Lin Evans

Hi Dale, Two parts to your answer: 1. I would suggest the freeware program Irfanview. Also download and install the Irfanview Plugins: http://www.irfanview.com Irfanview can do batch resize. You determine the pixel dimensions and the amount of compression and Irfanview does the work for you. Just give it an entire folder, make a folder to hold the copies and you will very quickly have what you need. 2. The mini-player resizes everything to a very compact size for display. This takes a bit of time because it's done on the fly. For the preview mode an actual exe temp file is created which instructs the computer to create the files at whichever size you have chosen for display, but remember large full-sized files are going to slow down the hardware. Just download and install Irfanview and the Irfanview plugins then look for "batch conversion". Irfanview comes with instructions in the help files and once you understand how it works you can do the task very quickly and efficiently. The resample algorithms in IrfanView are very good. If you have problems, zip the PTE file using PTE and post it. I'll be glad to downsample them for you and load your images then post them for you to test. Best regards,; Lin

Hi Frank, That represents the time it takes for the file to download from wherever the executable file is physically such as the email server to the client computer, not the time it takes for the executable file itself to open. It would be more expeditious for the company to post the show as a zipped executable on the company's website (in a folder on the host computer server) then provide a link in the emails rather than trying to email the executable slideshow itself. Then the download would have a visual "progress" indicator so that the person downloading would get a feel for how long it might take. Even with a very fast broadband and depending on various internet conditions it takes some time to download 15 megabytes of data. The only way to more or less "instantly" see a slidshow over the web would be to convert the exe file and create a streaming FLV Flash show which has its own set of issues such much lower image quality, smaller images, the necessity of the recipient having the proper Flash player installed, etc. You "could" make the images much smaller thereby making the file size much smaller which would download faster, but then that would defeat the great image quality with PTE. Best regards, LIn

Looks like it's limited to Powerpoint and Keynote? - must somehow be tied to Apple considering the judges and prizes? Best regards, Lin

Hi Fabrizio, I understand that what you want is the ability to distort the image as done with Photoshop, etc., in the perspective distortion mode. That's commonly known as "Z" axis manipulation and presently not directly possible in PTE - perhaps in the future..... By the way, there are no black shapes around the image in the samples I provided. The distortions are real and done via parent/child and independent XY axis manipulations - no "illusions". Best regards, Lin

Hi Ray, Never let age be an issue. The older you get, the more you can draw on a tremendous wealth of knowledge which you have stored over a lifetime. Only "fear" of things new and different will prevent you from learning new things every day. Ron Wilkinson (ronwil), one of our great but now departed forum members was learning and contributing to our collective knowledge up until the day he was physically no longer able to visit the forum. Ron passed away a few months ago, but we will all remember his wit, spunk, common sense, contibutions and advice. He was thrilled with PTE 5 and was creating great animated slideshows right up to the end. So don't let age get in your way of having fun, experimenting and learning new "tricks" with PTE - it will help keep you sharp! Best regards, Lin

Hi Frank, Perhaps in a future release there may some programmed text effects possible and as video technology improves there may be a future possibility of directly including high resolution video clips in a PTE show. I don't think its a matter of users not "wanting" additional features such as fancy text effects, video clips and such, it's more a matter of technical expediency at this stage. Where there must be a "choice" between image quality versus features as at present, image quality will always trump features for PTE users. It's the image and presentation quality (smoothness, etc.) which attracts users to PTE and nothing must be compromised in that area. Best regards, Lin

Hi Ray, Great start! Here's the changes I would make (sent you a PM with link). More areas of transparency to get more apparent waterfall. Darken the underlying jpg at areas of intense white burn out but do only on the jpg not on the png overlay. Unzip the zipped sample (I screen captured your original and created a new PNG cover) and compare the png and original to your own to see where you might make changes to get more water falling. Best regards, Lin

