Lin Evans

Hi Tom, Looks like a viable solution if one has a video editor which does chroma key. I couldn't find any information about the price for Atlantis. Do you happen to know what it costs? I saw something on a review which indicated $35 but couldn't find a link on the Atlantis site to confirm. I guess they would prefer you download and install first. The only thing which would prevent me from buying it is the lack of support for adding images to the document. That's something they need to add to make it a real value for publishing. Most "Ebook" presentations have lots of pictures as well as illustrations, so something like MS Publisher seems to be necessary. The rather unique thing is the sounds and ability to change the color of the background. I see how this would easily facilitate chroma key. Chroma key is one of two important features which the competition has that PTE lacks which makes it possible to do many things with Producer which are difficult with PTE. With PTE it takes the extra step of doing the chroma key extraction and video recode outside using 3rd party software. Hopefully, Igor will be able to implement video masking and chroma key extraction - both are possible with Producer. Best regards, Lin

Hi Xaver, I don't keep up with what Youtube is doing in terms of format - the last time I downloaded a Youtube video it came to me as Flash FTP so I assumed that's what they were still doing. Apparently they haven't changed older uploads to an AVC/H.264 format. Whatever they are doing, it destroys the smoothness of the uploaded XVID AVI and the transcoded result looks very much like the MP4 h.264 created by PTE. Excellent for stills, but for complex animations, not so much. Best regards, Lin

O.K., I've clearly established for my purposes that the XVID codec with PTE creates a much better original AVI than the MP4 h.264 output from PTE, or the conversion from MP4 to AVI from the PTE output. It plays perfectly smooth on my systems as well as via a USB device on my Samsung 1080P television. However - and it's a big HOWEVER, neither play correctly when uploaded to Youtube. The Youtube conversion has the identical issue as the MP4 h.264 played on my systems or on my television. Something in the conversion destroys the smoothness of playback on complex animations. I uploaded the perfectly smooth XVID AVI to Youtube and the conversion looks essentially like the MP4 h.264 upload. It has the same issues so though there is a very "big" advantage in my experience with smoothness in play on my computers "and" on my television with the XVID codec, the improvements are lost when Youtube converts to Flash. Best regards, Lin

Hi Gary, I see the difference but I can't account for it. On all five of my systems the output from Kantaris is perfect. There are lots of potential variables and it's difficult to know exactly what might cause the differences. Perhaps there are system issues which make a particular computer more compatible with one or the other player. Best regards, Lin

Hi Xaver, I don't think it's a resource issue. If it's "special HVV support" then that's possible, but here's my experience. I have five computer systems at this location - three running Win XP SP3 and two running Win 7 (one Win 7 Professional and One Win 7 Home Edition). I also have a 40" Samsung LED 1080p Television. The XVID AVI version plays perfectly on all five computers and also on the Samsung. No shimmer, no jerky motion and excellent sharpness and quality overall. Multiple compiles using PTE to create the MP4 h.264 "all" play the same. The opening sequence is "terrible" on each. I've tried various bitrates, single pass, double pass and using PTE to convert to AVI. The playback is identical in each case on every computer as well as on the Samsung TV. The mp4 h.264 version uploaded to Youtube by Wnsoft plays the same way on each of my computers. The opening sequence is very bad when the 3D transform rotates are done. The 3D cube rotation is not smooth. With the XVID codec version it is perfect. This is what leads me to believe that the XVID codec is simply superior for animation. As far as still images with minimal animation, the mp4 h.264 images look perfect, however, as soon as any complex animations are used the quality of playback is simply not satisfactory. Whatever the cause - the mp4 h.264 output from PTE needs to be addressed because the output simply isn't suitable for animation. Best regards, Lin

Hi Ken, That's good to hear! It plays the same way on both of my systems (XP and Win 7) so I think it's a wrap... I hope Igor can put it into PTE (it's open source) and if the next version or version 8 has BluRay burn capability, this codec will provide far better performance than MP4 h.264 as it's presently implemented. The difference is like night and day for the opening sequence. With mp4 h.264 the "edges" of the snow scene break into two parts during rotation. It's as if there were two separate images "sandwiched" together front and back with a separation between them which is "visible" during rotation, but not really there because when I do a screen capture it's clean. It almost looks like a dropped frame situation during the 3D transform rotate. The problem is that Youtube, Vimeo, etc., only accept MP4 h.264 and Flash as far as I can determine. I'm going to try to upload the XVID to Youtube later this afternoon and see what happens. Best regards, Lin

