Lin Evans

Hi Rick, You probably should wait and find out what happened before jumping to conclusions and getting all pushed out of shape. It appears that a forum software snafu has caused the issue from what I can determine. The only thing that was done by the moderator was to "add" a link to Beechbrook. I'll see if I can fix the problem.... I "think" it's fixed. There is an issue with the forum software when trying to add links. It's not working correctly and sometimes does this - there is absolutely no intent by "anyone" at Wnsoft or moderators to do anything but "help" make it easier to reach Beechbrook. Best regards, Lin

Hi Peter, The values you are seeing refer to the innate storage capacity of different types of media. "Standard" DVD's (DVD-5) have 4.7 gigabytes of capacity of which "most" is available to write your data to, but some is reserved for necessary housekeeping files. The 8.5 is for double (layered) - correction - correct Gayland - thanks! DVD media (DVD-9) which some use but not seen nearly as often. Some of the relatively tiny (physical diameter) DVD blanks (DVD-1) used by primarily by advertisers only hold 1.4 gig. There are also other types, but the line has to be drawn somewhere.... See below for a better explanation... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD Best regards, Lin

Hi Xaver, The two which I have used which work well for me are Nero and Ulead Movie Factory with their new plugin. There are several others which I have "heard" work well, but I have no personal experience with. I'm very confident to recommend Nero because it's probably the most compatible with more hardware. http://www.afterdawn.com/guides/archive/burn_avchd_with_nero_burning_rom.cfm Best regards, Lin

Hi Peter, I think perhaps you might be thinking of the "media" type and perhaps using the term DVD in a generic sense. DVD has a very specific meaning and that is essentially either NTSC or PAL resolution. Neither of these are anywhere close to HD quality. However, and depending on what type of player your customer has - it "may" be possible to burn an AVCHD format on a DVD media blank. AVCHD is very similar to BluRay in quality, but in order to play an AVCHD the end user must have a BluRay player which is compatible with playing AVCHD. Not all are such. AVCHD can be burned without a BluRay burner by any of several software packages. It uses a standard DVD burner and standard DVD media to burn this format to the media, but it can only be played back with a compatible BluRay player. The down side is that not all BluRay players will recognize AVCHD and the other down side it that you are limited in the amount of data you can physically fit on a DVD media blank at the much higher HD resolution. If you have time to experiment, you could burn a sample and send them to test. It "might" be the answer you are looking for. Best regards, Lin

Or just click on "File" "Create Backup in Zip". This will zip up your entire project with all necessary files. Post this using "MediaFire" or other service and we can take a look and see how to correct your problem. Best regards, Lin

Hi, What is the "background" slide? Is it just the black screen of the display or have you placed a jpg, etc., image as your background? If you are using a photo as the background, you will need to set the opacity of the background slide to zero by keyframe also to prevent it from being visible as you change the opacity of other slides. I believe the reason your problem has not yet been solved, is that it's not actually clear "precisely" what you are doing. If you could clearly articulate the situation, I'm certain that we can very quickly solve the issue for you. Best regards, Lin

Hi Robert, It's really too bad that there is this rift between the aspect ratios of cameras and that chosen by the video entertainment and display manufacturers. The wide format has not been completely accepted by the movie industry. At least here in the U.S., IMAX still generally uses the old aspect ratio pretty much corresponding to the 3:2 of the camera industry for their super resolution 3D output. On the other hand, general cinema productions use the 16:9 or 16:10 (I'm not certain which) ratio commonly seen on home DVD and BluRay movies. It's a difficult thing for the AV enthusiast, because it requires the photographer to either purchase a camera which "allows" shooting by using only a part of the sensor to get the wide angle, or shooting wide all the time so one can "crop" to suit the new format. The video modes automatically "crop" to the 16:9 mode for compliance with the HD 720 or HD 1080 interlaced or progressive protocols. It then sort of forces the AV enthusiast to avoid video in the production, crop the rest to match the video or crop the video to match the stills. Fortunately, we can do it all with PTE because by using the provided features we can effectively crop the video non destructively to match 3:2 or 4:3, etc. We just need to be careful when shooting to again, either shoot wide with stills or constrain the important parts of our video to a reduced width so we can display them to match. It would be so nice if these disparate industries could get in sync.... Best regards, Lin

