Lin Evans

Hi John, Left click the mouse on the word "Name" at the top of the slide list in the "Classic View" then choose: Name Extension Date Size Unsorted Reverse Order Best regards, Lin

A couple years ago there was some interest in adding an animated watch to slideshows using the really nice Panos FX Photoshop/Elements action which I animated and produced both an AVI tutorial and PDF tutorial on. I was reminded about this this morning by a member who wanted to animate a watch. Both theDom and I did a number of these a while back but I had forgotten to add this to the PTE Made Easy Tutorials posted on the Tutorials and Articles section of the forum. This morning I added these files. There are three links. They include an AVI tutorial, a detailed multi-page PDF tutorial and the PTE template including, this time, the mp3 file for the one second "click" sound. Those interested can find these files at the bottom of my PTE Made Easy - PTE for Smarties link in the Tutorials and Articles section of the forum linked here: http://www.picturestoexe.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=7901 Best regards, Lin

Hi Rick, Are you still patrolling those Idaho highways and "not eating donuts"? LOL It's been a while! Your original PTE key should still be available and it's good for the main program. If you need Video Builder to create DVD's that's an integrated, but additional program which you have to purchase separately. You can still create AVI's with PTE and burn to DVD with third party software but Video Builder is "much" easier to use so highly recommended. It has a two year upgrade policy while the original PTE has lifetime upgrades. If you PM Igor I'm sure he can find you in the database and get your email address at the time you purchased your original PTE to retrieve your key for you. Nice to see you back, Best regards, Lin

Hi Ron, I believe Video Builder has a separate key, so removing the main PTE key from the registry will not help AFAIK. It sound like he either doesn't have the key for Video Builder or he isn't installing it correctly. Best regards, Lin

Hi John, There are essentially two types of "sharpening" (with a number of variables) for images. Which to use and when depends on "why" the image is not sharp and how we want it to appear. If the image simply needs a bit of "unsharp mask" whether selectively or uniformly across the image, I just use photoshop's "unsharp mask." Unsharp mask actually is an edge contrast enhancement tool which differentially raises contrast at edge boundaries between dark and light pixels. This is somewhat akin to using an ink pen to "outline" some text to "set it off" and draw the eyes to these boundaries. This makes the image appear "sharper" but really is not true sharpening. We must use care in how many pixels we darken or lighten at edge boundaries or we have issues of "halos" around our images. If you see a white "ghost" near dark boundaries or a dark "ghost" surrounding light boundaries it's usually a sure indication of over zealous use of unsharp masking. Photoshops regular "sharpen" (as opposed to Unsharp Mask) doesn't discriminate at edge boundaries but simply enhances adjacent pixel contrast. This can lead to a very "oversharpened" look which most do not like. There are a host of sharpening algorithms available which actually go beyond what Photoshop does. Some are better at some types of images than others and experimentation is often the only way to determine which is best for a particular image. To understand how true sharpening is accomplished we need to understand a bit about how digital image detail boundaries are created. To imagine this, consider that we could create a featureless disc which was pure white (255, 255, 255 RGB values) and place it on a pure black backdrop which is also essentially featureless and smooth with a value of (00, 00, 00 RGB). At the boundary edge of the white disc, we will find a number of pixels (perhaps four or even five) which range from pure black to increasingly lighter shades of grey to white. True sharpening is done by algorithms collectively know as "deconvolution." What deconvolution does is find detail boundaries and actually change the number of these edge boundary pixels which effectively "sharpens" the edge by reducing the number of gradations in these edge pixels. Because of the ability to actually shift, add and delete pixels selectively, deconvolution algorithms can also correct for motion blur to as many as 20 pixels or so. So these algorithms are used by forensic science to do things like read license plates which are motion blurred, etc. Obviously, it's not possible to do miracles with deconvolution, but it is possible to save otherwise useless photos which either suffer from out of focus or motion blur and truly "sharpen" detail edge boundaries. One software I use for this purpose is called "Focus Magic." Focus Magic combines a little Unsharp Mask with deconvolution and does a very nice job in many cases. You can see Focus Magic here: http://www.focusmagic.com/ This software works both as a stand-alone product and as a Photoshop Plug-In. Best regards, Lin

