Lin Evans

Hi Linda, That's a good start. You may want to zip up one of the audio files causing the problem with the combination of PTE and Snow Leopard and send it to Igor. There is something about these particular audio mp3's which PTE doesn't handle in the same way as VLC or QuickTime which is causing Snow Leopard or one of the drivers to reject the combination. Igor can, perhaps, wring out the issue and it will help with the MacIntosh development. Best regards, Lin

Hi Linda, Perhaps one of our users who has a Mac can add more (I don't presently have one), but my approach to this would be to analyze the shows which "don't work" and find out precisely where the difference may lie. Do they have something in common which the shows which "do" work do not have? The first and perhaps easiest task to test would be to remove all music from the ones which don't work and try them without. This will immediately divide the problem between video and audio. If they "still" don't work, then we know it has to do with the video rather than the audio, etc. If they do work, then perhaps add the music back one selection at a time and see if there is one of the audio selection which may be causing the problem. It's sometimes difficult to track down these types of issues, but since these shows work on your previous system we know that the problem lies in the newer OS or in the interpretation or implementation of something associated with the new system. Best regards, Lin

Hi Igor, Personally, I believe Steve Jobs is as wrong about BluRay as he is about Flash. His opposition to Flash and not allowing the iPhone or IPad to see Flash has created serious opposition to these devices and opened the door for competition which otherwise would have never happened. People love the iPad because of the many fantastic features, but they hate the fact that when they go to major news sites (essentially all of them) they have big "holes" where the numerous Flash video clips reside. Flash is here to stay and Job's assumption that HTML5 will completely replace Flash is, I believe, a "pipe dream." There are simply too many Flash implementations out there on the web and too much money already invested for major players to abandon it. Steve Jobs is living in a dream world where Apple rules, but unfortunately the world is not going to the come to Apple as he would like. So it is, I believe, with BluRay. Many years ago, before the MacIntosh was invented and in the days of the Lisa Apple computer I was an Apple Representative selling Apple computers. When the IBM PC and IBM XT became so prevalent the handwriting was on the wall. IBM is here to stay and the business world selected it rather than Apple. I tried very hard to convince Apple management that they should open the architecture and even make a dual processor motherboard so they could run IBM PC applications. It would have been very easy for them to do this at that time. Had they done so, they would have easily been equal and even superior to the PC world and would have a major market share today. But Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak had their heads in the sand and refused to either open their architecture or include IBM applications with appropriate hardware and this decision doomed Apple to a 3% market share for decades. When they finally came to their senses and created a MacIntosh which, with an Intel CPU, could then run PC applications, their market share tripled! Today we find the same thinking at Apple which held them back in the 1980's and 1990's. BluRay has been adopted by the major movie studios as "the" method for distribution of their state-of-art presentations for home use. Blu-Ray players are being included with the majority of mid-range home computers today. It's here to stay for some time. The industry has accepted this technology as superior to HD, and so it will be until "major" improvements can be implemented. I think PTE users in general would LOVE to have the ability to create PTE shows in BluRay quality but the cost of BluRay burners has prohibited the majority from getting too excited about it. Also, as a group, I think PTE users are waiting until you are able to have video-clip drop in available for PTE and then I think you will find that most will be asking for the ability to output to BluRay. I also think that PTE users realize how much you have already given us, and how hard you have been working to create a MacIntosh compatible version of PTE. Now this decision by Steve Jobs throws a major curve at us. To have BluRay or to not have BluRay. If you have BluRay output for the PC, and not for the MacIntosh user, then we are sort of back to square one. The MacIntosh user would have to run Windows to be able to create BluRay discs; just as they now must use Windows to create native MacIntosh executable output. It's a daunting task to keep up with Steve Job's decisions, which historically have not been exactly good decisions for Apple's growth. It doesn't make your decision any easier either, does it?? Best regards, Lin

Hi Tia That's a complex question - it has two parts. First, if you have an mp3 which lasts for 2 minutes 30 seconds you can certainly create a slideshow with PTE which lasts exactly 2 minutes and 30 seconds, but PTE doesn't "randomly select images from a folder." You must select the image you would like to be in the slideshow and then PTE "can" display them in the order you select "or" PTE can randomly display them and evenly spread the display time of each slide so that the slideshow ends in perfect synchronization with the end of your mp3. This means that depending on the number of images you select, these images will each display for a time span which when added together equal the time of your MP3. You can also lengthen or shorten the time for any particular slide if you manually add or subtract the time difference to another slide, etc. It's very easy to have PTE automatically distribute the slides along a timeline which corresponds exactly to the length of time of your music. Best regards, Lin