Hi Gary, The "border" size is actually designated by "pixel" dimensions. I'm not certain why you would see a different size unless your video was "near" the edge of the screen area or if the color was so close to the color of you video that they blend. The border width is absolute but surrounds the image or video and the "position" is based on that. You can change independently change the width or height of the video, and thereby what is actually "displayed" by altering the Canvas size, but the actual "border" should, as far as I know, conform to the outer periphery of your video's dimensions. I would wait until Igor returns and send him a sample to see if there may be a bug of some sort or whether it might have to do with something relative to a particular video. Best regards, Lin

Hi Robert, LOL - I wasn't clear enough. What I was referring to as "our purposes" was my purposes and Tom's purposes. Actually, on my 40" HD Samsung LED television, I see no relevant differences between 720p and 1080p video from my S30 IS and my very best dSLR HD Video. They are both superb. The "only" differences are that with my full frame dSLR I can use fast lenses and do cinematic shallow depth of field frames. Qualitatively, there are no perceptible differences. Two megapixel resolution doesn't challenge either a good bridge camera or a dSLR. Of course the dSLR "generally" does better at high ISO, but "most" videographer specialists have little desire to shoot video in poor lighting and try to make it noise free for production purposes. Of course if you absolutely need 1080p video, then many of the bridge cameras are not the right tool. On the other hand, if you need great zoom range then there are only a few lenses such as the Sigma 50-500 OS which will allow decent zoom flexibility for those special needs for the dSLR. With a Canon, Nikon, Sony or other "full frame" model dSLR you get exactly 50-500 mm. With a so called "crop factor" Canon (1.6x) you get 80-800 mm. With a Nikon (1.5x) you get 75-750mm - likewise with Sony and the Sigma SD1. With other Sigma models (SD9, SD10, SD14, SD15) which are 1.7x you get 85-850 mm. So the range with a dSLR "can" be extensive for video, but this is a very large and heavy lens and has some vignetting with wide angle and full frame dSLR's. The beauty of the little bridge camera is that you can easily hand hold and correct for the minimal shake in software. You have a one button push with your thumb while you are shooting stills to "instantly" begin shooting video and the ability to press the shutter release at any time to capture a full resolution still frame while you are shooting video. Then there is that fantastic "up to 140x digital zoom" which really works! It's not a gimmick. There is absolutely no question that PTE needs to support the highest available video resolution. In the next year or so, we will begin to see four megapixel video hit the market. There is already at least one dSLR supporting this - so it's definitely coming. Now how that might translate to a projection screen is still problematic because at least for now, I don't believe there are too many projectors available which support this resolution - I'm not absolutely certain of this, but I've not run across many yet. They are available - just really expensive and not in common use, at least not where I live. Best regards, Lin

