have never noticed that before' or 'how beautiful that sequence was' or even 'thats interesting'.
I have done some judging and lecturing on AV, I have never and will never set myself up as an expert as clearly I am not. I usually try and introduce myself merely as someone who has some experience of AV production and if I can be of any help I will try and give as much information as I possibly can or advise where help can be sort.
I sometimes wonder if AV competitions could be judged by non AVers/Photographers just to see what the result would be because then it would truly be based on impact/interest retention etc with techniques, technical ability and rules probably not being understood and therefore not being taken into consideration.
Brianh
On this last point, Brian (Harvey, I suspect!) , there have been a number of occasions when other "artists" have been invited to Judge our AV Events. I have selected a few on a number of occasions (sometimes to the annoyance of other AVers!) They do add a different perspective to the Judgement, but on the whole the results seem similar, That's not all that surprising when art matches art, but rarely does an audience vote match the Judges' vote completely.
I think the best line to take is that if we feel that for some reason the Judges and the rules don't fit what we would like, then we have a choice: to take part or to not take part.
On the whole I decide to take part. After all most of these Judges and Organisers have some expertise that I don't have - ............. thank God!
If I had decided not to take part then I would not have the 200+ International AV Awards I currently possess.
The skip would not be as full when my wife clears up after I've gone !!!!!
I'm not at all certain there is a shelf for AV Trophies in "The Kingdom" - and maybe not even one waiting there, in case we ever win the Wold Cup again!
-
I'm no expert on resolution of projectors. However, I imagine that the format of the projector used would matter; if it is designed to show 1920 x 1080 images and the screen is in this format, then any Sequences produced in any 4 x 3 format would be at a disadvantage as they would not use the whole of the screen.
At the present time isnt it more likely to be the other way around? A 1024*768/ 1400*1050 projector being used to play a 1920*1080 /1920*1200 sequence. However, even if it were the way you suggest why is that a disadvantage? With a projected image the size difference isnt going to have much impact. The judges are still going to see a large image on screen and any judge who marks down a great sequence because it was not as big as the preceding one should not be asked to judge again.
Most UK and European Festivals seem to have used the 4 x 3 format and until recently have specified 1024 x 768.
Isn't that because projectors were mostly 1024*768 resolution and slide show software of a few years ago could not cope with larger images anyway. That isnt the case anymore as we see with PTE, which can handle far larger images and we can see the monitor resolution/format trend by looking at the ongoing forum poll.
I think the biggest issue by far for those enthusiasts who create images at the size they want them to project (I guess that includes most enthusiasts) are the settings in the Project Options > Screen Tab > Size of slide and the Fixed Size of Slide (in pixels) That is what I set first of all when making a sequence and then projection on any projector/screen resolution will be fine. Those settings lock in your selections for resolution and display size and no animation will be seen outside of those settings. I think this is one of the best changes made in PTE.
For the future, I suppose it will be possible for another issue to crop up for those who create a sequence at 1024*768 and then have it displayed on a projector running 1400*1050. While it will not affect the format, unless those settings are set correctly in the Screen tab the slide show may be enlarged from its 1024 size to 1400 with a slight loss of image quality.
Perhaps the major AV events of the future may have to state the intended projection resolution in the original invitation to enter?
It doesnt alter the fact that the size the slide show is made and the Jpg quality settings are the choice of the author and have no place in any rules.
I certainly agree with your last point, Barry.
"The judges are still going to see a large image on screen and any judge who marks down a great sequence because it was not as big as the preceding one should not be asked to judge again."
The folk who choose Judges are not always even as sensible as Judges !!!
