Lin Evans

Hi Hoodie, You're very welcome - glad it can help with your project, Best regards, Lin

Thanks Igor - it looks great! Happy New Year to you and your family! Best regards, Lin

Hi LRRH, Here's your tutorial: It's a zipped AVI video and it's also now linked on my tutorials list in the Tutorials and Articles sub section of "Frequently Asked Questions and How To" Link To Popup Text Tutorial Please let me know if you have any questions. Best regards, Lin

O.K. "hoodie" I'll make one for you later today. Best regards, Lin

You would like a tutorial on how to click on an object and have text appear or instant navigation to another image? If so, I can make a tutorial for that. Best regards, LIn

Hi Peter, Thanks! That solves the issue of text and rectangle having independent adjustment characteristics but adds complexity for the uninitiated. My idea was to keep the overall appearance of the construct as simple as possible to make it less susceptible to error when choosing the components for manipulation. Along with the improved appearance of the background component (which could be manipulated with Photoshop) having an external PNG rectangular background allows for a nice "button" appearance rather than a sharp edged rectangle. Come to think of it, a PTE "button" could be used as well. Though it would be "cleaner" from a programming perspective to liberally use frames for parent/child controlling, the more components inside the mask, the more room for error and confusion for the novice user. Once the user is thoroughly familiar with the process, I think your idea would be the best approach in the event we don't have the text background feature added by Igor. Good idea, Lin

Hi folks, A recent discussion and a question about how we might have a work-around for a desired feature led me to make an AVI tutorial on how to use text with a background colored block or "rectangle." There are times when having text to identify a person or feature in a slide is difficult to see because of the nature of the individual slide. The question was raised about offering a feature to have a background on which text could lie which could be faded in and out simultaneously with the text and would greatly enhance the visibility especially when the slide was "busy" with lots of color or data which tends to hide the text. The problem with simply making text a child of a rectangle is that opacity is not an "inherited" attribute, so this must be done with a mask or it means multiple keyframes (one for the rectangle and an identical one for the text) to effect the fade-in and fade-out. It's not difficult to use a mask, whereby one simply fades out the mask container, but there are some shortcuts which I cover in the tutorial that will make it very quick and simple should one have the need for this. I think having the "background for text" would be a very nice optional feature and quite easy to program, but until we have such, the work-around involves putting your text on a rectangle, preferably made in PixBuilder or PhotoShop, although one "can" use a PTE "rectangle." There are additional issues if we choose a PTE rectangle, because if we distort the rectangle to make it other than "square" then the child "text" also gets distorted and one would then have to hold the shift key and "drag" the text back to simulate a "normal" appearance. So it's best to use a rectangle made outside PTE. Here's a link to the zipped AVI tutorial for anyone interested - about a 70 meg download and it now resides along with my other tutorials on the Frequently Asked Questions sub forum "Tutorials and Articles." http://www.lin-evans...undtutorial.zip And here are PC and Mac Links to another topic of discussion demonstration of the use of several PTE features for manual control. If there is interest I'll be glad to make a brief tutorial on how this is done for anyone who doesn't already know. http://www.learntoma...e/examplepc.zip (less than 3 meg download for PC) http://www.learntoma.../examplemac.zip (less than 3 meg download for MacIntosh) Best regards, Lin

Hi Jim, Here's a small example of how this can work - a bit less than a 3 meg zipped PC exe and a Mac exe: http://www.learntomakeslideshows.net/example/examplepc.zip (Windows zipped exe) http://www.learntomakeslideshows.net/example/examplemac.zip (Mac zipped exe) Best regards, Lin

Hi Barry, Why would you assume that she isn't using 1024x768? That's the resolution I use. I have monitors which support up to 1920x1080 but the print is too difficult to see at the higher resolutions and none of my cameras shoot at 16:9 aspect ratio. I don't have a problem working at 1024x768 and have no problems with image quality. Best regards, Lin

Hi Tom, I understand completely. Fortunately, the exe format has been around virtually unchanged since the first IBM PC's were launched in August of 1981with PC DOS and MSDOS - over 30 years now. As a former developer, my old DOS software still runs fine under the latest version of Windows, but as you say, who know about the future. You're just a "spring chicken" at 55! In less than six months I'll be 70, if I last that long! I'm pretty familiar with archival storage methods since my wife spec'd and launched Hewlett-Packard's first tape library - internal codename Galactica - and for five years prior to that was marketing director for both EncyNova, Inc (first desktop tape autoloader) and MediaLogic ADL (Editor's Choice) multi-media mid-range tape library series. It was eat and sleep "archival storage" and backup for 15 years - LOL. The "secret" - if there is one - to successful computer archival storage, is constant migration to newer technology. Tapes are good for at least 35 years, optical for at least 100 years but the only way to be certain that computer archives are secure for the future is to continually migrate the data when new technology is available. For several years now there has been rather obscure development of very promising new multi-layered media which will put multi-terrabytes on 5.25 inch optical discs. I expect we will see it mature in a couple years. It's hard for we older characters to accept the fact that this method has taken over and paper and even microfilm are pretty much going by the wayside. I guess we dinosaurs have to change with the times.... Best regards, Lin