Hi Tom, Actually, the "video" feature on the Canon which Eric had prior to going back to a dSLR is as good as the video on nearly any dSLR and more versatile than most dSLR's for video. He had a Canon S30IS which I also have, along with numerous dSLR's and other bridge cameras. The video on the S30 IS is outstanding. The issue is that video on today's dSLR's and bridge cameras doesn't exceed 1080p. In reality, as Igor has mentioned numerous times, there is little difference between 720p and 1080p in terms of what you actually "see" on your HD television. The nice thing about a bridge camera such as the S30 IS the ability to zoom and I mean really "zoom" when doing video. The S30 IS has a 35x zoom range taking one optically from about 24mm to 840mm. The "very usable" digital zoom goes to 140X. I've actually shot "good" images hand-held at 140X which I could not have done with "any" of my other 40 odd dSLR's, bridge cameras or digicams. All this also works with video. As for other options, my best "secondary" video comes from my very small and very portable Nikon 1V which is a 10 megapixel hybrid with a 2.7x crop sensor and removable lens system with excellent video. This little jewel shoots up to 60 frames per second at full 10 megapixel resolution for about 30 frames, will shoot with its mechanical shutter at 10 fps and also do 400 fps and 1200 fps in greatly reduced size video for slow motion. The camera has both an excellent "nearly a megapixel" LCD and a very good EVF. It's not inexpensive, but with an adapter will also take standard Nikon lenses. I use a 10-30mm (27-81mm equiv), a 30-110 mm (81-297mm equiv) and the Nikon adapter with a 55-300 VR (148 - 810mm equiv). Of all my dSLR's and bridge cameras with video capabilities, however, I believe that the little Canon S30IS is by far the most versatile for pure video. Of course the video purists will argue that the ability to shoot with a full frame dSLR and a super fast lens for complete control of depth of field is unequaled and they would be correct. The real issue is, however, how many of us really care about commercial quality video captures? Probably very few. What most are interested in is stability, image quality, zoom capability, proper focus, etc., and for those who want to make a major motion picture, the super expensive full frame sensors and fast lenses are there to be had as long as you have a friendly banker or deep pockets. It's sort of like doing special effects and sophisticated things with PTE. How many of us can afford the $1000 to purchase Adobe AfterEffects? If I had endless resources I would buy it for the "warp" video stabilization alone. It's second to none. But, and I'm rambling here, I'll have to settle for Mercalli 2.0 and I have to change operating systems to get that to work! LOL. Video can become much like a sailboat - a huge hole into which you throw money - LOL. I think you are on the right track. I've seen very little differences in video quality between most of the newer bridge cameras and expensive dSLR's. If it does 720p, has decent zoom, reasonable ISO and a stabilized lens or body, it should be quite satisfactory for our purposes. Best regards, LIn

Hi Daniel, Thanks very much - she is a very unique and talented lady. Making a slideshow with her amazing art and talent is always fun - just deciding where to start and stop is the challenge... Best regards, Lin

Hi Mick, Thank you so much - I know Lisah will really appreciate this too. I know what you are going through - I had the same experience two years ago in August - my prayers and hopes are that all will turn out for the best! Best regards, Lin

Hi Gayland, If you need any help figuring out how to load your MP4's into Xara - just let me know and I'll walk you through it step by step. When you have done it once, it will be exceedingly easy to do. Changing background color, etc., is simply a click and drag from the pallet thing and the new Xara 8 lets you embed fonts on your website so there is no longer a need to use "web safe" fonts or convert everything to graphics. Best regards, Lin

Hi Gayland, Thanks - I'll pass your remarks along to Lisah - she will appreciate it! I use Xara Web Designer. First, I output the MP4 directly from PTE at 800x600 resolution, though it's possible with Web Designer to use any resolution so HD 1080 is fine too if your slideshow is in 16:9 aspect ratio. Next you open Web designer - click "File" "New" - choose your web size and Import. Then it takes only seconds to create all the necessary code and Export "Web Site" to a folder. Just copy it all to your choice of folder on your website. The entire process of taking the PTE output, importing to Xara and creating the code to upload the show to your site literally takes less than 60 seconds. You can download a trial of Xara Web Designer (latest version 8) here: http://www.xara.com/us/ Best regards, Lin

Hi Charlie, Thanks! It's fun making slideshows of her and her art. Best regards, Lin

Hi Davy, Thanks! She is also a talented writer and accomplished dancer - now if I can teach her PTE she will be the "compete" woman - LOL. Lisah is really a great lady. He art career is finally beginning to blossom and hopefully she will soon be recognized for the truly great talent she has. Best regards, Lin