Hi Xaver, I can certainly understand the difficulty of language barriers and how it relates to forums. I would be at a loss, for example, to carry on an intelligent conversation in German or Russian on a forum although I could do this in Spanish, Portuguese or Italian. It seems the French have solved the language issues by creating PTE forums in French. Perhaps in the future there can be forums in German as well, especially for the older generation who had not the advantage of learning an alternate language. I was surprised when I visited Germany on several recent occasions at how now, compared to my visits in the 50's, many younger people have an excellent command of English which seems to have become more or less the international business language. This is one reason we really need to provide the User's Guide in many languages. Hopefully, in the future Wnsoft can find sufficient resources or volunteers to translate into not only Russian and English as today but also into French, German, Italian, Spanish and perhaps more of the Eastern European languages as well. Best regards, Lin

Hi Fabrizio, It is possible within certain limitations. I believe what you want is the manipulation of the "Z" axis. To a degree this is presently possible using PTE. It's not a direct manipulation in that you can't achieve a total perspective shift as possible with "transform" or "free transform" with Photoshop, but you can definitely distort the image as you may see in these examples: First a flat image distortion on the "Z" axis: http://www.learntomakeslideshows.net/sample/distort.zip Then a distortion of a vertical image to lie horizontally while animated. Note the main rotor on the helicopter which is transformed from a vertical rotation to a horizontal rotation: http://www.learntomakeslideshows.net/sample/helicopter.zip Hopefully, in the future it may be possible to achieve the type of perspective distortion which now requires using Photoshop to achieve. But note that once done in Photoshop or other software it's possible to animate using PTE. Look at theDom's photo "book" example. Best regards, Lin

Hi Xaver, I use and have used m.Objects, Wings Platinum, Vegas Video, Adobe Encore and a half-dozen other video and presentation slideshow products as well. I know nothing of what AquaSoft has done with their new version. If they are using hardware rendering that's great. We'll see how it works out with DiaMaster and whether they have cured their audio synchronization issues. ScreenAV, is a totally different product with a different emphasis primarily for projected images. m.Objects has had more than its share of issues with the "simulated" full screen mode which has not near the image quality in my experience of PTE. Video simply can not match executable output for image quallity. I would assume you agree or your would be using m.Objects instead of PTE. The hardware rendering engine of PTE in my opinion is second to none and unlike any other in present use and you know exactly what I mean. I maintain my opinion that "none" of the other presentation slideshow programs matches the image quality of PTE. I will have to see someone else create a slideshow with equal output quality because I can't do it using the above products. I have not seen a slideshow from version 6 of AquaSoft so I can't comment on it as a comparison. Have you used version 6? Best regards, Lin