Hi Tom, Not to speak for Jim, but I think you misunderstood his original statement. He's not intending to use a presentation slideshow program for preserving archival media, but rather as a way of "presenting" the information today to an audience. What alternative in terms of slideshow presentation is there? Video? If so, PTE can create that, but I doubt that today's video formats will be any better preserved than the executable format. Just saving the images in tiff format doesn't include a way of presenting them and to my knowledge, there is nothing out there any better than PTE to use for the presentation. - see his opening quote below: -------------------------------- I’m writing a book on digital archiving and presentation of historical photos and sound recordings. It includes a chapter on making slideshows because I think that slideshows are the most effective way to present historical information and should be used more. Most of my experience has been with Proshow Gold and Proshow Producer (PSP) and I prepared the draft chapter describing them. However, the explanation of all the complexity and pitfalls in using PSP would probably turn off people more than encourage them. -------------------------------

I agree with Xaver - it's quite arbitrary whether it's "on" or "off" by default. Those who use it more frequently will prefer it to be on and those who don't will prefer it to be off. Best regards, Lin

You didn't say "how" you want to split the image. You can do it horizontally, vertically, or with three across and three down rectangles. You can do it as David suggests with Photoshop or your favorite editor, or you can do it the "easy" way with PhotoScape. I would suggest trying PhotoScape, it's free, powerful, and easy to use. Splitting is only one of many features. See it here: http://download.cnet.com/PhotoScape/3000-2192_4-10703122.html Best regards, Lin

Hi Laszlo, This notification means that you have both music added through the projects options and music inserted on one or more slides via the "customize slide" option. When you have both, there is no way to synchronize the music and slides. Look at each slide and you will find at least one which has had music or sound added to the slide rather than via the projects options. If you remove this sound it should play normally for you. MP3's play really well with PTE - I would suggest not using the WAV format but rather use MP3's and just to be safe, load them into Audacity and export them out of there for perfect compatibility. Also, my suggestion would be to use PTE 7.0 because the audio capabilities are much better. If you are trying to do more sophisticated things with sound, you can add as many additional tracks as desired. You can use the "offset" to sequence the audio to start at any time during the show. Just put each selection on a different track and you have complete flexibility with audio. Go here to read a discussion of the error message you were getting: Best regards, Lin

Hi Dan, All of my tutorial links appear to work fine, but if you visited my site it links you to the tutorials which are referenced and linked here at PTE. I don't have anything specific about "making" masks but that's a very straight-forward process using any image software editor which will allow you to "paint" over an image then create transparency png files. Here is the location on this forum where you will find everyone's tutorials - it's a sub-category under "Frequently Asked Questions:: http://www.picturestoexe.com/forums/index.php?/forum/8-tutorials-and-articles/ Best regards, Lin

Hi Gary, It's all there in Video Pad. When you click on "Save Movie" then from the popup menu "Video Output Setup" when you choose your file format you have a wide range of options. Depending on what you choose for an encoder, etc., you will have different choices. In some cases bitrate will be a choice and in other encoders you have no choice of bitrate but rather "quality," etc. You'll just need to play with it. Essentially, create yourself a tiny video clip and use it with the different options you have on your system. These will vary depending on installed software. Video encoders are much like audio codecs in that you may have a few or many depending on which ones reside on your individual computer. This is greatly different and depends on installed software and whether or not you have purposely installed things like DivX, QuickTime, etc. I can't answer for Igor about MOV/AVI and MP4 differential treatment, but I'm certain there are very good reasons for this and they likely have to do with the individual video encoders and envelopes used. Best regards, Lin

Hi Peter, It only takes a trip to the AVG forum to see that this is certainly not limited to PTE - AVG is finding false positives on installs like Chrome, Quicktim, Malwarebytes, etc. This is a widespread issue and people are getting fed up with it. Read some of the posts here: Here's a sample: ------------------------------------------------------------ This is the owner of YouTube Downloader. What is the escalation process for getting this false positive removed? While the AVG antivirus engine is no longer flagging our files, AVG Identity Protection is still flagging our installer as "Dropper.Generic2.CKPF". If you choose to put it in the vault, AVG then completely removes the entire YouTube Downloader application, not just the flagged installer file. It's been almost 2 weeks since AVG first started flagging us. I have filed a support request (AVG#0001396015) one week ago, and had two iterations with the support staff so far with no joy - they are unable to reproduce the problem despite my repeated instructions. I am tired of receiving emails from the AVG support staff which are void of any technical expertise, trying to solve AVG's mistake. What are my options to get this resolved short of releasing a new YouTube Downloader application asking my several hundred thousand users to file false positive reports with AVG until this is fixed? This is costing me time, users, and reputation, and my patience with AVG is growing thin. Thanks, Biennesoft ---------------------------------------------------- Here's a link to the thread: http://forums.avg.co...=show&id=139985 Best regards, Lin

