Lin Evans

Great job Jean-Pierre, and welcome back - you have been missed! Best regards, Lin

For anyone interested - right now for a limited time there is a great deal on a very good and very powerful video card - the PNY Nvidia 8800GT chipset based Geforce XLR8 8800GT 512 mb PCI Express card for $232.84 (limit one per customer). For those looking for a really powerful card this is a great deal. I bought one and it's about $60 less than the best price with tax which I found locally. Here's a link: http://www.mwave.com/mwave/skusearch.hmx?SCriteria=AA72380 Lin

Hi Sherrill, Here's a link to Price Grabber where you can find the Nvidia 8600 GT card with 256 meg RAM which would make you a dandy Video Card. Prices as low as $94. You need one for a PCI Express card slot. http://computers.pricegrabber.com/video-ca..._kwfeed_1/skd=1 Lin

Hi Sherrill, Actually, compressing them by making the file size of the image smaller without changing the image dimensions would tend to make them more grainy than actually making the dimensions smaller. For print purposes you definitely want to leave them as originals in every way as far as image size and low compression coming from your S5-IS Canon. But for making slide shows there is no good reason to leave them at their original dimensions and many good reasons not to especially with PTE 5.1 where later you may decide to do pans, zooms and rotates, etc. There are a number of good free utilities around which will allow you to downsample your images automatically in batch format and not affect the image quality at all. They will duplicate your images and not affect the originals. Actually, I'm surprised that there was any significant difference on your system among my various images. This tells me that perhaps it is your video card (or lack of one because it's integrated into the motherboard) which is causing the problem. Each of the images you downloaded should have about the same quality in the slideshow. What we need to find out is the type of slot in your computer for a video card add-on. There are a number of decent video cards which don't cost an arm and a leg depending on the type of video slot you have. If the system is a newer one it's probably a PCI Express slot. Perhaps we can find out or maybe Brian knows from the specifications sheet. If you plan to use PTE 5.1 you will eventually want to upgrade the video card because the built-in one is extremely marginal. It works very well with PTE 4.x because that version doesn't use any graphics acceleration, etc. PTE 5.1 is designed to be backwardly compatible but some of the integrated chip-sets like yours is not well behaved and doesn't conform to accepted standards. Even Acer suggests upgrading it. You would not know this unless as you did, try to create a slideshow with images which overtaxed the system. Once you have seen what you can do with an upgraded video environment I know you will be happy that you upgraded even if you have to save for a few months to do it. We will try to find out which video slot your system uses and perhaps help you find an inexpensive solution which will greatly improve the quality of your slideshows, etc. Best regards, Lin

Hi SCJ (please give us a first name so we can be less formal), Actually, many of us here are "senior citizens" and we love to help each other with understanding the new technical devices and such which seem to come much easier to the "kids". The fact that you could see some of my shows tends to make me think that even though you may definitely need a stronger video environment to help you make PTE shows, that there is something perhaps which you are inadvertently doing in creating your shows which is causing the major part of the problem. Could you tell us how you took the images which you are using for your slideshow? Did you use a digital camera and if so, what brand and "resolution" in megapixels? Did you do anything to the images such as resize them before putting them in your show? The reason for the questions is that sometimes we use oriinal full resolution images and if the video card is less than optimal it could be that the size in pixel dimensions of the images might affect the performance. This is generally not an issue for the older 4.4x versions of PTE but "can" be an issue for PTE 5.x depending on individual circumstances. To test this, I have about a dozen images which I have posted on a website link for you. If you will download each into a folder then open PTE 5 and try a simple slideshow with them and tell us if it works normally, then perhaps we can better diagnose the problem. Just click on the link below. When the page opens, click on the first thumbnail at left top then when the 1024x768 image opens right click on it and download to a folder on your computer. Use the right arrow to go from 1024 pixel to next 1024 pixel image until you have downloaded each of the 12 into a folder. Next open PTE 5.1 and create a simple slideshow using all defaults. Let us know if this one runs normally. If it does, then we can safely assume that the size of your images is causing the issue. http://www.lin-evans.net/testimages/index.htm Best regards, Lin

Hi Brian - there's a saying: Give a girl a fish and you have fed her for today - teach a girl to fish and you have fed her for a life-time. O.K. - I took a few liberties with the saying - LOL. Actually, I believe we need to make people aware that they can generally always find out a great deal about their own system by using the "dxdiag" diagnostic. Knowing this can help them provide technical information to decide whether they need to consider an upgrade on their various components to make PTE work better or whether the problems lie elsewhere. Best regards, Lin