This may be of interest to those who want to run high end graphics and slideshows on laptops with insufficient video clout. This may be a relatively inexpensive way to run your PTE shows with intensive graphics on that underpowered laptop or when you want to use the laptop to display your shows at an AV club, etc. There are some limitations such as having to use an ATI video card and needing a recent enough laptop to have proper hardware (Windows 7 suggested), but certainly much less expensive than purchasing a gaming computer. I just thought it worth looking into..... I moved this topic to Equipment - just wanted initial exposure in the "main" forum.... http://www.amperordi...ock_2_4670.html Lin

Hi Greg, It's not PTE's Video Builder which is problematic, it's the entire DVD industry. These type problems exist with nearly every software I've used to burn DVD's at one time or another and with one system or another. There are a tremendous amount of variables including media, drivers, different country codes (on older hardware), premature burn-out on DVD burners and a host of other glitches which make it a nightmare for trying to get a system which works "every time" and for "everyone." Even the two major software developers (Nero and Roxio) are not compatible with each other. If you have formerly used Roxio, there is a good chance that Nero won't work correctly until every vestige of Roxio has been removed from the Registry. If you have formerly used Nero and are trying to use Roxio - likewise. Developers of other than straight DVD or HDVD burning software generally use licenses for what are called "libraries." Libraries are code based functions which are licensed for developers of other software to drop in and include in their own software to allow features which these developers didn't write themselves. Sometimes these core "libraries" are modified to suit the individual software they are included in, but the seller of the "library" may have also licensed part of their own code from some major player such as Nero or Roxio. This means that there are myriad possibilities for error and for incompatibilities with both existing and latent code languishing in the Windows Registry. To add to this issue, there are numerous hardware drivers, media issues and such which are problematic with one or the other software approaches. This makes the entire issue of finding complete compatibility a very large "crap shoot." If one has the good fortune to not have these issues then Video Builder works like a miracle and the user generally can't understand why other may be having fits trying to do something which works perfectly well on their own system. On of the major competing presentation slideshow software companies have even publicly recommended that people using their products not try to burn DVD's directly if they are having issues, but rather buy commercial products made specifically for this purpose. Some of these products have registry cleaners which seek out "alien" code and remove it. That work fine when one has, for example, switched from Nero to Roxio or vice versa, but could be a "big" problem for a developer using a library. The developer who uses a library can't automatically assume that the system his code will be installed on doesn't have one of these major software packages installed. It wouldn't look so good if installing PTE or some similar product disabled some other major software the user depended on. Better that Video Builder or other similar library based product fail than inadvertently disable something the user depends on. Unlike a major change from Roxio to Nero (few would want both on their systems) it's quite possible a user would want PTE "and" Nero or PTE "and" Roxio, etc. The bottom line is that ferreting out these incompatibilities is a major pain even for those who really know what they are doing. For the rest of us, it's sometimes overwhelming. Best regards, Lin

Hi Eric, I think he is talking about his C drive (hdd - hard disk drive). Best regards, Lin

Hi David, Unfortunately, like most "polls," there is not a category which fits properly. In my case, I really don't have a "main" monitor but have seven systems which I use on a fairly regular basis. They have monitors ranging in resolution from 2560x1600 to multi-sync models which top out at 1600x1200. I don't have a 1920x1080. To work on the smaller monitors I generally keep them at 1024x768 so I can more easily read text. On the large, high resolution Samsung, I keep it at 2560x1600. A year or so ago I had a Viewsonic VP2290b (9.2 megapixel) monitor which I used because several of my gallery clients used them. It wasn't great for slideshows with any motion, but was fantastic for still images. It took two high resolution graphics cards to operate it and I found that it wasn't very useful for "most" of my slideshows. I probably will eventually buy a 1920x1080 monitor though I dislike having to crop all my images to fit. The problem is that the display manufacturers elected to go with a format which doesn't reflect the needs of the still photographer. The vast majority of digital (dSLR) cameras use 3:2 (after 35mm film) with only the 4/3 people like Olympus differing. Some of the newer dSLR's have a mode which will internally delimit to 16:9 but this is wasteful of sensor resolution because it amounts to what is essentially a "crop." Small sensor digicams usually have a couple modes, but generally not 16:9 unless in video. I suppose that the newer crop of dSLR's which feature video capabilities do shoot at 16:9 in video mode whether it be 1080p or 720p. The problem is that the still photographer is rarely satisfied with 2 megapixel resolution except for display. I detest having to shoot wide on every frame to allow room to crop for 16:9 but it seems that this format is in vogue today..... Best regards, Lin

Hi Ron, It's a bug - email Igor.... Best regards, Lin

Hi Keith, This might work for you: http://www.dkszone.net/6-best-and-free-file-recovery-software Or here for pay but free trial: http://www.easeus.co...mpact-flash.htm Lin