Hi Jim, This usually means that the image which the PTE file is requesting has been moved or deleted. If you use Notepad and look at one of your files with the PTE extension, you will notice that it gives the location to include drive designator, folder, etc., where the images used in your slideshow are located. If for any reason you delete or move one or more of these images, or if you are using an external USB or Firewire drive and the drive designator has changed for whatever reason, you will get such a message. PTE simply doesn't know where to find the picture to load. One way to eliminate this is to use the Zip feature in PTE which combines all necessary images along with the PTE file, etc., in one file. You can then move the entire content anywhere you wish and as long as you do not move any of the files outside the folder where you open the zip file, all file will be found by PTE and you won't get this error message. Best regards, Lin

Hi Peter, Actually, they only added the ability to "burn" your shows to a BluRay disk with Gold. You can create the same and actually "better" MP4's at 1920x1080 pixels with PTE then use other software such as Pinnacle Studio Ultimate Version 12: http://pcworld.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsit...io+Ultimate.htm which lets you burn BluRay output to standard DVD media blanks which are much less expensive than real BluRay media. Of course you still need a BluRay player to play these back to an HD TV but BluRay players are not all that expensive. BluRay "burners," on the other hand are still quite expensive. Of course the down side it that you can only get about 20 minutes of video on a standard DVD blank but that's enough for the majority of slideshows. Of course once you start adding video to the equation, you up the ante for storage space by a huge amount. Remember, when we create an executable slideshow without video to be played on a computer or by using a computer to play on a high definition TV, we are only encoding the actual images plus the "instructions" to the computer to create on the fly the intermediate images necessary for an animation. For example, we may have a zoom or pan or rotate which actually has hundred of intermediate images to effect that zoom, rotate or pan action. These images are not actually stored in the executable file, but are created on the fly by the video card at the rate of 60 frames per second and greater (that's what hardware rendering is all about). Only the first image must be stored and it is used to create all the intermediate images on the fly. Now when we insert a video clip, things are quite different. For a video clip every single image that is necessary to reveal the animation must be created ahead of time and "stored" on the media or within the executable file (in the case of software which actually embeds video). This means that for a 29.97 frame per second (let's round to 30 fps for the sake of simplicity) for every minute of video play we have 1800 separate images which must be stored on the media and within the file. If these images are reasonably large, such as 1024x768 then we have enormous storage issues. Let's just say that each image is a couple hundred "K" in size then we have about 360 megabytes of data to be stored for each minute of video. As you can see, when we begin talking about seriously large video files such as a resolution of 1920x1080 we are going to have HUGE files. Not something you could easily post on the web or even upload to your website for download by your friends. If you used very much video at 1920 x 1080 resolution it could take a long time to download and even a much longer time to upload. This is something which most users are not really consciously aware of. The fact that we would all like video included in our shows is one thing, but to have "quallity" with these videos we need larger file dimensions and less compression to maintain higher quality. These factors mean we will end up with some really big slideshows. Unfortunately there is no good trade-off yet. Either mediocre quality such as with Proshow Gold or huge file sizes and all that entails. Best regards, Lin

Hi Mary, Thanks for the reminder! Actually, this company also produces what I believe is the finest HDR software available. A trial can be downloaded here: http://www.mediachance.com/hdri/index.html Thanks again, Lin