Just for your own information for the future - video drivers are free from the manufacturer, they don't cost anything. You can find out all about your system by clicking from the Desktop on "Start" then "Run" then type in the word "dxdiag" then click on O.K. Your computer will run a diagnostic and return a screen with multiple tabs which you can click on to find out exactly how your system is configured. If you click on the tab marked "Display" it will tell you the name of your video card chip set manufacturer, the amount of RAM and other important information needed to tell you whether your system is up to running animated video. Best regards, Lin

Hi Bill, If you have any animations (pan, zoom, rotate) in your slideshows this isn't going to work for you, The problem as Brian has explained is one of synchronization with fames. PTE executable shows have differential frame speeds depending on what's happening. The recorder records at a constant speed and this causes jerky movement. You don't get this when a PTE show is converted to AVI or MPEG but when you try to capture from the screen it's an issue. You are just as well off to just use PTE to create a small web-sized AVI to upload to YouTube as to go through the process of playing an executable and recording it via the screen. The primary value of this program is for those creating tutorials or desiring to capture multiple still images from a PTE executable video not for capturing the the animated show. Best regards, Lin

Hi Brian, Thanks, I suspected as much. There just doesn't seem to be any readily available Windows software which can capture an executable video having animations smoothly. This lack of smoothness is the primary reason I quit trying to play back using the Preview function on my AVI tutorials. No matter which software I've tried (most of those available) the PTE playback is always quite "jerky" on the AVI even though quite smooth on the cursor movements and other portions of the recording. It seems that when the "executable" part (previews are actually temporary executable code) is played the recorder doesn't synchronize properly causing jerks in pans, zooms, rotates, etc. On the other hand when you actually "drag" the cursor across the timeline by hand the same sequences can be made very smoothly. This software makes a very viable competitor to Camtasia at a fraction of the cost. Having multple output capabilities and extremely powerful editing to include frame editing on the AVI is a very useful feature. When I get my new system in and get it configured I will probably switch from my present screen recording software to this which is much more flexible. Bottom line is I think for capturing still frames from your PTE shows this is the "cat's meow". For doing tutorials etc., it sure beats the high priced competition in many useful ways. Thanks for drawing our attention to this great product. Best regards, Lin

Hi David, For assistance with the particular templates you purchased from theDom, you should communicate directly with him but for general understanding of PTE there are numerous AVI tutorials and a 130 page User Guide available from the "Tutorials" section of this forum and a host of other tutorials available from theDom's website. My suggestion would be to download the User Guide and you may want to start with the "PTE Made Easy" series of AVI's. Best regards, Lin

Hi Brian, Just a quick question as I'm in the middle of trying to recover and rebuild from a total crash. I downloaded this video recorder and it seems that it's a feature rich and fantastic value when compared to the gold standard. The only thing I'm having difficulty with is determining whether "any" of these screen recorders can record a PTE animation smoothly. So far I haven't found one which will give me even a close representation of the real show. The default in this one is 10 frames per second but even when I set it to 30 fps (29.97) it still records animations in a "jerky" way. Resampling doesn't seem to make it significantly better. I've tried this on a couple of my systems with powerful video cards and processors (3.2 ghz CPU and Nvidia OC8600 GT GPU, etc.) and it's evident that while recording the video performance is being compromised. Have you been able to record a PTE show with animations with smooth AVI results? Best regards, Lin

In the old versions before 5.0 if you were on the first slide and pressed the backspace or back arrow the program would go to the first slide. It doesn't do this any longer, but it's very easy to program it to go to the first slide or last slide, etc. or any slide. You can set an invisible "button" or program a slide to go to any slide from any other slide in a couple ways. Go to Objects and Animations screen then "Common Tab" then click on the Down Arrow next to "action on mouse click". You can choose from a number of choices one to go to any slide number. Put in the last slide then a mouse click on the first slide will take you to the last slide. You can also click on the "Add Button" icon on the top-left of your screen (next to far left icon) and add a button and put it anywhere on the screen or make it very large, set the opacity to zero then set the "Properties" to go to a particular slide, etc. Lots of options. Lin

Just a notice that I will not be available for a few days. My system has crashed and my mirror image hard disk is down as well. It will be several days before I can rebuild so won't be available to answer questions. Best regards, Lin

Hi Mike, Just a quick observation. I don't believe the magnifying glass Dom has is the same. It isn't a moving magnifying glass which "magnifies" . I don't believe that feature is possible with PTE right now. I'll have to check but I think the one you see in the PSP demo requires a feature not yet available in PTE but may be soon. Best regards, Lin