Hi Ken, The latest XVID codec is for all current Windows versions including Win 7, XP, Vista and 2000. The video file is not the same one you use to test with, it's the one which you can access via Youtube or download in exe format from the Wndoft site, but the one with XVID codec is only on the link here. You have to have the XVID codec or it won't play. Here's a link to the one I just installed on my Win 7 notebook - it works fine: http://www.xvidmovies.com/codec/ Best regards, Lin

In searching for a solution to render a video which plays back virtually identical to a PTE executable when using complex animations, I have been disappointed with MP4 h.264 as a solution. MP4 simply doesn't encode some complex animations smoothly. I created a PTE demo show which uses some of the opening sequences from my original PTE demo from a few years ago which is commonly used to test video card response because it has some complex animations which really challenge the GPU in many systems. This latest demo runs beautifully as an exe file, but the opening sequences which consist of a snowfall scene which is rotated and subjected to 3D transforms fail badly as an mp4 h.264 output. In a search for a solution, I've tried high bit-rates, double pass encoding and myriad other combinations to try to find a video solution. This morning I tried creating AVI files with various codecs and found a solution which creates a video virtually identical to the exe file in quality. By using the XVID MPEG-4 video codec with XVID high def, single pass profile, target quantizer 4.00 at max quality, I was able to create a video output virtually identical to the EXE file when played with the Kantaris Media Player. This video will not play smoothly when dropped directly in PTE, but will undoubtedly allow burning a PTE show to BluRay and probably to AVCHD which is virtually identical to the EXE version.... Anyone who would like to test this - here's a link to the video. You will need a suitable player. I suggest Kantaris Media Player (free) and also the free XVID codec which can be downloaded here: http://www.afterdawn...codecs/xvid.cfm (older Windows versions) or here: http://www.xvidmovies.com/codec/ (Win 7, Vista) http://www.lin-evans...tingPTE_vid.zip (about 123 meg download) Best regards, Lin

Hi Jose, Yes, that's the "not perfect part." Video masking has been discussed and Igor is thinking about how it might be implemented. We can only wait and see... Best regards, Lin

Hi Jose, I've been thinking about it, and "maybe" there is an easier way. It's not "perfect," but it would be very easy to do and very quick. Here's how to proceed - also I have included a little sample PTE file for you to look at - link below. What you do is go into Photoshop or other editor and type in white letters (255, 255, 255) on a black background (zero, zero, zero) so you type your entire text that you want to appear as type. This will become your mask. Then you place this over your video and adjust the position and size to size and position your text accordingly. You will be able to see the white letters on the black background. Next you choose the color you want for your text and create a solid color jpg which will be panned as the "image" inside the mask. You will set keyframes to determine the speed that the "text" appears and the text color jpg will be "dragged across revealing the text in that color as it crosses the text mask. You then adjust the speed of the reveal of your text to correspond with the typing sound you use. The letters of your text are revealed then sequentially. It's not "perfect" but as you can see in the sample, it's easy, quick and may be sufficient. http://www.lin-evans.org/demo/typing1.zip Best regards, Lin

Hi Lee, Learning the possibilities which are latent in PTE can be an intriguing pursuit. It does take time to learn many of the techniques, but there are myriad helpful tutorials available and also lots of "templates" both free and inexpensive which can help the new user of PTE quickly produce some very sophisticated and impressive results. The first thing I would suggest is that you avail yourself of the free tutorials which cover the vast majority of possibilities from simple pan, zoom and rotate through very esoteric things such a creating three dimensional rotating objects. Let me give you two links below. The first is to my own site where I keep my free tutorials which are also available on the PTE forum at the second link. There are numerous other tutorials available as well. Browsing through these may save you many hours of "head scratch" and frustration when trying to achieve your presentation goals... http://www.learnpte.com (click on the tutorials link) http://www.picturestoexe.com/forums/index.php?/forum/8-tutorials-and-articles/ Best regards, Lin

Hi Jose, Unfortunately, it would not be a solution for what you want to do. In the case you described, the only way I know which might work involves creating your text in one of two ways, The first way would be to create the text as a PNG file with transparent background, then move a mask to reveal the characters one at a time. This would involve extensive coordination of the mask movement via keyframe. This method would work well for a small amount of "type" but probably would be too labor intensive for any lengthy paragraph. The second way derives from the first and that would be to create individual characters as PNG files in the same manner. Then reveal the individual characters via opacity keyframing. Best regards, Lin

Hi Jose, I "think" this was where I downloaded it: http://www.fonts101.com/search/astoria+titling.aspx The important thing is that you have one which works now!! Best regards, Lin