Hi Frank, What does "sophisticated" mean? LOL - no offense taken. As I said, "any" text animation which can be done using video text can be duplicated using PTE along with animations which "can-not" be done with currently available video text engines, and yes, of course it's not nearly as easy as typing in your text and choosing an effect from a list. But the problem remains. One must choose the appropriate tool for the task at hand. PTE doesn't use video for the reasons I've stipulated so one has a choice of video or image quality. I use and have used the competing software products (all of the popular ones including some which cost me over $1500) so I'm completely familiar with their capabilities and limitations. Being able to drop in a video clip (which is essentially what these text effects consist of) is very convenient if you need or want these fancy text effects for your show. The point is that we all have different needs and different software programs have different strengths and weaknesses. Most who use PTE don't want to sacrifice image quality and versatility for "flash" (pun intended). There are already plenty of software programs available which do these kind of things. Making PTE into yet another of these software rendered programs would, in my opinion, be a giant step backward. If it were easy to implement video in PTE without loosing what we have then yes, that would be wonderful, but in fact it's not or the developers would already have done it. They haven't done it for the same reasons the competition have not developed hardware rendering: the two are not compatible from either an aesthetic or technical perspective. I believe your original argument that PTE "must have" this feature in the "near future" simply does not obtain. It's horses for courses here. PTE in the opinion of the majority here is the finest presentation slideshow software available. That's certainly my opinion. It's the choice of the majority who do AV competitions and its popularity growth is phenomenal. I believe the reason is that it relatively bug-free, produces the highest quality imagery possible and provides the most versatility in image manipulation. PTE has "always" been a "nuts and bolts" type software which means that you "can" do things with it which you can't do with competiting products. With that extreme versatility comes limitations in "convenience". Yes, it's very convenient to drop in a video clip to facilitate text effects or choose from a convenient library of Flash animations but while these type things have a definite place in "some" presentation slideshows they are outside the core competency and direction of PTE and not a necessary component. There are things easily done with PTE which simply can't be done with the competition and things easily done with the competition which can't be done with PTE. As one can't make a sports car of a Hummer or an off-road trail blazer of a Ferrari, there is a place for each. If one wishes to race on a track or carve through mountain road "S" curves then buy a sports car. If one wishes to crash through the jungle, climb rocks or slosh through mud, buy an off-road vehicle. Don't try to add another live axle to your Ferrari and beef up the suspension and body to make it into a poorly designed Hummer or replace the heavy-duty suspension and all-wheel drive and bullet-proof body of your Hummer to try to make it into a poorly designed sports car. They are fine the way they are. Adding cup-holders is one thing, trying to redesign to fit inappropriate use is yet another. If you want video clip drop-in then use Proshow Gold, Producer, Media@Show, Vegas Video, Wings Platinum, mObjects or other presentation slideshow product amenable to this. If you want the ultimate in image quality and a nuts-and-bolts low level power to create then use PTE. Like the Hummer and Ferrari, they share some features but differ in significant ways. As you admit, PTE has unparalled image quality in an executable slideshow. Keep in mind that PTE stands for Pictures to Executable not pictures to video. The executable file has "always" been the core competency of this product from its inception. Perhaps in the future when commonly available video improves to the level of the executable (it has a long way to go yet) it may be possible to add video to PTE without diluting the quality but there are major technical barriers right now. Until then when you need or want video type text effects either spend the time to create them with the tools available in PTE or use a different product. Best regards, Lin

Hi Gayland, PTE is a "very" versatile program. Frank is really talking about "canned" text effects but may not realize that about any text effect which can be done in Proshow Gold or Proshow Producer with the canned text effect engine can be duplicated in PTE and "many" effects can be done with PTE which "can't" be done with Producer or Gold. Is it as easy? No, of course not. A templated text effect such as "exploding" text or the appearance of a single letter at a time, etc., can be easily accomplished with a text effect engine. The "best" text effect engine is in an inexpensive program called "Media@Show" by a former US company now owned by a Taiwanese company called Cyberlink. The program has no pan, zoom, rotate or any of the extremely powerful features of PTE but the original developers came from the video industry and they have spinning, twirling, tumbeling, rotating, bending, you name it text effects second to none. Having an engine amenable to video allows lots of text effects not easily accomplished in a program like PTE, but there are "MAJOR" trade offs. The primary trade off is the one which sets PTE apart from "all" the competiton - IMAGE QUALITY! Neither ProShow Gold, nor Proshow Producer, nor mObjects, nor Wings Platinum, nor Adobe Encore or "ANY" other presentation slideshow program can match PTE's image quality. Why? They don't have hardware rendering which allows the creation of an executable slideshow second to none, period. Some of these other programs (Wings Platinum, mObjects, Encore, etc.) can produce incredibly good video just as PTE, but they can't produce the smooth, fast, hardware rendered quality of PTE in an executable slideshow. To have this capability we give up certain things such as the easy implementation of video and all that entails. Video and hardware rendering are a difficult mix - this is precisely why Proshow Gold and Produce do not have hardware rendering. Many of their users are hooked on video. There is a place for video in slideshows but it doesn't mix with ultimate quality so a decesion must be made by the user to use the proper tool for the task at hand. So to get these fantastic text effects with PTE we must manually program which takes much more time to do, but it also gives us the ability to do things with text which none of these other programs can equal. By controlling text as an object we can apply things like parent/child relationship (something the competition can't do) and off-center rotation (another thing the competition can't do) and with this combination we can accomplish animations which are virtually impossible to do with other presentation slideshow software. So for quick, fancy text effects, use a software which allows video and you can have fantastic animated text effects. But if you want quality, use PTE. There is a misconception - such as Frank has, that having these text effects is as easy as having a text engine. It's not. And the reason PTE does't have one is not that it's "expensive" or "lack of resources" - it's simply not something amenable to a slideshow engine which doesn't directly support video. With a video engine there are virtually dozens of programs you can use to have fantastic animated text, but then you don't have that incredible image quality we have with PTE. So give up quality and have video or give up video and have quality. At the present state of art in the graphics industry it's that simple. Best regards, Lin