Hi Peter, Proshow Gold has had the ability to integrate small video clips into the slideshow for years. There are a number of products which allow integrating video and have for six years or more such as Media@Show, Vegas Video, ProShow Gold, Adobe Premiere, etc., etc., but none of these products have hardware rendering which produces the ultra high quality and ultra smooth transitions and animations we have with PTE. It is possible to display video clips with PTE now by using Boxig's ShowVideo PTE utility: http://www.picturestoexe.com/forums/index....p;hl=video+clip but it's not yet possible to incorporate video within PTE as and integral part of your slideshow as a background while running PTE slides on top as it is with some products which incorporate video. Using video in your shows presents a plethora of issues when you have to somehow mix the fast frame rates allowed by PTE's hardware rendering engine and the lower video frame rates and lower quality animation, etc., of current video implementation. The technical obstacles are many, and to date we must choose whether we want the highest quality output possible, or settle for what is in my opinon the mediocre image and animation quality found in the competition. Right now we can't have it both ways so users must decide which is more important until such time as the technology is available to give us both. There is no reason to choose one or the other. It's perfectly acceptable to use numerous presentation slideshow products to create presentations. Proshow Gold is a pretty stable product; Proshow Producer is decidedly not. There are "many" unhappy people who are becoming upset with Producer and the myriad problems, crashes, patches and issues which have plagued it. It has great features and some impressive potential but largely unrealized and troublesome according to many who use it daily. I can recommend Gold if you want to add video clips to your shows, but I could not recommend Producer at all. There is nothing wrong with using both PTE and Gold - I do myself though not as much as in the past. Only the PTE development team can comment with certainty about the probability of incorporating video with PTE so I won't attempt to second guess the plans. In the final analysis, PTE has far more to offer me than either Gold or Producer or any other current product for that matter. Unless you want to spend really big bucks, you can't really top PTE and even when you do for some things there is no comparable product in my opinion. Best regards, Lin

Hi Dom, I think the issue may be the bitrate. If you have the option, set the bitrate much higher than the default and see if this helps smooth out things. I had a similar issue when I was trying to capture the spinning Earth for one of my planets sequences where I decompiled the video and used individual sequenced frames. I think I was using Screen Recorder Gold (It's been a while) and I found that to get smooth capture I had to jack up the bitrate. Some codecs support this and others don't seem to have an accessible setting. Best regards, Lin

Hi Andrew, Great show as it is. In the future to remove unwanted subject from a frame, take multiple identical frames from the same position of any scene you want to remove people from with the camera in the same position and with the same settings. Then use software such as PhotoAccute Studio http://www.photoacute.com/studio/index.html which can remove any moving subjects... works great! Best regards, Lin

Hi Dave, I think Xaver was referring to a "rectangle" as created by PTE internally rather than a jpg image. Rectangles and Frames (solid color) called in O&A seem to have a different aliasing applied and when animated the edges look a bit strange where a jpg or png image holds its shape better. Best regards, Lin

The "size" of the image for the mask is relatively unimportant. What is important is the aspect ratio. You only need to find the aspect ratio of the monitor or display you are using and make the mask the same. Then "size" the mask in PTE in the Object's List and when you have determined the proper size just use the same zoom figure for each image. If you want, you can then permanently resize the mask in Photoshop, etc., and use is for all your image of the same aspect ratio. You can turn the mask 90 degrees and use it then for portrait mode as well. Displays are typically either 3:2 (rare), 4:5, 16:9 or 16:10 aspect ratio depending on the manufacturer. Digital camera images from most dSLR's are 3:2 (such as to exactly fit a frame of 8x12 inches, etc.) or from an Olympus or Panasonic dSLR it is 4:3. From consumer digicams typically the aspect ratio is also 4:3 which fits perfectly on an 8x10 frame. So first determine the aspect ratio of your images and display. If necessary, crop the images to the same aspect ratio of your display then make the frame the same aspect ratio as the display and your problems will be solved. Remember though, if the show is displayed on a different display having a different aspect ratio there will be unavoidable issues. You "may" only need to size the mask in PTE to fill the frame of your display. It would help if you would post one image from your camera and your present mask. Then we could look at it and give more specific help. Best regards, Lin