Hi, I downloaded Astoria Titling and it works correctly for me - I didn't convert it, just installed it. I'm using Win XP home edition, SP3. I'm at a loss to explain why it isn't working for you... Here's a link to the one I downloaded - see if it works for you... http://www.lin-evans.org/demo/astoriatitling.ttf Here's a sample:

Hi Isabel, Actually, there are very few reasons to use an AVI for your shows any longer. It can definitely be confusing because some codecs are fairly "common" and some are not and one is never sure whether the system the file will be played on has the proper codec installed. By using the "Publish" feature and choosing "HD Video for PC and Mac" you can create an MP4 h.264 which will be acceptable to virtually all users whether MacIntosh or Window based. You have the choice of file size and can create anything from a small dimension show to full HD (high definition) such as 1080P (1920x1080 pixels). I would recommend using this feature rather than creating an AVI. The quality is excellent and it's pretty much an automated process. Best regards, Lin

Hi Isabel, Actually, it is well worth the upgrade. As with all versions, the upgrade to the basic PTE program is free and you only need to pay for the two year cycle upgrade of Video Builder. There are lots of great new features which you will enjoy. To begin with, audio now can be faded in and out, you can have multiple tracks and even a waveform envelope to visually handle synchronization with images. It's possible to set where to begin within a song and also to set fade-in and fade-out. You can do many neat things with audio and there will be even more improvements with version 7.5 which will begin beta testing before long. We can now drop in video clips and treat them like any other object. This means it's possible to size, position, use three dimensional transfers and lots of other neat things. PTE now has built in masking and borders around images, etc. Zooming in and out and panning are very easy to do as well as myriad other things which were not available early on. Once you get version 7.0 up and running, you may want to avail yourself of the many free tutorials available. I have created over 40 myself which will help you quickly learn the ropes. I will give you two links. The first is a "shortcut" to my own tutorials which are here on the forum as well as on my own website. Mine are in avi format so you can watch and listen while I walk you through the various features and how to accomplish different goals. There are numerous other tutorials as well and it's worth looking at them in no particular order since they are mostly independent of each other and don't make too many assumptions about prior experience. http://www.learnpte.com (click on Tutorials link - this is on my website) http://www.picturestoexe.com/forums/index.php?/forum/8-tutorials-and-articles/ (internal link to all tutorials) Best regards, Lin

Hi Isabel, Long time ... Glad to see you back here! Actually, it's no longer possible to directly upload to Vimeo because they refused to release their new and changed API protocols with some lame excuse, and attempted to "hold up" users for fees. In general, it was an unsatisfactory situation which prevented both Wnsoft and Photodex (Proshow Gold and Proshow Producer) users from automatic uploads. In order to upload to Vimeo, you will have to create your MP4 and upload manually as in days before the automatic upload capabilities. There was a good bit of discussion about this issue when it first happened. The principals of Vimeo apparently don't particularly care for slideshow people and are courting only video producers. They gave a really poor excuse that they thought it was "too easy" for slideshow people to violate copyrights (ignoring that it is just as easy to "copy and use" video clips as it is to copy and use still images.). In short, some of us including myself have simply boycotted Vimeo since. I got the distinct impression that we were not welcome there unless we wanted to pay them so I pulled all my support for that venue. This, of course, is my personal opinion and in no way reflects any official view by Wnsoft, etc. Best regards, Lin

Hi Thomas, Although there is presently no way to manipulate the audio on a video clip other than to mute it (this will be addressed in the next issue of PTE), it actually, isn't too difficult to achieve what you describe right now with PTE - Audacity isn't needed. There are at least two ways to accomplish this with PTE. The way I would approach this is as follows. First complete the slideshow and pay no attention to the audio - that is run your PTE audio mp3 background "and" your video complete with audio. Next, carefully look at the precise time your video clip begins and ends. Next, duplicate the PTE MP3 on the same track (insert the same audio selection twice). On the first iteration, use either the waveform envelope or simply the "duration" of the PTE track and the fade out feature to fade out at the precise time the video clip begins. Then for the second iteration (duplicate MP3) set the audio to begin at the precise place on the mp3 time where the track one ended and fade in at the precise time the video clip is expiring. This may "sound" complex, but really is quite easy to do and involves start times, duration and offset. Please download and watch my AVI tutorials # 25 and # 27 here for clarification and instructions on precisely how to achieve this: http://www.learnpte....earn/learn.html (click on "tutorials) for # 27 In this zipped archive are both a PTE sample to play with and an exe format tutorial. Best regards, Lin