Hi Dom, Magnificent! Anyone who hasn't taken the time to get over to your site and see these presentations needs to do so and be prepared to be blown away! Best regards, Lin

Hi Mike, I'm not sure whether there is anything devoted to creating DVD's but I can give you a quick run through. Create your slideshow with PTE and test it using the Preview. Once you are happy with it click on the "Video" button at the bottom of the Main Screen then from there click on "Burn DVD". From the next screen negotiate to the folder where you have the PTE file and it will appear as a large thumbnail in the top portion of the screen. Either click, hold and drag it to the bottom or click to select then click on "Add". Next click on the "Project Options" and choose between NTSC (U.S.) or PAL format. For now take the other defaults as far as bitrates, etc., and click on "O.K". Next be sure there is a check mark in the block beside "Create Menu" then click on "Next" Choose a template from those available, click on title, etc., and change to the font text you wish and such. For now use one of the templates rather than your own background image. After you have the text and template like you want it click "Next". On the screen which appears you have the option to select whether and where you which to create an mpeg2 file, whether you want ISO images and a DVD folder and where you wish theim. For now I would ignore these and just click to put a check beside "Burn DVD" then be sure you have a DVD in your burner and that the program has identified your hardware (usually automatic) then click "Start" That all there is to the basics. Hopefully, later this week I will create a tutorial on some more esoteric aspects of creating a DVD menu such as using your own backgrounds, etc. Best regards, Lin

Hi Ray, A few thoughts. You really don't get any increase in image quality from 35mm color film or transparency from scanning at such a high resolution, you just get a larger file size. All usable detail can be captured at about a 4,000 dpi scan. Even drum scans at $75 per image don't get additional detail at greater than 5,000 dpi they just scan grain. With this in mind you may want to try lowering the DPI to about 4,000 and compare. The thing about scanning is that you can scan at higher and higher resolutions but you reach a practical limit with 35mm color film or transparency at about 4K dpi. Anything higher just increases file bloat without giving you any significant detail. To see the true load size of your files, look at the size of an 8 bit tiff. From your description, it could be in excess of 100 meg per image. There could well be a bug in 5.1 which is contributing to the problems you are experiencing but even with your computing power remember that 5.1 does "hardware" rendering for DVD. You may want to try the same with 5.0's Video Builder which "didn't" use hardware rendering for the DVD/mpeg creation. This "could" be the difference causing the problems with the huge files. Which video card are you using? Sorry if you mentioned that earlier I missed it. Go to the Tutorials section and in the "PTE Made Easy" download the AVI on SuperZoom. The essence is that at the time you capture your images and knowing that you may want to zoom to highly detailed areas, you shoot a few overlapping frames to stitch. Then when you want to zoom to detail levels you first find 100% zoom levels for the first image (use "original" to find this) then you load the stitched or longer focal length image temporarily as an object with image 1, zoom it out to match the 100% zoom of image 1 (set opacity to about 40% to visually align and size) then copy/paste the zoom and pan and/or rotate numbers into image 2. This gives you a perfect match for size and position. Then set the opacity back to 100% for image 1 and delete image 2 from the image 1 objects list. This can be repeated as many times as necessary to get even macro detail in the zoom. It's a bit easier if you actually see it on the tutorial but here are links to two samples. Originally I intended to make the sample for panoramas but the idea is amenable to any zoom. The only thing necessary is to be sure you cover enough real-estate so that when image 2 is zoomed out there is sufficient image size to meet the full screen aspect ratio hence the "stitch" concept. Look at these two samples which will give you some idea. http://www.lin-evans.org/pte/kachinazoom.zip http://www.lin-evans.org/pte/prowler.zip The first is a one centimeter tall carved Native American Kachina figure zoomed from wide angle to macro. The second is a travel trailer zoom starting at about 28mm and progressively going to 2000mm. On the second one I didn't use stitched images to match, just wanted to show the procedure as a sample but you get some idea of the possibillities. Note the original travel trailer image presented at original size within the "O" of the word "Prowler" at the end of the slide. Best regards, Lin