Rarely, these days, is there a "bad" Sequence shown at any International. Judges, on the whole, seem to do their job quite well, and they seem to favour those Sequences which have used all aspects of the medium well: music, words images and transitions; in other words, getting their "message" across exceptionally well. Things which distract from such perfection are those which get lower marks. I do recall in the "bad old days" 800 x 600 Sequences being regarded as "distractions from perfection", when they did not fill the whole screen. Any screen which obviously has a set size, must have a maximum size of image and consequently a maximum number of pixels which can be seen on that screen. Of course, an excellent Sequence is still excellent if it does not quite fit the screen, but at the end of the showing of say 100 Sequences, some Sequences do seem more excellent than others. Many things can affect the judgement of such excellence and a lot of these are, of course, subjective, so no wonder Judges do get it "wrong" most of the time !!!!
If we notice Judges getting it "wrong" in not selecting "our" work, eventually we don't bother entering such events and just moan that most Judges are no good get it "wrong" most of the time becuase they are not proper experts !!!! If they were really good Judges and proper experts, then you and I would win ALL the time and that would be very very boring.
-
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).
I'm no expert on resolution of projectors. However, I imagine that the format of the projector used would matter; if it is designed to show 1920 x 1080 images and the screen is in this format, then any Sequences produced in any 4 x 3 format would be at a disadvantage as they would not use the whole of the screen.
Most UK and European Festivals seem to have used the 4 x 3 format and until recently have specified 1024 x 768. The first time the RPS tried a few Digital Sequences in their International, there was a mixture of 800 x 600 and 1024 x 768. Last year the RPS Nationals used a 1400 x 1050 projector and I wondered if there would be any problem with pngs, so I asked one of my Clubs if they would bring a 1400 x 1050 projector to my home for me to try a few Sequences. There was no problem with any 4 x 3 format Sequences; in fact it was difficult to tell which were 1024 x 768 and which were 1400 x 1050. I did wonder what would happen to the pngs within a 3 x 2 format Sequence, but no one complained at the event. Interesting enough it was a 1920 x 1080 Sequence which won the event overall. I had two entries; one made with 1024 x 768 and the other 1400 x 1050. The 1024 x 768 Sequence won an Award; the 1400 x 1050 did not !!!
Peter
DG
-
GOOD LAUGHS FOR THE DAY
SEE
Expert. Ex is the Latin word for something that is apart from the main body and spurt is a drip under pressure. An expert is a drip under pressure and out of the mainstream. Here's a picture of such a drip.
http://www.amazingribs.com/tips_and_technique/cooking_glossary.html
http://www.flickr.com/photos/eric_tank/2678855518/
KEN
I continue to be amazed at what gets added to a simple question and answer.
However, being an expert at winning International AV Awards (currently well over 200 of them!), I do welcome putting myself in front of these other "experts". I accept their expertise; I play their games; I read their rules; I do approve of such things as they provide me with deadlines. I don't really take Competitions all that seriously, but when I win an Award, I treat it as some sort of bonus. Sometimes, you see, THEY do get it right !!!!!!!!!!!!! Then I approve of these 'ere experts !!!! From time to time some of these "experts" decide I am an "expert"; then I get to do what they do.
I don't mind !!!!
Peter
-
Maureen/David
well said
ken
When I asked my straight-forward question. I got a straight-forward answer. (well, two actually)
These were very helpful.
I did not imagine that so much other stuff could be attached to the simple question and answers.
"Expert's?" !!!
I like the definition: "An expert is a drip under pressure" !!!
Most real experts listen well and write and speak infrequently.
I try to be an expert listener (and reader of the PTE wisdom on this site).
Peter
-
Thanks, Barry.
This seems to have worked OK on my computer.
I expect it to be OK on projectors too , but I have yet to try this.
It does seem that I do not need to make a mask.
Many thanks again for the speedy replies.
Peter
-
Peter
Try ticking the box in the Project Options Screen tab that says Fixed size slide (in pixels) and make sure the size of the slides boxes reflect the 1920*1080 size of your show.
-
I have made one or two Sequences recently with the format 1920 x 1080, but they are played either on my computer which is in a 4 x 3 format or on my projector which is 1024 x 768.
The pngs which form movement passing through the 1920 x 1080 frame show in the black areas above and below the letter-box frame. Can this be prevented with some button within PTE or do I need to make a black mask. If the latter is true then please advise me on the simplest way of doing so.