Hi Frank, There is no specific text animation mode in PTE but you certainly can do text animation - some in ways which are not possible with Proshow, etc. Let me know what it is that you would like to see and I'll provide you a sample. P.S. Here's a little "taste" - LOL http://www.learntomakeslideshows.net/sample/nutella.zip Best regards, Lin

Hi Dale, You have plenty of resources for normal shows and an excellent graphics card but the large originals are too much for really quick changes. Set their pixel dimensions, except for slides with deep zooms to the normal resolution of your monitor such as 1200x1600, etc., whatever you are using and you should have perfect synchronization. Best regards, Lin

Hi Stuart, That's a strange one! Could you possibly post one or two of the images in full resolution which you are having difficulty with? Have you tried the same show on a different computer? This really sounds like a hardware issue of some sort rather than a PTE issue. Perhaps if you could create a very simple PTE show just using about two images where you see this problem and post both the zipped PTE file and a zipped executable file we can quickly get to the bottom of the cause. A "mesh" pattern which appears on images in a PTE show in both 4.x and 5.x but which "doesn't" appear in other software on the same system would be very strange indeed because 4.x and 5.x use totally different "engines". 5.x uses hardware rendering through the video card while 4.x doesn't render but just displays via the video card. The video card is the common denominator but the first thing I would do would be to see if this is happening on a different system. Also try some of your older images from another trip and see if they too show this problem. Could you also try playing a slideshow from perhaps Beechbrook which has blue skies, etc., to see if the problem also appears there? Best regards, Lin

Hi, As others have suggested, it sounds very much like a hardware resource issue. If there are very fast changes it forces your video card to attempt to create the necessary stream of images quicker than your hardware configuration will allow. Unlike DVD, AVI, MPEG or other video formats, an executable file doesn't contain all the images required to play your show in a pre-created library. This is why executable code is relatively tiny compared to video code. The executable file contains the initial images you used to create your slideshow and an instruction set of code which tells your hardware to create the intermediate images necessary to achieve the desired pan, zoom or rotate on the fly. PTE will instruct your system to create on average 60 new images per second which gives you that incredible smoothness compared to the maximum of 29.97 images per second in a video mode. But to do this takes more resources when image dimensions are large than when they are smaller. So if you are using original captures from a digital camera, for instance, and these are quite large in both pixel dimension and file size the video card is sometimes taxed beyond it's resource allocation and it slows down or skips frames. Remember that even though a jpg may have a compressed storage size in terms of kilobytes or megabytes, when it is played on your computer it expands in memory from this compressed state to its full uncompressed size - the size of an uncompressed 8 bit tiff file. To make a complex situation oversimplified, just reduce the dimensions of the images to a point where the hardware can keep up with the demand and you should get proper synchronization. The reason the mini-player can keep up is that the images created use but a fraction of the hardware resources that the full slideshow usese. Best regards, Lin

Hey, I'd like to catch a Salmon myself - heck with the bear!! Lin

O.K. folks, I'm through playing with waterfall animations - this is the last one. All three in one 19 meg animation show .... On to other projects.. http://www.learntomakeslideshows.net/sample/3falls.zip Lin

Hi Jim, Since my tutorials use the DivX codec, you may download and install them here: I would suggest trying the ACE Megapac install first followed by the DivX install. http://www.divx.com/divx/windows/ This "should" make your system again compatible with the DivX suite. Best regards, Lin

