Lin Evans

As Al demonstrates, there are numerous ways to approach this. If you are in a hurry you can use multiple rectangles to mask areas of the screen and if you want to take some time you can make up dozens or even hundreds of PNG masks and save them for future use. Remember, if you use Photoshop you are not limited to just a rectangle or a square but can set brushes to nearly any custom shape and use that shape to "cut" out your transparent area with the eraser tool. Here's a 15 second quickie cut out using a star brush from a blue overlay on a transparency. Just a sample of how you could get creative with this. Also you can have less that 100% opacity on your masks by varying the opacity of the eraser so you can achieve etherial effects if desired.... http://www.lin-evans.net/p2e/smallmaskdemo.zip Best regards, Lin

Hi Peter, Of course you can do this. Actually it's not difficult. What you need is called "masking". A "mask" is a file you create using any photo editor which can create a transparency. I'll use Photoshop as an example but you could use any of a number of different programs including the very inexpensive PixBuilder Studio available right here at Wnsoft. In Photoshop, you click on "File, New" and open a file with the attribute "transparent". You want to the size to be sufficient to cover the entire screen so whatever the resolution of your display in pixels would be sufficient. For example, if you are displaying at 1024x768 then make this file that size, etc. Next paint this transparency with black using the Photoshop paint bucket. Next use the Rectangular Marquee tool to select a rectangular area on this black image the size and shape you want your photo to animate within then press the "Del" (delete) key or use the Eraser tool to remove this portion of the black revealing the transparency layer beneath. What you will now see is a black screen with a "cross-hatch" pattern representing the transparent portion in the shape you have chosen. Save this file as a PNG file. Use a name such as "mask1.png". Open PTE and place this mask as the top layer object in the O&A object list with the photo you want to animate on the layer just beneath. The photo will show through the transparent "window" and you may enlarge, zoom, pan, whatever you photo and the areas which fall outside the "window" will be "masked" or hidden from view. The end result is that you can do exactly what you are trying to achieve with this simple mask. It's possible to use several masks on different layers to achieve different effects thus simultaneously have several photos doing different animations simultaneously each showing through a mask. Also you may want to surround the transparent "window" with a white border to dress up your mask. You may want to look at some masks theDom has on his site which you may download and use. Here is a quick sample mask I made for you to play with: http://www.lin-evans.net/p2e/masksample.png Best regards, Lin

Hi Howard, I can't say either whether older Minolta lenses will or won't work with the Sony. Your best bet would be to ask on a forum like dPReview: http://www.dpreview.com As for lenses - for best results a fast 2.8 as suggested would be great and a range such as 70-200 along with a 1.4x tele converter might be ideal but no doubt expensive. Because Minolta lenses are very expensive, if price is a major consideration I would have a long look at perhaps the Sigma 70-300 F3.5-5.6 APO which is not an expensive lens but works "very" well according to all reports with the Sony Alpha 700. While a stabilized lens is wonderful for shooting subjects which are still or relatively still, for fast sports, etc., it's not such an advantage as a faster lens, but because of the excellent high ISO capabilities of the cameras I think you can depend on decent shots even with a 5.6. Because of the 1.5x crop your field of view at full 300mm will be as a 450mm with full sampling resolution so other than depth of field and other optical characteristics of a true 300mm optical focal length, you will essentially get the effective magnification of a 450mm lens on a full 35mm platform sensor. If you find that the Minolta lenses which you have won't work with the Sony Alpha, then also look at the Canon 40D which is a wonderful 10 megapixel camera. It doesn't have the stabilized body, but there is a large assortment of stabilized lenses available for it and it has perhaps even better high ISO performance than the Sony. Of course the real cat's meow, will be the Nikon D300 coming in November which with a battery pack/vertical grip added will shoot at 9 frames per second at 12 megapixels. It's a dandy with incredible autofocus and such. Of course it will cost about $1800 U.S. dollars for the body but there are now a pretty good assortment of VR (vibration reduction - Nikon's name for stabilized lenses) lense for it. The high ISO performance on it "should" be even better than either Sony or Canon. Going completely wild would be the new Nikon full frame D3 which will have incredible high ISO (up to ISO 25,600 but this body due out in November is $5000 but worth every penny. My suggestion for the Sony was predicated on the potential for using your Minolta lenses, but if you can't use them (ask on dPReview Sony dSLR forum) then there are certainly more choices even to include the Olympus e510 which is by all reports a dandy little dSLR. Best regards, Lin