Hi Eric, Do you just want to attenuate the sound, or "mute" the sound? The PTE mute actually "mutes" or "kills" the sound completely. To attenuate or diminish the volume level, you would need to do it in a video editor, but I assumed when you said you wanted to "mute" the sound you meant stop it entirely which is generally what "mute" means. Best regards, Lin

Hi Eric, There is no need to edit your clip to mute the sound. Just put the original or converted clip in PTE, go to Objects and Animations Properties Tab and click beside "Mute Audio." Best regards, Lin

Hi Jean-Claude, Sorry, I did miss your post and that's a great program which will be "very" helpful. I couldn't get your link to work - so I looked up your post and edited your post to link to it. Best regards, Lin

Hi Mike, Actually, there is an undocumented feature you might want to experiment with. This feature will be documented in the next version of PTE, but for now it is still "experimental" in nature. While in the Objects and Animations screen, hold down the Ctrl Key and Press "E". You can then move all keyframes to the right by typing in a positive number and to the left by putting a "minus" sign and a number. You can also move them by using the up and down arrows. You can't select individual keyframes to move - this undocumented feature works only on all keyframes together, but it might help you. Best regards, Lin

Hi Mike, There is no way to actually "split" a slide, but you can "duplicate" it by copy/paste in the main slide list and then rearrange the time for either. The keyframes can be handled in two ways automatically, depending on whether or not you check "scale keyframes in objects (on time change)" If you click and check this feature, then when you shorten or lengthen the time for an individual slide, the actual relationship between adjacent keyframes remains constant. For example, if you were to have a pan followed by a zoom in and zoom out programmed, and you had placed a checkmark in this block, then changed the time display for this slide from 10 seconds to six seconds, everything would happen exactly as it did before only it would happen faster. The same "relative" times between keyframes would be maintained. So if you were to take actions which you had programmed and assign them a "percentage" of overall time, this percentage based on the total slide time would remain the same after you had changed the slide's display time. On the other hand, if you do "not" check this and you add time to the slide, the actions will remain identical except the extra time would be added after your keyframes. But what if you "subtracted time?" Then if the new time were "less" than the time encompassed by the keyframes, you would loose whatever was previously happening in that time period chopped off the end. So you "probably" will be able to do what you are attempting by duplicating (copy/paste) the first slide then applying the above rules. Best regards, Lin

Hi Mike, Actually, though what you want to do is not terribly difficult, it is rather complex and you "probably" would be advised to buy theDom's template and study it to see how it's achieved. When you put multiple images on a single background, you have two basic issues to deal with. The first issue is that each image lies on a separate layer. as you zoom in on an image, unless it's the top layer image, the other images will remain visible unless you keyframe their opacity to zero. Then to see subsequent images, you must keyframe them back to full opacity. This process must be repeated for each image unless you duplicate the original image on subsequent slides with the image to be zoomed in on in the top layer. Perhaps that's the easiest way to accomplish this, but you need to understand how layers work and such. The bottom line is that this is a fairly grandiose project for your first one. I can make you a sample and show you how to do it, but I fear you will get lost in the process unless you first get a good background in using PTE. The essence is that you create your initial image complete with all the small images which might be pinned to a bulletin board with push-pins (made of small png files with transparency). You then copy and paste this first slide as many times as you have images to scroll to and zoom in on. Then you modify each subsequent slide by moving the image to be zoomed in on to the top layer so that when you zoom, none of the other images will be superimposed on the main subject. Then you simply go to each successive image, zoom in on the subject, and then zoom back out to the original frame. It will "appear" that you are always returning to the same image of the "set" of pictures, but really you will be going through the "set" of duplicate image but with the one you intend to zoom in on being on the top layer of the one displayed. Best regards, Lin

Hi Ken, There is something wrong with the forum software. I've noticed this in the past. When you added the link, all the internal code suddenly became visible and it was almost impossible to read the text. The screen image looked very much like Microsoft Word when you use "Reveal Codes" so all the supposedly hidden formatting codes which give line breaks, paragraph breaks, etc., were visible. I've noticed for some time now that when I try to add links for my tutorials, things just don't work right. Sometimes what I type disappears, sometimes it goes nuts like it did after your added the link today. What Rick saw was a total mess and I'm absolutely certain that's not how you left it after adding the link. It's a forum software issue and we need to have Igor look at it and see what is happening because it can be very annoying. I think Rick thought someone intentionally made a mess of his post, and obviously that wasn't the case. He really "should" know better and not fly off the handle until he found out what happened - but that's something only he can control. The point is that you were only doing what you are supposed to do as a moderator and the software created a mess. I tried to straighten it out and I "hope" it doesn't happen again, but there is no guarantee until we find out what is causing the issue. Best regards, Lin