Hi Fergy, What you need is a very simple PNG file with the correct aspect ratio. This can be created in Photoshop, PixBuilder Studio or your choice of photo editors which supports PNG files. It "could" be a jpg file, but a PNG could be more versatile depending on your individual type of border desired. What I mean by this is that if you want an irregular border, PNG supports transparency where jpg's must have a rectangular appearance. Since PTE can have multiple layers the only thing necessary to show the border is to size this file so that it frames the smaller image in the foreground but doesn't obscure the background image. This is very easy to do. The framing image goes between the background and foreground images in the Object's List. If you will post three image and say which you want to be in the background, which you wish to use as the border for the smaller image and which you want to be the smaller image I will create a quick sample for you. Best regards, Lin

Hi Sarolta, As you can see in my sample, it's very easy to place the double accents over the O and U by using the Numeric Keypad and typing the appropriate Alt xxxx numbers as indicated in my post. Of course you "can" do it in Photoshop as suggested by making a PNG file or you can do it in Photoshop by adding the text to your image as well, however, I don't see either of these methods "easier" than simply typing the "ALT XXXX" characters on your Keyboard Numeric Keypad. Does your keypad not function in the same way as mine? Best regards, Lin

Hi Sarolta, It seems that only the ASCII character sets may be entered and that the cut and paste doesn't work for characters not recognized as ASCII but I believe that there are alternate ASCII character sets which can be used which have the Hungarian characters. The issue is how to install this extended set. Please read the following: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO/IEC_8859-2 I've been testing with my keyboard set to Hungarian and have been able to get double accents. I have only gotten to zero 251 with my testing, but it appears that you will be able to do what you want to do using the Numeric Keypad with keyboard "Alt" followed by the proper sequence of numbers. - see below: Lin Later: Sarolta, Using Windows XP Home Edition, I was able to go into my Control Panel and change my language to Hungarian then use the numeric keypad and get the following using respectively: Alt zero two one three (Alt 0213), Alt zero two one nine (Alt 0219), Alt zero two four five (Alt 0245) and Alt zero two five one (Alt 0251). If you test all possible combination's I'm pretty sure you will be able to do what you want to do. If you get to a point with ALT 02XX where it stops putting in characters, go to ALT 3000 and so on. I wish I could find a chart which would give the exact keystrokes for all Hungarian characters but so far I've not found one. I do believe however, than since I have been able to put the double accents on the O and U that you will find a combination to also put in your other Hungarian specific characters. Do not try to do this in Word or other word processor but rather directly in the text in PTE. You can test and make a chart so you can easily enter any special Hungarian language character by simply using the Numeric Keypad.

Hi Sarolta, There may be a workaround for your problem. The ASCII characters (256 of them) can be accessed by first activating the numeric keypad on your keyboard then by holding down the keyboard "ALT" key and typing in the correct series of numbers on the numeric keypad you can achieve all the "accent" marks you wish to use. For example: http://office.microsoft.com/en-ca/excel/HA101675391033.aspx There are also downloadable scripts for different languages I believe.... Also see: http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/Windows/e...1d1dc41033.mspx You can actually put in most any specialized letters by this method which will work with PTE. There are a variety of ASCII character sets - I'm not sure whether or not there is one for Hungarian, but I'll bet there is! see: http://stason.org/TULARC/travel/hungary-hu...acter-sets.html and for general information: http://knopok.net/symbol-codes/ascii-code.html As an alternative, you can always type your text in Microsoft Word, etc., then copy and past in place of the word "text" in PTE. The accent marks will be preserved. Best regards, Lin