Absolutely! The new Sony Alpha 700 will work with Minolta lenses, has 12 megapixel resolution, incredible high ISO performance and is within your price budget. The Alpha 700 is presently available only through Sony stores but will be at all stores in November. It's a dynamite dSLR, perhaps one of the very best available - I'm buying one myself and I have over 30 digital cameras including Nikon (D2Xs), Canon (D30, 10D, 1D, 1DS, 1D Mark II), Kodak (DCS-760), and Sigma (SD10, SD14) dSLR's. This new Sony is a winner in every way and will be an excellent camera for your grandchildren's sports and for low light photography. Best regards, Lin

The important thing is knowing that it works properly in the executable file. If it's working properly there and you are certain, then the issue is one of proper rendering by the codec. Rather than try different codecs, use the Microsoft Video 4 codec and begin by testing with a rewritable DVD so you don't waste media. Break the show down to test into not large than 200 image increments. Try the first 200 and see if any frames are dropped. Try the second 200, etc. and see if there is a particular place where the problem is happening. Lin

Are they all displayed in the executable file? It may be that your hardware can't keep up with the fast display speed at the size image you are using? Lin

Two things: first, it would be better for conservation of resources to convert the wav to mp3 so go ahead and download and install the free Audacity program. Simply open the file in Audacity and export as an MP3. In PTE, you need to go to the timeline (you can do this before you convert to mp3 to test it) from the main screen. Simply check "synchronize music and slides" AND "auto spread slides along music". That's all there is to it. Also - download and read the users guide from the Tutorials section.... Best regards, Lin

Hi Pat, Because of the high resolution hardware rendering PTE doesn't support drop-in movie clips. You may want to look at Proshow Gold or Proshow Producer by Photodex which supports dropping in movie clips. I can't answer you question about the sound track but if you go here there are probably people who can: PicturesToExe is more oriented toward the professional presentation with high resolution animation. http://www.proshowenthusiasts.com/ and here to try Proshow: http://www.photodex.com Best regards, Lin

Hi Mike, There are two ways to do what you want. One way is a complete manual show without transition effects via the "pause" control button on the Navigation Bar - the other is to set longer default times on the Projects Option and apply to each slide. When you click on the Pause button (the parallel lines) it changes to an arrow. If you don't click on it again but use the double forward or double back arrows buttons, the slides will advance or go back one at a time but without any transitions. In other words you now have a strictly manual slide show which just shows the slides and holds each slide for as long as you avoid clicking on the arrows. If you set the timing for each slide for an extended period (as suggested by John) then you can have the animations and transitions for each slide as well. Of course the other way is to click on Pause (as Ken suggested) between slides then click the Pause off before proceeding. Best regards, Lin

Hi Colin, That's a bummer. I don't know if this is relevant, but I understand that Alienware has been purchased recently by Dell so this may be impacting the availability for the short term. Of course this does nothing to remedy your problem. Let's hope Alienware US can help sort it out for you. On the issue of graphics cards - I'm not sure how relevant this might be but you may want to read this review and comparison in its entirity before making a graphics card decision. The very best that is available is definitely the NVIDIA 7950 GTX cards. The NVIDIA 8600 GT was compared here in real-life tests against the earlier 7600's and may be of interest: http://legionhardware.com/document.php?id=637 Best regards, Lin

Beautiful Igor! It looks like the iPhone's camera and the photographer each are quite capable! Early colors, they are just begining to change in Colorado but already you have beautiful Fall leaves! Best regards, Lin

