Lin Evans

Done, Best regards, Lin

Hi Peter, I suspect that the necessity of using only a black background may be obviated by one or two possibilities. First, if one doesn't adhere to the distinct same characteristic of the mechanical Rubik's Cube and make the inside of that part of the "cube" which is seen when the nine cube sections are rotated black (transparent) then it's possible to use any convenient color for a background. I chose a light grey color for mine. Otherwise, it would probably be possible to use a black side for those cubes on the segments visible during the rotation. I just let the actual color of that particular cube show rather than a strict adherence to black. Of course this all depends on the orientation of the cube at the time of rotation of the block. What works in one position doesn't work correctly in the opposite (180 degree rotation of the entire cube) necessitating construction of alternate cube configurations if you rotate segments at specific times. It can get complicated indeed. I used a black border surrounding each cube and this pixel space probably accounts for the difference between my -47, and 47 versus your -66 and 66. To get rid of the black as you did in your fade to a solid I would just duplicate the cube itself (one with the black individual facets to one with no facets) and fade between. Having said this, I discovered that neither -47, 47 nor -66, 66 works in all situations. Just why I've yet to discover. It could be possible that what you begin with in the form of "zoom" when you're working on the project impacts the percentages. At 100% logic dictates that 1/3rd of the total space is taken by each nine cube segment. This then should make each segment occupy 33.333 % of the total and would suggest a "push" of -66.33 and 66.33 for the "proper" figures. Why it was different for my second image than for my first I've yet to determine, but I will try to unravel the mystery. Perhaps in a future version Igor will provide an "option" of having opacity control under the parent. For some animations such as this, it would be very, very helpful but we don't want to give up the versatility of having it like it is now also so having an option "switch" would be the way to go in my opinion. In a true mechanical Rubik's Cube there are only 26 actual cube facets with the center one being the rotation "connector" so our simulation is slightly different in function but as they say, "good enough" I think! In any event, it's a great simulation which you presented. If having a different colored background is important in some future animation, you might try doing it as I have - there are many ways to "skin a cat" LOL. Here's a quick little single slides sample with only one portion of segment rotation (one of the two). http://www.learntoma...ubik2sample.zip Best regards, Lin

Hi Ray, What you had in mind can't be realistically done with PTE. There are a total of six sections of the Rubik's Cube which can be rotated, but only three sections can be rotated on any one slide with PTE. To rotate the other three requires a different construct and the two constructs can't occupy the same space at the same time without setting all individual (27 cubes) to zero opacity on all six sides. That would mean each time one of the alternate set of three sections containing nine "cubes" were to be rotated, 162 separate opacity setting would need to be keyframed out then back in. Since opacity is not "inherited" in the Parent/Child settings, it would be terribly complex to try to do this in real time - hence the necessity for doing this operation on separate slides where no opacity settings need be changed. Perhaps some day in the future if an option for parent/child inheritance of opacity becomes available, this might be feasible, but not today. Best regards, Lin

Hi Guys, For those who are mystified, just a brief explanation of how the Rubick's Cube is constructed using PTE. 1. Begin with a single cube as explained in my Cube Tutorial 2. Using the Parent/Child feature, combine three cubes under a single frame so that you have a single element consisting of three cubes side by side. Let's call this Cube sets A, B, and C. 3. Create three of these and place them one under the other so you end up with a total construct made with 9 cubes and place all three constructs under a parent frame. Let's call this Cube set AA 4. Create three of the nine cube constructs, each controlled by it's own frame. Call them AA, BB, CC 5. Set each of the controlling frames to respectively -47, 0, and 47 on the "Z" axis (pan Z). Set the entire 27 cube ensemble above under a single controlling frame. At first it will look a bit strange because you now must go to each individual "cube" in the set and turn off the "front" and "back" for cubes not seen from the outside of the individual component "cube sets." You can can check the accuracy by rotating the individual cube sets A, B, and C as well as AA, BB, CC. When you rotate the entire 27 cube ensemble with the controlling frame using the 3D transform (X an Y) you will easily see which cube faces need to be turned off. Rotate individual groups "AA, BB, CC" using O & A "rotation" to get the individual section "spins." Hopefully, in the future I will have a rather complex tutorial demonstrating the construction and manipulation of the Rubik's Cube. The above instructions covers rotation on one set of three components making up the Rubick's Cube. In order to rotate on the opposite axis, it's necessary to duplicate the entire above instruction set but using alternative cubes within the block and this construct, though identical in appearance to the first, will rotate the three alternative sets of nine cubes. However, they can't be displayed on the same "slide" so it's necessary to match the ending rotation angle, etc., with a "Quick, No Transition" on a second and subsequent slide to rotate the opposite three. So to simulate the actual Rubik's Cube action requires multiple slides. Best regards, Lin