Hi Gary, Unfortunately, I can't afford to buy the software I would like to use anymore so for video editing, I use the free version of VideoPad Video Editor. I generally save the output from my edits in VideoPad in MP4 format, then let PTE do its variable bitrate conversion using 100% quality on the slider - but that's only if I'm using a high resolution video. Many of my video inserts are rather tiny and used for special effects such as fire animation or other output from Particleillusions which don't really need super high video quality because the viewer can't see any difference regardless of bitrate, etc. You may want to read this link if you haven't already seen it: Scroll to the bottom and read Igor's comments about h.264, etc. I suspect that the same variable bitrate is used in the PTE conversions to AVI though I haven't verified this with Igor.... http://www.picturest...0225#entry90225 Best regards, Lin

Hi Gary, Not being familiar with the software, I'm not certain what may have happened, but file size is determined by multiple factors. Once you have reduced the size of the input still images to no larger than your intended display and use a reasonable compression, there is little more that can be done with them. Video, on the other hand, has a number of parameters which affect overall file size. It could be that even though the "parameters" are said to be "same as source" the compression level may be greater, or the bitrate may not be "variable". Just what "parameters" are being duplicated is often a question. When you save or convert a video with PTE using "best quality" the bitrate is variable. It "could" be that your software sampled and chose a lower bitrate as the "same" parameter. PTE uses a low bitrate when it doesn't affect quality and a higher one for parts of a video which need it for optimal quality. These factors might account for the small loss of quality you mention. Best regards, Lin

Hi Gary, Looks like fun was had by all! Nice show - makes one feel like they might know how a Gibbon feels!! Best regards, Lin

Hi Mick, You may find some interesting discussion about that here: Best regards, Lin

Thanks Colin! Nice one! And a Merry Christmas to you and your family as well !!! Best regards, Lin

Hi David, The only way you will probably appreciate the difference is to download a trial copy of PKZip and explore the myriad possibilities which are way too numerous to even attempt to explain. Your original question was "why" use a "third party" zip utility when Windows has one of its own. If you have Windows with a zip feature and all you do is zip and unzip a few files located in a single folder or adjacent folders on a single drive, then there is no good reason to change or use anything else. On the other hand, if you need data encryption security, have anything other than very "simple" zip requirements there are multiple reasons why the Windows supplied zip utility is decidedly insufficient. PK Zip is a full featured "program" like PicturesToExe. You have countless options and controls over what, how, when and where zip actions are to be performed. There are six major categories of Compression, Extraction, Security, Mail, View and Miscellaneous and within these categories literally hundreds of options. We have drifted far from the original suggestion to include a zipped executable as an option within PTE, but the bottom line is that some need the sophistication of programs like PKZip while others may be perfectly well served by the utility provided to most Windows and Apple users. The differences between PKZip and the included Windows zip utility are rather like the differences between the slideshow capabilities of say IrfanView or Fastone and PTE. Can you make a slideshow with Irfanview including an executable slideshow? Yes. Does it serve as a functional tool for those who wish to make slideshow presentations? In some cases the answer is yes. In other cases the answer is decidedly no. Let me ask you this: Would you trade the slideshow capabilities of Irfanview for those of PTE? My guess is that you would not. For people who have sophisticated zip requirements the situation is quite similar. One situation is an OS which has a feature which lets one zip or unzip a file(s) or folder of files. The other situation is a full featured software program dedicated to all the nuances required by corporations, government agencies and users with more complex needs. Best regards, Lin

Hi David, Whether or not you got a zip utility with your version of Windows depends largely on the OEM who built your system and their licensing agreement with Microsoft. or whether you bought the OS software directly from Microsoft, and which of the numerous "versions" you bought (home, professional, etc., etc.). There are numerous Window users who didn't get one of the zip utilities. I ran into this on a regular basis when I installed networks and large archive tape libraries for clients. The difference between PKzip ( and other "good" utilities such as 7zip) and the rather cumbersome zip utility provided by Microsoft is like night and day. The ability to read various zip type formats (there are dozens if not scores of different formats) is highly constrained with the build-in Windows version. The ability to include or exclude file types and various other useful features which are needed for corporate and government security purposes are missing from the skeleton version included with Windows. For purposes of simply zipping or unzipping a few files into an archive, the Windows version is fine. But if you have the need for versatility, it's just not there. If you must be certain that you can read from and write to the various and sundry forms of data compression which may be encountered, you certainly can't depend on the version supplied by Microsoft. If the version of zip included with Windows was sufficient, the numerous other vendors would be out of business. Rarely will you find major corporations depending on the "included" (or not) zip utility provided with many systems.There simply is not sufficient security. You might want to read some of the PKWare client reports here: http://www.pkware.co...success-stories I've used PK Zip since I first met and discussed compression with the founder, Phil Katz, back in the late 80's when he was working on PKARC. At that time we could create an executable zip format which made it possible to send zipped (ARC) files to customers and they didn't need to have the software to unzip them. They just needed that password. Personally, I won't use anything else... Best regards, Lin