Hi Ray, Are these 25 meg jpgs? What are the dimensions in pixels? The reason I ask is that if the size of the jpeg in storage is 25 meg and it's done with moderate compression the "actual" size of the file in memory could be as much as 100 meg per file. Since even the Canon 1DS Mark III at + 21 megapixels doesn't make native jpg images that large, i'm assuming you have interpolated these to get to a compressed file size this large. Remember, PicturesToExe hardware renders at full resolution for any pan, zooms or rotates. If we assume that the "compressed" jpg is 25 meg in size this could mean rendering as much as six gigabytes per second for a pan, zoom or rotate when the program creates sixty frames per second (100 meg true file size times 60 frames per second = 6,000 meg = ~ 6 gigabytes). That's an enormous load on any system. PTE 4.4x doesn't render it simply displays. So static images are displayed one at a time for the duration necessary for the desired display. This means only one file of the total dimensions and load size is processed for each slide rather than up to 60 per second. Programs which create AVI or mpeg files without hardware rendering downsample to the desired display size (in your case 1080p) and don't playback in real time until the files have rendered and been stored in the final file at which time they are much smaller. If you want deep zooms, it would be a much better approach to follow the method I explain in my "Superzoom" tutorial where you shoot a few frames with longer focal length lenses and match the 100% size of image one's zoom to the downsized (zoomed out) frame of the following image. This way you have no need for any single image larger in pixel dimensions than your final display device can play. In this case you would get just as good an image as from a huge unmanageable interpolated file of as much as 100 megabytes. What Colin is saying is that a 5 megabyte jpg (compressed size) compressed in Photoshop to the lowest compression settomg of 12 (highest quality) will have an actual file size of ~25 megabytes when the compressed file expands into memory. A good example of this is to look at my puzzle files where the appearance on screen is nearly identical but one will challenge even the best hardware and the other will play on even a 32 meg video card. They have practically identical visible pixel dimensions and almost identical compressed zip and executable sizes. The difference is that one expands in memory to over 128 meg per puzzle piece while the other is tiny. The difference is that one has a tiny PNG "footprint" per puzzle piece while the other has a huge 128+ meg footprint per puzzle piece. The "invisible" portions are the transparency sizes which compress greatly but expand back to their true size in memory. I suspect that what you what to achieve can be easily done with PTE 5.1 but not with files which have a true size of perhaps as much as 100 megabytes per image. Having file sizes this large will not make the end result any better than much smaller files taken with longer focal length lenses. Unless I totally miss what you are trying to achieve what you need is a different approach to achieve the same end. Keep in mind that none of the other programs you have attempted this with do hardware rendering but rather downsample to the pixel dimensions desired for display. Best regards, Lin

Hi Mike, If you want the moving magnifying glass as demonstrated on the PSP example your best bet is ProShow Producer. You can't get away from using tools such as Photoshop or similar with any presentation slideshow software if you really want to exploit special effects. There are things which Proshow Producer does that PTE can't do and things which PTE does which Proshow Producer can't do. The primary benefit of PTE is image quality and value for your money. Producer or Gold can't match the hardware rendered quality of images in your executable slideshows which you get with PicturesToExecute. Depending on your hardware, PTE can give you the absolute ultimate in image quality in your slideshows. Nothing else matches the smoothness of pans, zooms and rotates. You have features like parent/child relationship and off-center rotation with PTE which other presentation slideshow programs don't offer. You have hardware rendering of DVD's - something no other program has. With modern hardware this gives you the ability to create DVD's as much a 400% faster than the other programs including Nero, PSP, PSG, Media@Show, all Adobe products, m-objects, etc. None have hardware rendering. With PTE you can do unique things in presentation slideshow software such as alter the "Z" axis to give horizontal rotation of an object, rotate an object around the screen rather than on it's own axis and even keep objects upright while rotating, make elipitical orbits of objects, simulate bezier curves, etc. You can custom build your own menus, call and run external executable code from within your slideshow and do a number of things simply not possible with other presentation slideshow software. PTE does not use "Tiff" files nor at present does it use Photoshop native formats. Frankly you won't want to use Tiff formats in slideshows. They are far too large to run smoothly and it doesn't matter whose software you use. Also I couldn't imagine why anyone would want to use a DNG file in a slideshow. DNG files are simply a way around not having RAW conversion software and are not useful until converted to a standard format such as jpg, bmp or tiff. The primary advantage to PSP is the ability to include video clips in your slideshow along with still images. You can't do that with PTE. The other advantages are some audio editing capabilities some of which will be in the next version of PTE. PSP also has some ability to adjust image color, brightness, hue, saturation, etc. Most of us around here feel that these features are better done in a dedicated graphics program. Actually it would be better to ask Photodex about what they feel are the advantages to PSP, etc. If you would like, let me know and I will be glad to show you examples of what PTE can do which PSP can't and you can ask around on the PSP/PSG forums what it can do which PTE can't. PTE offers you free upgrades for life for the basic product. You get two years of free upgrades for the Video Builder which offers internal DVD authoring. Check with Photodex about PSP pricing and upgrade policies. Best regards, Lin