Hi Eric, A couple things: First, if you will go to the "start" then "run" at Windows, type in "dxdiag" then click on "O.K." Windows will run a diagnostic. When it is finished, click on the "Display" tab and you can get specifics on your own system in terms of the amount of Video Ram, the type of Video Display Card, etc. Then you can go to this section of the forum: http://www.picturestoexe.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=10555 Click on the "Videocard Benchmark" link and search for your individual card. When you find the card, look for the number associated. A number of 900 or higher should run virtually "any" PTE show smoothly. A number of at least 420 is necessary for some of the more complex graphics shows, etc. If your card has less than 420, you might think about upgrading. If you will let me know the details of your video card, I can look up the performance characteristics and help you decide whether or not you need to upgrade. Graphics performance is a complex issue which involves many factors. The number of objects on a slide is one factor, but even a very old and mediocre video card can handle many hundred objects on a single slide if the objects are quite small. For example, one of our forum members made a demo using over 900 objects on a single slide which could be played on virtually "any" computer. The secret? The objects were very small in memory requirements and the motion was not complex. Likewise for masking. A simple, small mask can be handled by virtually "any" system, but it is very easy to create a complex mask which can challenge even moderate systems. A true "torture" test for video is when you have multiple large objects on a single slide in complex motion simultaneously and run complex masks and large images (large pixel dimensions) in the same animation. The most demanding graphic I've created and one I use for testing video cards with is linked below: http://www.learntomakeslideshows.net/sample/ptedemoshowfull.zip This one is about a 100 meg download. It begins with some complex snow animations including masks and 3D transforms. Most moderately good video cards will run the first part of the show fairly smoothly. An excellent graphics card will have no problems. The show then goes to a complex graphic of a wrist watch in motion with movement of all three hands, snow within the crystal, etc. This graphic can be seen smoothly on most moderately good graphic cards. The show then presents a moderately animated waterfall scene using multiple masks, fairly large PNG files and simultaneous motion. This portion usually is decent on most systems with a moderately good video card. The next scene uses masks but not large images and should work smoothly for most. The following waterfall and moving water scene has multiple masks and a medium large image and can be problematic for weaker systems. The next scene is a killer for weak systems. It consists of a rotating Earth circling a rotating sun simulation. This one uses over 650 large objects in simultaneous motion, masks, etc. Only really powerful systems will play this simulation smoothly. Systems will less than optimal resources will get the timing wrong, jerky motion, pause or simply hang up. The text will be displayed either at the wrong time or will flash so quickly it can't be read at all. Again, only really optimal systems will play this portion of the show smoothly. Finally, there are some 3D Transforms of OOB (out of bounds) images which most moderately good video systems will play smoothly, followed by an actual slideshow using 3D transforms and decent sized images. "Most" moderately good video cards will play the last section smoothly. This show is the ultimate torture test I have yet devised which will ring out the video card and let anyone know whether what they have is up to the test of playing about anything which might be built with PTE. Best regards, Lin

Hi Peter, Actually, he needs to just go to the "Tutorials" forum here and all my free tutorials are right there on the PTE Made Easy (PTE for Smarties) section. Link: http://www.picturestoexe.com/forums/index.php?showforum=8 Best regards, Lin

Hi Peter, Very nice job and I'm certain a great learning experience for you! You and Dominic have much more energy than I to tackle such a project, but the "proof's in the pudding" as they say. Indeed PTE's new 3D transform has opened many doors for animation possibilities and will probably be even more useful as a tool as time goes on. I've been pondering JPD's use of the octahedron (or possibly an isocahedron) and trying to derive a basic formula for constructing it. Unlike the cube which is constructed on squares where jpg's can be used, the triangular shapes require png transparencies and I'm still contemplating the necessary angles and groupings necessary to put it into some sort of understandable tutorial. In my cube tutorial, I chose Dominic's basic pairs (frame pairs) approach since it is easier to explain verbally than my initial tiered, multi-child method used for the first demo. The easiest part of any tutorial is to explain "how" to construct some of these shapes. The more difficult part is to explain "why" certain elements need to be manipulated as they are. I can see that the future is going to be fun indeed - LOL... Best regards, Lin

Hey Ken, I'm glad is ran O.K. for you. The large, high resolution image takes a toll on the graphics environment. I runs fine on my nVidia 8800 GT card, but the "cubes" stutter a bit on Sherry's 8600 GT OC nVidia card.... Best regards, Lin