I expect that when played on a projector 1980 x 1080 the problem does not occur but as my stuff is shown on different systems, I do need to ensure that such distractions do not appear before any audience.
Also, recently I showed some 4 x 3 format Sequences, on a 1400 x 1050 projector and one or two of the frames were still 1024 x 768 within a frame of 1400 x 1050. The owner of the projector did the projections and I did not wish to appear to be very critical. The 1024 x 768 images were projected smaller than the 1400 x 1050 images, so making a bit of a mess of the whole Sequence (well for me, anyway!) Others may have drifted off by then, as no-one commented adversly afterwards !!!!
Please advise.
Peter Coles
-
Hi Peter,
I can help you with that. If you will tell me how long your sequence is, I'll post a link for you to a short animation you can just copy and paste.
Best regards,
Lin
Thanks, Lin.
The Sequence is 3minutes 21seconds duration.
It would be nice to be able to have the snow coming and going and with different "flakes sizes" to denote distance away, but I expect this may be asking too much !!!
Peter
-
I am trying to find a way of making snow fall throughout a short Sequence. I know it has been done before, but I would like to download a "template", if this is possible to save me the bother of inventing the wheel again. Could someone point me in the right direction, please?
-
I enjoyed your tutorial, but if there is a template by theDom to make one by just inserting the six images, where can I find this?
-
Hi Peter,
Sure, the template is given freely for anyone to use, modify, experiment with, etc.
I'm in the process now of expanding it so that in a few weeks (it's a slow process for me) it will be able to handle up to about four minutes of video. Right now I have it up to about 44 seconds.
So as to not overload the graphics card, I have settled on 631 frames per slide then using multiple slides. The issue which is taking me much time is manually entering image numbers for each frame. JPD does this with Excel then merges the output into the PTE file but I'm not that confident in my Excel skills so it will be a few weeks until I have finished the complete template.
As it stands now, if you will tell me the length of your video clip I will try to post a version of the template for you which will allow that length up to about one minute.
To answer your question, the way you proceed is to first decompile your AVI, MPG, etc., into PNG frames then name them in order using IrfanView or other batch processing (Photoshop with and action, etc.) so that the names are image001.png, image002.png......
Place the template in a folder by itself then start PTE and open the videosimulate.pte file (this will be the name of the one I post which is customized for you). From the main menu select and copy the available slides (there will probably be three slides) then without closing PTE, open your slideshow where you want to insert the video and "Paste" the slides where you want the video to appear in your slide sequence. Copy your decompiled video data with the renamed (image001.png, image001.png, etc.) images into the folder with your other slides which will overwrite the tiny placeholder png files included with the template.
If you have fewer images in your decompiled video than the default number in the template, simply select and delete the object numbers (image3220.png, image3221.png, etc.) which are superfluous.
You can then use the parent frame at the top of each slide to position and size the video. If desired, you can insert a slide as a background. Just place your background slide as the top object above the frame. You can animate this background object or treat it as you would any other via keyframe, etc. You may also have any other objects, etc., in animation around the running video. Experimentation will help you decide.
The speed of the video as I have programmed it is about 30 frames per second. If you want to slow it down or speed it up (like slow motion or fast forward) just adjust the slide speed via "customize this slide". Leave the "Scale Keyframes in Objects" checked so that you don't loose any frames and the video will run faster or slower depending on what time you select for the slide. Remember, if you adjust the frame for position or size that to keep this size or position you must copy/paste the pan or zoom values from one slide to the other since there is a transparent slide change between image631.png and image632.png, etc.
I would suggest saving your original slideshow to a new name for the purpose of experimenting until you have the show completed with the video addition.
Let me know if you have questions....
Best regards,
Lin
Many thanks, Lin.