If you wish you can uncheck "Create Menu" and the show will start without a menu at all. If you want to change the background or the image displayed you have those choices as well. You can uncheck "animated menu" and you can click on the image displayed on the title page then on "select frame" and choose from any image in your show. You could even put a blank image in if you wished by adding one to the end of your show, etc. I think there are ways to achieve what you want but you need to experiment. My suggestion would be to create a tiny show of about three real images plus a blank image. Get some rewritable DVD's and experiment to get familiar with what you can do such as changing the background image, changing the size via properties, etc. For example you could set the opacity to zero in the "properties" and have no image on the title page - click on any word and delete it, etc. This way you could have a title page with your own background image and only a button to click to start the show. The reason you won't find all this in the User Guide is that there are too many combinations and permutations to cover. It's not possible to know the myriad ways someone might want to use the title page so the program, like the rest of PTE, offers tremendous flexibility but to understand it all you really need to experiment. As mentioned earlier, the easiest way is to use rewritable DVD's and a tiny example slideshow so you can get a feel for all the possibilities. Best regards, Lin

If you email Igor he will post a link to 5.0 for you and you can use that until the hardware issue is resolved. Best regards, Lin

Hi Judy, Generally I archive my RAW files for possible future processing. I convert from RAW to either JPG or Tiff depending on whether I see a need for extensive processing. I use a variety of RAW conversion software both from the manufacturer and from third party developers. I use Adobe Camera RAW for some conversions but also sometimes use others depending on which gives me the better conversion. I find for one of my Canon bodies that Digital Photo Professional does sometimes give me better conversions from my Canon 40D right now than ACR but Adobe is always "tweaking" ACR and in the future that may change. For my Nikon D2XS I use Capture One and for my wife's Olympus E3 we use both ACR and Olympus' own software. For Sony and for my older Canon dSLR's I generally use ACR. I used to use DNG but it adds an additional step. However it does allow some flexibility for those not inclined to keep paying the bills for Adobe by upgrading every few months. Workflow is always problematic. The one thing which is dirt cheap today is storage. If you have lots of photos then invest in a couple external hard disks. They are generally much more reliable than storing on DVD media which is prone to inexplicable failure. I also use Ultrium 2 tape as backup but don't suggest it for other than professional use because the drives are prohibitively expensive (around $5K). Perhaps the best investment one could make when there are lots of photos involved is a good catalog program. Actually, Picassa is quite good if you don't have too many photos. When you get into the hundreds of thousands then it becomes problematic unless you religiously keep up with your indexing. I wish I had better suggestions for workflow but after over 40 years of doing photography professionally I'm still scratching my head - LOL. Best regards, Lin

Hi Mark, Beautiful imagery, photography and presentation. I really like the music which has both a Celtic and northern flavor. The full screen version (which is the one I see today on the download) plays perfectly for me. The "only" thing I would change is to straighten the horizon on about slide 8 or 9 depending on whether you count from the opening page turn or first slide. You've captured the very somber mood of this lovely place. I can see why SAD (seasonal affective disorder) might be prevalent. This reminds me of lengthy times I spent in northern Alaska where you begin to go slightly nuts from lack of sun. The Inuits there sometimes have a disorder similar to what in Algonquian culture is called Windigo Psychosis where a craving for human flesh is supposedly caused by mythological giants (Windigo's). One must suspect that prolonged deprivation from the sun must have strange effects on human behavior. In any event you did a first rate job with this and your new D300 didn't let you down either! Best regards, Lin

Hi Mark, This sounds more like an issue with video drivers then with hardware. I suspect you have plenty of video power and computing power to run nearly any PTE show but the first thing I would do is update the video drivers. There are only a few cases I've seen where a newer computer running an "as shipped" version of Vista has so little video power that a PTE executable wouldn't run fairly well. If you would, go to the "Start, "Run", then type in "dxdiag" and either press "Enter" or click on O.K. and wait for the computer to run a diagnostic to return a screen with multiple tabs. Click on the "Display" tab and check the date (right hand side of screen) on the video driver and compare it to the latest on the manufacturer's web site for your video card. I suspect updating it may resolve the issue. Also be sure you have the latest Direct X installed. Best regards, Lin