Hi Barry, It's really strange the way prices are distributed around the world. I've never understood either why it's so much higher in the UK than elsewhere. I suppose VAT has a hand in it but it varies in other countries as well. I have a friend in Switzerland who I bought and shipped a camera for a number of years ago. It was almost double the price in the US there. For a while cameras were cheaper in Canada than in the US and people were buying them there. They have higher taxes than we have and not a fraction of the market so you would "think" they would be higher there. There seems to be no rhyme or reason to it all. Yes the Mark 3 is definitely pushing the limits of the platform with some serious enlargement potential. It's into medium format territory for certain, but your 1DS is still a dynamite camera even though it's a bit long in the tooth as digital camera go. They pulled out all the stops when they built it so inside and out it's a first class piece of equipment. I had "distinction," if you can call it that, of being the first to find a "bug" which was fixed in later production models. In the original the antialiasing filter was bonded to the sensor all around. Air trapped between them caused my original sensor to warp at when I used the camera at 14,268 feet elevation. Canon replaced the sensor and had me back in business in less than a week and made production changes to allow trapped air to escape when used at extreme altitudes so no one else will have that unfortunate experience. Since it's been a wonderful tool. Best regards, Lin

Hi Barry, Yes, for certain if you are using the laptop to do Photoshop manipulations, etc., the more power the better. I only use mine for presentations so can get by with just the video clout. I have seven other systems of various configurations but all with decent CPU up to 3.2 GHz and lots of RAM. The Alienware systems can be configured to amost any needed power but of course that takes a toll on battery life so having AC power becomes important. I think Canon has gone to more pixels than necessary for producing a 35mm platform. I stopped with the 1DS and 1D Mark II and went to Nikon D2Xs which has all the clout I can really use. The new full frame Nikon D3 will be about as much as I think reasonable for a 35mm platform sensor. I have looked at the 1DS Mark III's output and though it's long on pixels I don't see any real improvement in the other areas to warrant spending $8K again. I have the D30, 10D, 1D, 1Ds and 1D Mark II but really get more use from my Nikon D2Xs and my Sigma SD14. One thing the new Nikon will have is incredible ISO performance. I've looked at the output from the Sony Alpha 700 which uses the same Sony sensor as the Nikon D300 will have and even ISO 6400 is completely usable. It's the only camera I've ever seen which actually bests my old Kodak DCS-720X which I've given to my son-in law. For low light use that one was unparalled for many years, but this new Sony chip is something else. The new D3 will apparently actually be usable as high as ISO 25,600. Personally, I don't like to shoot at higher than ISO 400 right now, but I may pick up one of the new D300's when they are released. I shoot mostly wildlife for fun these days. I'm trying hard to retire and have cut way back on my gallery art clients so having a crop factor for the tele boost is more important for me now than having the full frame but I am tempted by the D3 with nine frame per second at full resolution, etc. It's great as long as you can get close enough to the subject, but out here in the mountains shooting wildilife pretty much requires nearly 800mm for really good frames and the rugged terrain and high altitude make a tripod, head and huge lens a non starter. So with a good crop-factor sensor, a fast stabilized 400 (I use the Nikon 200-400F/4 VR, Canon 100-400L IS and Sigma 80-400OS) plus a 1.4 tele I can get an 840mm FOV with the Nikon, 896mm FOV with my 1.6x crop Canon's and 952mm FOV with the Sigma. All this with full resolution sampling. If I had the 1DS Mark III using the same lenses when cropped to the identical FOV of the crop factor cameras I would only have 10.5, 8.4 and 6.3 megapixels respectively for the 1.5, 1.6 and 1.7 crop cameras. So all my crop factor cameras way out-resolve even the 1DS3 for my purposes. Of course for landscapes or studio work, those 21 megapixels would be put to great use. You're sure right about the file sizes - it's gone nuts hasn't it? LOL Best regards, Lin

Could you post a zipped PTE with only about 4 slides showing the effect you are using so we could see how it's set up. It may not be possible to do this because there is no way that I know within PTE to apply a common attribute to slides if this attribute resides in the O&A. So to make sense of it and get a definitive answer it would help to see the set-up. Best regards, Lin