The Sequence is in currently early embrio. When I saw your rotating earth come from behind the sun, I thought maybe that would look good fading in and out of dissolving abstracts already on the screen. And maybe I could get the whole lot to disappear into a "black hole" which appeared within these dissolving abstracts! From what I had read, but not yet experimented with, I also imagined that two PTE files could now, within PTE 5.7, interact with each other; hence my experimental desire. The whole project is also part of an ambition I have to get a long-standing AV worker back into producing worthwhile Shows. He and his wife were (are) in many ways the father and mother of AV in the UK. His original work goes back almost 50 years - mine a mere 40 !!! His original best work was with abstracts interpreting music. Mine has almost without exception always relied on the spoken word and music, together with interacting visuals. So in my imagination, I had hoped to bring all this together to produce something memorable.
-
Hi Peter,
Here is a MediaFire third source link to all three in case the other two don't work:
http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=cfda814...04e75f6e8ebb871
I did, eventually, manage to download the file via your second site, even though it took me two attempts, initially being informed that I could not download it, but then being told I could continue.
Anyway, I thought it was very effective.
Am I allowed to use a section of it in a Sequence I have in mind - "String Theory".
If so, how do I do that? Can it come in via "objects and animation" or is there now an alternative way, though incorporating one Sequence alongside another?
I would appreciate some guidance.
Peter
-
Lin, I think it must be a problem at my end, as the video would not come down either.
I'll try the other sites you have mentioned.
Peter
-
I tried to download both, but was informed that the download did not work and that I may be able to download these fron an alternative site. I tries that with no result - there no alternatives !
I'd love to witness what you have done but it seems I may be denied this priviledge.
Peter
-
I understand, from Peter Brown, that there is to be an article about the National AV Championships in the next edition of AV News, the magazine of the Royal Photographic Society Audio-Visual Group. This will contain my statement about trying a 1400 x 1024 projector brought to my home by Eddie Spence to play some of my 1024 x 768 Sequences which contained several .png images, and also my concern over Sequences which were other than 4 x 3 format which did not pay particular attention to the guidance within the "Information Pack". I hope this thread within Beechbrook, together with the forthcoming article by Peter Brown in AV News, will encourage an even more confident participation within our National Championships in Leicester later this year.
Peter
-
"The Great Darkroom in the Sky"
An AV worker was once very concerned about when he died, so he asked the local Vicar, if there were decent 1400 x 1050 projectors in heaven. The Vicar said he was not sure but he would try and find out! He would pray.
Next week, when asked about it, the Vicar said that there was good news and bad news!
Lets have the good news first: Yes, there are wonderful projectors up there, not only that but there are wonderful audiences too, who clap loudly at anything you have made, for as long as you like; even standing ovations are built-in to each performance!
What's the bad news?
Your first Show is next Tuesday!
Peter
-
"Also if you have any sequences with images set to original mode, be they panned, zoomed or png images, they will not be adjusted to fill the new resolution. So it is something to bear in mind when sending sequences off to competitions etc."
So what must the authors do then, poor things? So what must the authors do then?
Today, I received a digitised version of the most "Awarded" Sequence in the world, in all time. The words just happen to be written by me. Now, if this digitised version of the Sequence were to be sent in to an event using a 1400 x 1050 projector (which, incidentally, it has no chance of being sent, because the authors are aware of such problems!), it would not be shown to best advantage. All this seems rather sad to me and, in some ways, a retrogressive betrayal of our heritage.
Not quiet so, for this Sequence, "Mororway", is now to be shown in the oldest continuous Annual International AV Event in the world, later this year. In Epinal, France. It is here that digital AV was born, long, long before PTE was even thought of; when digital projectors cost more than BMWs and "crashed" even more frequently than their motor counterparts!
So what must the authors do now, poor things? So what must the authors do now?
What they do is cry, silently!
And they leave the technicians to pass by into their anonimity.
But for whom do they cry?
"Weep for yourselves, not me"!
Weep for your anonimity.
Peter
-
Think you should have pointed people directly to the web site for the UK Nationals Peter
I am sure you are right, Maureen, I was merely quoting from the bits of paper I received labelled "Information Pack" !