Hi Jean-Cyprien, Thanks! It's a very nice new feature isn't it!! Best regards, Lin

Hi Jeff, Yes, it definitely requires the latest beta with ability to run animated gif's. Thanks for the reminder! Best regards, Lin

Hi Dom, Thanks! I think they (animated gif's) can be used sparingly to spice up intros, etc., and the Xara capabilities can produce nice ones which look professional enough to enhance some of our shows. Best regards, Lin

Hi John, You might want to run this by Igor with the error message. It appears to be a memory access error, but I'm not certain. Try at a smaller file size such as the default which is about 598x335 and see if it works for you. Generally, there is no need to make an animated gif as large as 1024x768 but I see no reason why it "shouldn't" work at that size. You may be running into some local (resource) issues within your individual system. If it works for you at the smaller size then this is logical. If it hangs up at the smaller size too there may be something else causing it such as some incompatibilities with Windows 7, 64 bit implementation. I would email Igor and ask him to take a look.... Best regards, Lin

Hi guys, Seriously, a very simple to do example of combining a couple of excellent programs (PTE & as John suspected, Xara 3D) to highlight the new PTE capabilities of including animated GIF's in PTE sequences. Xara 3D, Xara Xtreme and Magix 3D are sister programs which allow some sophisticated creations of both animated GIF and PNG output. They are inexpensive and quite powerful tools for creating banners and animated objects which complement PTE's fantastic object handling. 3D text, banners, and objects can be adjusted for lighting, extrusion and a host of manipulations to create some interesting and useful effects. PTE adds a great deal to what can be done with these animated GIF's because it can also apply 3D transforms to them as well as just run them. All the normal features of object handling such as complex motion, PTE's own animations, opacity control, etc., work with animated GIF's just as they do with normal jpg and png objects. John, the relevant settings for the animation are 60 frames per cycle and 15 frames per second and zero pause. Of these three programs, perhaps Xara Xtreme is the most powerful, but all are worth looking at.... Best regards, Lin

http://www.learntoma...e6.5pcintro.zip (8 meg) http://www.learntoma...6.5macintro.zip (MacIntosh 8 meg) Lin

Hi George, Sorry for the confusion, everything is right here on the forum right above. Look for "22 a" and click on the link right below. There are no templates on my learntomakeslideshows site. Go to the first page here on this thread and you will find the link. Best regards, LIn

Hi George, Sorry, I should have posted a link but my original domain name was lost and in the process of changing the links I mistakenly omitted the link to the template. I have since simplified the template by replacing the images with a single image, removing the keyframes and setting the time to 60 seconds. Now you can click on the link (22. a) and simply follow the same instructions for copy/paste of the mask container and set your own slide for 60 seconds and probably everything will work correctly. You "may" have to adjust the size of the mask container but it's set for a full screen default and will work as is in most cases. Best regards, Lin

Hi Roy, It seems you may have run up against a fairly common issue where a codec used in one of my video's is missing from your system. The easiest way to be sure you can play all the videos is to use a player which provides most common codecs. The one I recommend is free and available here: http://www.kantaris.org/ Just download it and install it and you should be able to see as well as hear all of my AVI tutorials. Best regards, Lin

Hi Xaver, That would work, but then it wouldn't be done with PTE?? Best regards, Lin

I think I understand. What you want would be what might be called adjustable brightness without affecting transparency?? If so, you can have that now by placing a black or white layer between an object and the layer below so that when the opacity is adjusted, you don't see the object or objects on the photo in the layer beneath, but instead just see the black (or white) jpg, etc. Best regards, Lin

Hi Tom, LOL - that's a bit embarassing, isn't it? Best regards, Lin

Hi, It works fine for me using the latest beta. Which version of PTE are you using? Could it be that you have it positioned outside the viewing area for a wide angle display? Do you see the logo during the construction of the video? Best regards, Lin

It's not quite clear to me what your question is. Luminosity, in the relevant sense of the digital image, is delimited by the saturation point of 255, 255, 255 which is as much "white" as can be displayed depending on the intensity of CRT or LCD brightness. At this point zero detail is visible and only the outline of the object or part of the object reflecting pure white is visible. Opacity is the amount of transparency or translucency allowed whereby any image or object on a layer beneath the manipulated layer may or may not be partially visible. In PTE terms, "opacity" can be set from 100% where there is no possibility of seeing the layer beneath, to zero, where the top layer is totally invisible and the layer beneath is seen in its full "luminosity." Best regards, Lin

I made an MP4 at 1024 x 768 for a friend who has an iPad - worked perfectly...... Lin