A slideshow I just did for my lady friend Lisah. It spans the years from 1980 through present and features Lisah, her art and her voice.... Nothing fancy - no animation - simple fades between images.... http://www.lin-evans.org/lisah/art.zip (about 29 meg zipped Windows exe) http://www.lin-evans...isah/artmac.zip (about 29 meg native MacIntosh executable) http://www.lin-evans.org/lisah/index.htm (web video version) Lin

Hi Eric, If your Olympus recorder is tough on batteries, then rechargeable batteries are much less expensive. I use a 15 minute rechargeable which works very well for some of my Sigma cameras which take eight AA batteries. It would cost me hundreds of pounds a year if I used anything else. Good rechargeable batteries will take as many as 1,000 recharges and they really don't cost that much more than standard batteries. You can even recharge them from the 12 volt accessory plug in your vehicle while you are on the road..... Best regards, Lin

Hi Davy, I think some audio control of the audio stream within a video is on the table for planning for the next version of PTE - maybe it's already been done but we will have to wait for 7.5 to see. Audio improvements are a big part of 7.5 as I understand. Best regards, Lin

Hi Boogie, I bought it at Walmart so I don't know if there is a distributor in the U.K. or not. This is the same unit, except mine has a 4 gig rather than an 8 gig capacity and was $34.95 rather than $44.95 USD. The picture is with the Menu Display shown where I had a jpg displayed on mine. http://www.adorama.c...m_source=pgrabl Best regards, Lin

Hi Peter, Click on the little icon (with the dots) to the far right of the file name and that will bring up the file name in a window where you can rename your file. Best regards, Lin

I bought a little RCA MP3 player yesterday so I can play MP3's in my Toy Hauler/travel trailer through the aux inputs on my built-in radio/cd player. Since the player in my RV doesn't play mp3 from a CD like my old one did, I can hook up the output of the player which normally go to the earphone buds to the input on the RV unit and it works great! Interestingly, this little player has an FM radio complete with "recorder" and also can play videos which are converted by the included software. You get a little mini-USB to charge the battery and connect the unit to download music, audio books, video, etc. It's a pretty sophisticated little device and cost me less than $40. It has a 4 gigabyte capacity and I found I could output my slideshows from PTE, run them through the "converter" and provided RCA EasyRip software and they play great on the little player.... 3.5 inches long, 2 inches wide by 3/8ths inch thick. Lin

Hi Brian, The only problem I have with understanding the issue he is having is that when he puts his D7000 original MOV in PTE it plays jerky on his two systems. When David played SG's MOV on David's system it played perfectly. When I put my original D7000 MOV's in PTE they play perfectly smoothly and likewise for several others who are using D7000 videos. Assuming SG has the same software as everyone else from Nikon including any necessary codecs, etc., doesn't this then indicate some difference in "hardware" between his system and others? This is not to say that there could not be a "software" conversion "solution," but that the actual problem he is having playing the original MOV file smoothly on his two systems is likely hardware based? Best regards, Lin

Hi Brian, The only problem I have with understanding the issue he is having is that when he puts his D7000 original MOV in PTE it plays jerky on his two systems. When David played SG's MOV on David's system it played perfectly. When I put my original D7000 MOV in PTE it plays perfectly smooth and likewise for several others who are using D7000 videos. Assuming SG has the same software as everyone else from Nikon including any necessary codecs, etc., doesn't this then indicate some difference in "hardware" between his system and others? Best regards, Lin

Hi Gary, You're confusing apples and oranges. What you are looking at are two separate programs - one is Objects and Animations and the other is the Slide View. Even though you can "see" both of them if you play with a windowed view, they are not related by program. They are entirely separate entities. What you are seeing on your screen are entirely different code segments which are not connected. This can be done with numerous programs, but like PTE, you can't have separate windows running and expect one to affect the other - as Stu said, the program isn't written that way. It's as if you had PTE and Microsoft Word both visible simultaneously, but changing something in one has nothing to do with the other. There is no slide view in Objects and Animations. Best regards, Lin