Thanks Bob, He's definitely an excellent lyricist and stuck to his convictions back in the 60's when the country was divided on the Vietnam issue. I think his "New Tennessee Waltz" was his parting shot at the politics of war and a turning point in his career. I will try your idea and see how it plays. I've reworked the ending in anticipation of possibly doing that with a future iteration of the Earth simulation. I have been searching for just the right NASA high resolution photo to let me do what I did with the ending. If you have the patience to sit through another 10 minutes, let me know what you think. This one is a killer on graphics cards so may not run the cubes smoothly - large, high resolution images take a toll ! Here's the Mac and PC links for the newer version: http://www.learntoma...gravity2mac.zip (Mac version) http://www.learntoma...ghravity2pc.zip (Windows version) Best regards, Lin

Hi Xaver, I think this is a bug. I believe time "should" be regarded as a personal setting just as transitions effects and so on. I will ask Igor about this... It seems illogical to have to change the time to another value, save, then change the time back to the default of 4 seconds and save again in order to get things back to the default for time. Perhaps this is how it is intended, but seems illogical to me. Thanks, Lin

Hi Gary, PTE will vectorize any font you have resident and "use" to create an executable or video slideshow but it doesn't provide the font for you to create a slideshow with. The essence is that should you have a particular font available and use that font to create a show, anyone who watches your slideshow will "see" that font rather than some Windows substitute font. What you are doing when using a "template" is substituting your images for the "place holder" images used in the template. Any special fonts not resident on your own computer and used in the template must be downloaded and available to PTE at the time of creating your own show in order to be "vectorized." PTE can't create the fonts out of thin air - they must be resident to be vectorized. Best regards, Lin

Hi Artie, Glad to see you over here! From the Main Screen (not Objects and Animations screen), as Tom says, if you click on "Slide" (at the top of the screen) then on "Reset Personal Settings of All Slides," the program will automatically remove whatever "custom" settings you may have set on individual slides and set everything back to the default of 4 seconds per slide display. You may then click on the "Project Options" button (bottom left quadrant of the screen) and on the "Main" tab you can set the display time to a different value (Time Interval for New Slides) if you wish and then click on "Set For Existing Slides" and all slides will be set to your new chosen value. Then, if you wish to have certain slides display for different times, you can navigate to the slide where you want a different setting and use the "Customize Slide" button to override the universal setting you have programmed for all slides and only the presently selected slide will have the new setting. This way you can set certain slides for custom time displays as well as custom transitions, etc. If you have problems with this just ask and I'll be glad to help you get the settings you want for any of your shows. Best regards, Lin

Hi Bill, The nature of software development is essentially that it "happens" when it happens. It's really not possible when developing for a new platform to give accurate estimates of when a product might be ready. There are myriad issues and lots of testing which must happen before release of a new product and the Wnsoft development team is proceeding as quickly as possible. Right now it is possible to run Windows on your Mac and produce native MacIntosh output. You can also produce MP4, AVI, DVD and even output a file which can easily be converted to BluRay for customers. Although we would all love to have a native MacIntosh version yesterday, there are other considerations which the developers also have yet to implement in the Windows version such as video clip drop in and rudimentary sound controls - these will help complete the "package" for PTE to be the very best product available for professionals to use to make presentation slideshows. I don't believe you will ever see a MacIntosh version of Producer. In my opinion, it's just too cobbled in terms of programming and way too complex with too many bugs to convert. As a former developer myself, I see it as having gone down the "try to be everything to everyone" road with the "jack of all trades, master of none" theme. PTE, in contrast, has stayed relatively pure in that the developers make every effort to swat bugs "as" they appear and they have not sold out by rushing features which work poorly or not at all. If you want to experience a major degree of frustration, just try to do off-center rotation with Producer, etc. Their attempts at matching some of PTE's features (keyframing, for example) have confused and confounded many of their users. They try to do "workarounds" to emulate some PTE features by means of what they call "modifiers" which are convoluted and clumsy. They have no 3D engine and it would take a miracle of programming to incorporate some of the great PTE features into their code. The PTE developers will put out a true Mac version in good time when it's "ready" for prime time. I don't believe they can give you a realistic estimate of when it will be ready, but be assured that they are working diligently to do this. As soon as they are close they will let us know. In my opinion, until then we must be patient and let them work without pressure. Best regards, Lin

Hi Xaver, I think it's all relative (lens rating) when it comes to extreme zoom lenses. If pixel peeping, there are obvious deficiencies in nearly all long zoom lenses, but for use in relatively low resolution (1080p) video, these issues are mostly moot. Even the sub-average rating zooms such as the Tamron, Canon and even Nikon are magnitudes better in most ways than the lenses you get with camcorders in my experience. I suspect that the Tamron will do just fine for the intended purpose. Best regards, Lin