Following Eddie's visit, yesterday, before I invest in any "improved" projector, I would also like to know when a shorter focus lens would be available for such Optoma projectors. I find the digital Royale I have now so easy to use that I can arrive late and still start on time! No one, so far has complained about the image quality or the Sequences. More often than not, when I see several Sequences shown one after another, it is the Sequences that need improving rather than the projectors!
Peter
-
Dave
when i had to write operating instuctions we had to practice KISS and the lowest common denominator factor
we had to work on what we called "OPERATING DISCIPLE" FORMAT - a lot of "what if" came into the picture and they all had to be answered
there seems to be so many problems with aspect ratio and projectors -- imho i dont think a lot of people know how their hardware works --- they should be spending time RTM
instead of rushing out and buying a "cheap" projector they should be asking the RPS what the standard they use and act accordingly
I know " it is easy to say" but the results would show it. Instead of slapping your head trying to figure out what am i doing wrong the extra time would be used to relax with a pint or 2
ken
UK National Championships
I had some initial concerns about the way 1024 x 768 Sequences would play on a projector 1400 x 1050. I expressed these concerns to the organisers. Today, 30th May, friends from Leeds AV Group brought one of these projecters to my home, here at Lacy House Farm. I am considerably relieved to find that, provided the format is exactly the same, ie. 4 x 3, then all play OK. For any who have made Sequences with a 3 x 2 format, I would still have serious concerns unless, in PTE, under Project Options/Screen/ the "Fixed size of slide" is ticked. Otherwise, pngs would appear to come in from any black space above/and/orbelow the main frame of the jpg images. It is important that all authors, using any other than a 4 x 3 format, recognise this otherwise they could be disappointed with the performance of their entries, particularly if pngs are included.
This must reassure most authors and encourage them to send their Sequences to our most important National event. To find out more visit: www.avg.rps.org or contact brian-jeffs@tiscali.co.uk
-
If the older sequences all have the images set at the same size then all should be well.
However when some of the images are larger than others then the larger images will suddenly "jump out" in the new projections and fill more of the screen, depending on the fill screen settings.
Can be quite confusing when viewing.
Have Emailed you Peter.
Love Maureen
Thanks for that, Maureen.
To me it does seem very important that, when authors send Sequences to be viewed by others, there should be no confusion. Clear specific directions should be given as to what is required by Organisers of Events. It should never be a "suck-it-and-see" matter. When changes are made, clear expectations need to stated. If authors find their Sequences are played in a way that they were not made, they may decide not to bother sending them again.
Thanks for your e-mail; I have sent a zip of the Sequence you mentioned. Any comments would be appreciated.
Peter
-
Hi Peter
PNG files will be re-scaled in exactly the same manner as jpgs, so from this point of view there will be no problem. The potential issue is if the png files have smaller pixel dimensions than your background jpgs, then there is a chance that the relative positions of the pngs will shift on screen. Sometimes this might not be noticeable, but if you have some that need to be precisely aligned it would be best to save the png image on exactly the same canvas size as the background. This might entail having a large area of transparancy, but will preserve the relative positions exactly as the scaling will be applied to images of the same dimensions.
Ian
Thanks, Ian.
Your response is most helpful.
This is exactly the sort of thing I suspected, but as I do not yet have a 1400 x 1050 projector, I could not test it.
I have too many Sequences already made to go and alter them all. I'm always too busy looking forward to spend a lot of time in the past. I also expect that we may get a few others who notice minor differences which they regard as major. That's part of the problem: we all notice differences in our own Sequences, whereas others may not! What can seem important to an author may not even be noticed as significant by most viewers.
I would still value any comments from others who may have noticed differences in a switch from 1024 x 768 to 1400 x 1050 (or to any other format).
Peter
Key [SOLVED]
in General Discussion
Posted
My Computer system failed and I have now bought a new Computer.
I have downloaded PTE 6.5 but need a key and instructions how to re-start.
Your records will show that I have purchased the delux version.
Peter Coles
My e-mail address is peter@3-c.coop