Anyone wanting a fantastic laptop for running PTE shows need look no further than Alienware: http://www.alienware.com/?from=PAIDSEARCH:...21-S-6181999021 These are first class all the way. You don't need one of their super machines with dual GPU's or super large hard disks or even super fast CPU's though they do offer all that if you want to spend the money. What you need is the top-end Nvidia graphics cards they use in all their machines. The really nice thing is you can order them with XP or with Vista. Personally, I won't touch Vista until they get SP2 out the door, but others have had good luck with it. So you have a choice. About $2200 will get you a dynamite machine which will run "any" PTE show smoothly. The lower-end systems also have LCD's which are perfectly amenable in display resolution to run high-end LCD projectors without jumping through hoops. Our younger forum participants may really relish super high resolution LCD's for everyday work, but we old codgers with compromised eyesight need a bit larger icon and print so the lower resolution possibilities are fine. The nice thing is you have a choice. In the US, at least, you can find great compact external USB drives up to 500 gigabytes for only about $150 so it doesn't make a lot of sense to pay the additional for a large notebook hard disk. Just get the 100 gig fast one, the 1.8 gHz processor (no need for battery eating super-fast processor) and put your money into the finest Nvidia graphics card. No need for duals - one will suffice nicely. The graphics card you want is the NVIDIA 7950 GTX - by a landslide the most powerful graphics card available. Again, you don't need the "dual" 7950's - just one will work perfectly. Best regards, Lin

Hi Martin, That explains the problem. If the program didn't put the .wav extension on the file created, it's not really a .wav file and PTE won't play it. Apparently Windows Media Player knows which format it "really" is and plays it but PTE hasn't any idea which is why even though you have an extension ".wav" it's not recognizing the format. I can't tell you exactly what the problem is, but what I will do is post a link to a zipped file containing both a .wav and .mp3 file of the same song. Try using the song I provide to test the function in PTE. If it works for you, then what remains is simply to get a program which will "properly" rip the CD to a good .wav or preferably good .mp3 file. Here's a link. Try this as both the .wav and .mp3 files. If they work let me know and I'll give you some further suggestions for a program to properly rip the CD to get working .wav and .mp3 files. File size about 45 megabytes for download: http://www.lin-evans.net/pte/trythis.zip Best regards, Lin

Hi Martin, It sounds like you are doing it correctly, but probably don't have a good .wav file for whatever reason. Typically, I would suggest converting the .wav file to .mp3 but either will work fine. Try a different music selection and see what happens. Essentially it must show up in the list. The fact that you see zero on the time duration tends to make me think it's a problem with either not really being added or it's a defective file with no real content. Best regards, Lin

I was recently looking on a web site devoted to competing presentation slideshow software and noticed someone had posted one of my quotes from back in June or so of last year. The question revolved around why PTE was so much cleaner and sharper on executable shows that the competition and I had been quoted in this regard when I had discussed the fact that only PTE had hardware rendering. Someone posing as an expert on the forum had answered "nonsense" and had informed the petitioner that he (the "expert") knew for certain that neither their product or PTE had hardware rendering and that my statement had obviously been made in error. Further, this expert suggested that my statement about "9 megapixel monitors" needed "explanation" LOL. What amazes me is the extent of ignorance on the web and the number of pseudo experts who influence people with their self-assured attitudes about things which they obviously haven't a clue. It's nice to be self-assured and confident, but it's even nicer when you also know what you're talking about. For those who are new to PTE - yes indeed, PTE has true hardware rendering. The competition does not. What this means is that the competition renders their animation at low resolution, near the 800x600 level which makes it very easy to convert to NTSC or PAL (720x480 or 720x576 pixels) resolution for DVD conversion which is their principle goal. This is done via software algorithms rather than by using the power of the GPU (Graphical Processing Unit) in the video card. PicturesToExe gives the user a true "input=output" resolution so that it's possible with the right hardware to have shows output and displayed in true high resolution. And for the record. For a couple years now nine megapixel monitor and display resolutions have been available. A PTE show on a nine megapixel system is incredibly impressive. All it takes is "money" folks. Several of my art patrons for whom I do photography use IBM and Viewsonic systems for which they pay dearly, but which produce nine megapixel resolution on the displays. These monitors average around $6000.00 U.S.D. and the display cards to drive them are quite expensive as well. Typically some of my clients have over $15,000 in their computer systems so it's not something which is common, but it's very real. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_T220/T221_LCD_monitors Here are a few links to the monitors used: http://www.engadget.com/2004/07/06/viewson...hose-new-apple/ http://www.viewsonic.com/support/desktopdi...series/vp2290b/ http://www.monitoroutlet.com/844555.html http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/ch/intellist...o/why_t221.html So next time someone tries to tell you that PTE doesn't have hardware rendering - just send them over to the forum and we can straighten them out quickly. Best regards, Lin