Hi Dirk, LOL - I long ago gave up trying to figure out "why" certain MP3 selections and such work properly with some music players and not with others. I've decided to relegate the reasons to black art, gremlins, witchcraft or playful elves (take your pick). Whenever I encounter a really strange occurrence such as this I just scratch my head, import and re-export the selection through the gremlin filter of Audacity once again and all is well. Not having access to the internal code of PTE I suspect that a different library is being used for the mini-player audio which may account for the fact that the music plays all the way through with the mini-player yet fails with the preview and executable (which are really the same in that the preview is simply a temp exe creation). Why removing and inserting a slide caused this issue (if it's not just an unlikely coincidence) is and probably will remain a mystery. I do use most compatible when I export from Audacity for PTE myself.... Best regards, Lin

Hi Dirk, This may sound strange but take your music out entirely and save the PTE file. Open the music in Audacity and export it under a different name then re-insert music and try it again. What this could be is a slight corruption in the MP3 which may not be detected by all music players. I don't think this is a bug in PTE - too many people have used it without issues after adding music, removing music, etc., actually thousands so more likely an issue with the music file itself. Audacity sets things right when it exports and I'm betting that this will solve the issue. Best regards, Lin

This one more difficult because of changes in direction of water flow: about 9 megabyte zipped exe.... http://www.learntomakeslideshows.net/sample/olympia.zip Lin

Hi Gary, Reboot your computer and look again. "If" the codec pack which you installed has additional codecs which were not already installed on your computer they "should" appear in the list automatically. PTE simply queries the system and reports via standard Windows procedures what Windows has shown to be properly installed and operating codecs. As for choosing one, the issue you face is one of trying to second guess which codecs may or may not be installed on other's systems. For any system to recognize and play an AVI file or an audio file the codec used to compress video and/or audio must reside on and be properly installe on the system the file is played on. Windows comes with certain codecs installed but which depends on which iteration of Windows. Generally if you use a Microsoft codec the probability of the codec being available on other computers is greater. The lower number video codecs such as MPEG 1 or 2 (rather than MPEG 4) are more common because they have been around longer, however some of the higher number codecs are more sophisticated and produce better results. It's really a guessing game as far as which you choose and much depends on the audience for your AVI and what you can assume about the relative age of their systems as well as the technical savy of their owners. I generally recommend that for your first AVI's which you plan to use for general distribution that you choose Microsoft MPEG 2. There are some issues which make it difficult to be absolutely certain which codec you have used. I've reported this to Igor in the past but I'm uncertain whether it's something he has control over or whether PTE uses Microsoft's own reporting code. When the drop-down list appears, there is a vertical scroll bar but no horizontal scroll bar and some of the codec names are too wide to display properly so it's not always possible to tell exactly which video codec you have selected. When Igor returns from his vacation (holiday) I will ask him again if it's possible to remedy this. Meanwhile try Microsoft MPEG 2 for your video codec. Best regards, Lin

Hi Folks, As per requests I've created an AVI tutorial on creating the waterfall simulation animation. I've also included a PNG file you can use with modification as instructed in the tutorial to simulate falling water. I didn't cover how to create the PNG, it's akin to "black art" LOL, and would take way long to explain, but for those who want to research it I provided a tutorial on making "snow" animations and how the PNG files are done in Photoshop long ago. Use the search engine - but I don't have the links at hand so if you need to find out how to make your own just search the archives and you will find it. With the instructions in the rather lengthy description and the provided PNG file, you should be able to choose and animate your own waterfalls. Experiment, play and have fun and be sure to post your designs for the forum to see! Here's a convenience link to the Tutorials and Articles forum. The zipped AVI is the last one on the PTE Made Easy (PTE for Smarties) section pinned at the top (about 69 meg download). http://www.picturestoexe.com/forums/index....st=0#entry49109 Best regards, Lin

Hi Ray, I have the waterfall simulation tutorial ready (about 69 meg) and am putting it up now. It also contains the PNG file called "snow5.png" which you will want to use to simulate the falling water as explained in the tutorial. Best regards, Lin