Hi Brian, I assume you mean a template in the sense of being able to simply change file names so others can use your creation rather than the "template" feature of PTE which gathers files into a single location? If so, it's fairly straight-forward. Give your file names a very generic name such as image001.jpg, image002.jpg, etc. Then after you have finished your project, others simply rename their own images to the same names and replace your files with their own. They do this by copying their own renamed file into the folder containing your own PTE project overwriting your original files. You only need to tell the user whether the images are in portrait or landscape format and what the aspect ratio of the originals were. For example, if you create a 16:9 aspect ratio photo, then a user of your template must also either crop their own to that aspect ratio or use images having a 16:9 aspect ratio. If you use 3:2 (typical dSLR photo) then you need to inform the user accordingly, etc. It's really fairly simple - just be certain to use generic file names and use meaningful names for objects which identify their purpose to the user. Best regards, Lin

Hi Summer, Go to Main Screen, Project Options, Comments Tab. Look for "insert template" (underlined in blue). Click on this and you will get a drop-down list. Find "Picture Name" - or if you want also the extension, then use "Picture Name with Extension" and then click on "set for all slides" - that's all there is to it. Lin

Hey Jeff, Hint: Remember the opening for 2001 a Space Odyssey? Remember the monolith (sort of cube) and the one planted on the moon as sort of a space age "alarm" to possibly indicate to those who apparently "seeded" Earth for our development when our fledgling attempts at leaving this "big blue ball" were successful? The cube finally lost its battle "defying gravity" - LOL. The shooting star would be possible but not really "accurate" since a meteorite develops its intense heat from friction with the Earth's atmosphere. The atmosphere in the simulation is such a tiny proportion of the overall scene that the significance would be lost I'm afraid. Shooting stars are viewed from Earth as the mass accelerates when attracted by gravitational forces and from space would be just a "blip" on the horizon. What "would" be accurate and perhaps possible would be a nice comet?? I'll have to think on that one! Best regards, Lin

Hey Tom, We do what we can! LOL. Yep, that's a pretty steep re-entry angle for sure. Did you notice where the cube ended up? Right back in Rocky Mountain National Park so the "critters" can either return home or at least their "ashes" can be interred there if the angle was too steep and the descent too rapid! Best regards, Lin

LOL - the simulation only covers three days or so. It could be that the clouds will be back! This time of year we will take any good weather which providence sends our way!! Best regards, Lin

Hey Ken, Good one! L

Congratulations to the entire Wnsoft PTE development and support team! A wonderful product and done in record time!!!! It's time for some holiday and celebration now.............. Best regards, Lin

Defying Gravity is a song written and performed by Jesse Winchester. It was also performed by various other artists including Emmylou Harris, Jimmie Buffett and Waylon Jennings. There is another song with the same title from the play "Wicked" which is performed by various artists, but this is not that one. There is a hidden "implication" in this - see if you can detect it! About 10 minutes running time.... http://www.learntoma...nggravitypc.zip (Windows PC - about 20 meg) http://www.learntoma...ggravitymac.zip (MacIntosh - about 20 meg) Lin

Hi Jean Pierre, Excellent suggestion! Hopefully, Igor will be able to implement this in the very near future! best regards, Lin

Hi Peter, The little guy (is that Rocky or Romeo?) looks like the candles are keeping him warm in spite of the snow! Very nice - I'm glad you found the free converter which seems to work fine. I think it's fine the way it is. To preload, you generally need Flash FLV which is a bit more complex and usually requires a commercial converter which also creates a player. For no more size than the three meg for your animation, I think the SWF file is fine. You might want to put a little text reminder for visitors to "wait" for a few seconds until the animation begins. Best regards, Lin

Hi Jeff, What you need to do then is simply build the cube at the starting keyframe exactly as in my AVI tutorial. This will leave you with a full size cube which can then be sized with the controller frame. This can then be dragged anywhere on or off screen by dragging the controller frame. Next you would create a keyframe at the time where you want the cube to appear in the center of the screen and drag the cube via the controller frame to that position. Next you would resize the controller frame at that position then for the controller frame only, set the X and Y axis to the number of degrees and direction you want the spin. Fine tune the position for the stop by incrementing the degrees of X or Y (depending on how you set up the spin) until the proper face of the cube appears centered. I've made a quick sample you can use as either a template by changing image names or just use it to understand the keyframes. I've made it stop on the chipmunk. http://www.learntoma...ple/forjeff.zip Best regards, Lin