Hi Gayland, A long time ago when the "mask" feature was first introduced to PTE I made a brief tutorial which still may be of some use, you can download it here: http://www.picturestoexe.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=7901 For my grandchildren, I made a little slideshow for Halloween last year which demonstrates some uses of masking. Actually, it uses masks to add and reveal real "face masks" on my daughter, son-in-law and grandchildren. This is but one of an almost infinite way in which masking "could" be used for a slideshow. In any situation where you want to have a portion of an image change in real time but make the change happen as a "wipe" or similar effect but only on a "portion" of the image, a mask makes this very easy to do. Let me explain a bit further. There are alternative ways to make this happen, but not in exactly the same manner. For example, if one were to create two almost identical pictures such as my picture of my daughter and son in law in the sample below, one wearing the face mask and one without. Then it would be possible to sequence these two images using a fade, etc., one right after the other and it would appear that the face mask was fading in or fading out. But if the user wanted the face mask to appear from one side or the other of the face and seem to be painted on a bit at a time, then using a mask makes much more sense. Let's further assume that it might be desirable to have an effect such as moving a magnifying glass over an image and having that portion under the glass appear "magnified." Then using masking makes perfect sense and is the only effective way to get this effect. This would be done by using a zoomed image within the "mask container" which would be a duplicate of the image outside the container but zoomed in. The "mask," in this case would be a circular white PNG object sized and positioned to fit the circle of the magnifying glass and made a "child" of the magnifying glass so that when the instrument is moved across the subject the "mask" moves in perfect synchronization. Everywhere the mask goes, that portion of the underlying "zoomed" image is revealed so that it appears as if the magnifying glass is actually "magnifying" that portion of the main image beneath it. In reality, the magnifying glass lens (i.e., the mask) is "revealing" the underlying zoomed image. The mask feature makes this illusion possible, etc. Halloween demo: http://www.learntomakeslideshows.net/sample/halloween.zip Just to the magnifying glass demo: http://www.learntomakeslideshows.net/sampl...yingdemoexe.zip Here's a link to the mask demo using a variety of masking : http://www.learntomakeslideshows.net/sampl...demorevised.zip Best regards, Lin

Hi Gayland, Hopefully, this will help a bit but to really understand masks you may want to experiment.

Hi Dom, Very nice "variation" on the use of the magnifying glass with very nice shadows and effect! Best regards, Lin

Hi Lorie, Many projectors simply can't handle animations smoothly. If you could let us know the model and manufacturer of the projector, perhaps one of our forum members who has had experience with the particular one might be able to comment. The problem appears to be that many of today's projectors have difficulty with the fast frame rates which are generated by PTE to make smooth pans, zooms and rotates. Some of the newer projectors have corrected the deficiencies and work well with PTE's hardware rendered output, but a number of earlier designs just can't deal with this and there is no known solution. Please post the exact make and model of the projector you are using and one of us will try to diagnose the problem with you. Best regards, Lin

Hi Tom, I actually didn't see any fading on my CRT which has a pretty fast refresh and low persistence phosphors; just a bit of a trailing ghosting like a plasma trail, but both leading and trailing edge of the disc on the LCD were quite evident. Nice job on the extrusion - you could have fooled me! (you did fool me - LOL), it makes a great phonograph platter! The interesting thing is that this highlights some of the issues which might be misunderstood by people watching slideshows which have objects in fast motion. What may seem perfect to the person creating the show might be seen in a totally different light by others who have different displays. Since LCD displays are becoming much more popular these days than CRT displays, we must take care when creating animations that they don't exceed proprietary bounds for viewing on disparate monitors. Best regards, Lin

An interesting illusion of 3D simulation in 2D image achieved with (Tom will recognize this) the light reflection position. The object (actually a phonograph platter) appears to reveal 360 degrees along the horizontal aspect as if it turns in space. Actually the same side is always seen. When playing with this, I observed that on my high res CRT monitor I have a clean view of the leading and trailing edge with slight ghosting following the movement due to phosphor refresh and retention time. However, on my LCD display, the leading and trailing edge are dissolved during rotation as if the object is dematerializing. Just wondering about how it appears to others who have LCD displays with varying refresh capabilities? http://www.learntomakeslideshows.net/sample/3Dsimulation.zip Best regards, Lin