Nice improvements Kim! The sound effects were used very well - the ending ride-off was a nice touch. Something to think about for future shows might be to look into masking. You could zoom a few of the stills inside their frames (where you incrementally display multiple frames on the screen). Making up a few good masks would let you use them for different shows and not only pull two or three frames to view simultaneously, but also get some dynamics and animation on the individual frames where and if it would benefit the presentation. Used sparingly it can be a useful eye-catching effect. Best regards, Lin

Hi Annemiek, Icons are either sixteen by sixteen or thirty two by thirty two pixels. You can take any jpg file and resize it using Photoshop or other software then save it as a Compuserve GIF file with 256 colors only (no more than 256 colors). Then open the file in a program like IrfanView which will let you save it as an icon with the .ico extension (Windows Icon). Obviously, it best if you use an image which is closely cropped so there is a major subject or even a design rather than lots of detail. Fewer colors are better than lots of colors. Sometimes it's nice to put about a four pixel black border around a 32 pixel icon for better visibility. The essence is that an icon must be 32 pixels or 16 pixels square (32 looks better) and must have no more than 256 colors. Since a Compuserve GIF file is 256 colors it's just convenient to save a jpg this way to strip off the excess colors then simply open the GIF and save it as an .ico file. Best regards, Lin

Hi Kim, Cool bikes and nice show! My only suggestion would be to use non-linear "smooth" on the zooms which would make the starts and stops less "abrupt". You can see how to do this in the User Guide on the tutorials section. When and if you do this, you might click on the "blur" for those photos which have the really sharpened cooling fins on the cylinder heads which tend to shimmer a bit. The blur isn't sufficient to make the images less desirable but will cut the shimmer a bit especially for the slow start on non-linear smooth. Nice music. You might want to lengthen the last slide a tad to end with the music. Best regards, Lin

PTE scr files are just renamed executables. The easiest way to do what you want is to put all the scr files in a folder together then rename each to "filename.exe" Next create an invisible menu. I discribed this in a previous post in the tutorials section. Essentially what you do is create a slideshow with as many slides as you have executable files to be sequenced. The best way I know is to use a very small jpg image and repeat it in the slide list once for each exe show you want to run. Set the time for the "display" to one second and set each slide to run a different executable show. When you have it all working then just set the opacity attribute in the O&A section for each slide to zero. Set the menu to repeat until "ESC" is pressed and click the hardware acceleration off for this "invisible menu". Execute this invisible menu and your renamed scr files will execute in a serial fashion until ESC is pressed twice. Once to end the executing slideshow and again to end the invisible menu. Lin

A little more information would be necessary to help you. Explain exactly what you did, what you played the DVD back on, etc. Lin

I just checked the User Guide and it's actually already there in 4.4.4.4 Best regards, Lin

Hi Tony, Probably a good idea to download and read the PTE User Guide at the top of this forum. To get zero opacity you simply go to the Objects and Animations screen, highlight the object you wish to make zero opacity then click on the animations tab and type in a zero for the opacity number. If you do this with the first keypoint highlighted the opacity will stay at zero for that object. If you want to change the opacity somewhere later but keep opacity at 100% before that time, it will take an additional keypoint to hold the 100% opacity and a third to change it from that keypoint time to zero. Best regards, Lin