Lin Evans
-
Posts
8,206 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
12
Posts posted by Lin Evans
-
-
Linearity of Zoom Feature
Is the Zoom feature suppose to be linear? To me this would mean it would move towards or away from the picture at a constant speed. Thinking in terms of the mechanical rostrum cameras, when the camera moves towards the photograph it would move at a constant speed. The Zoom in P2E appears to be non-linear, accelerating when moving away from the image (and decelerating when moving in). I was wondering if this is what is intended. It makes it difficult to zoom out of consecutive images (think Google Earth) with either a seamless transition or a sense of continuous motion. While I can see the deceleration (or acceleration) useful in some instances, I find myself wanting to maintain a constant sense of motion in many of my zooms (independent of the transition problem mentioned above). Often the image is zooming too fast by the end of the slide.
If it is suppose to be linear, I think the math/equations need to be looked at again. If not, I would find a linear option very useful. It would be nice to have three options.
Linear
Decelerating In (current form)
Decelerating Out (reverse of current)
To see the magnitude of this effect, just exaggerate a zoom from 100 to 800 for any picture and notice how slow it gets towards the end of the slide. I think it is more perceptible going in than out, but can be seen in either direction.
Steve
Steve,
The zoom is absolutely linear. What you are experiencing is normal in that the smaller an object gets the more it "appears" to move away faster and the larger it gets the more it "appears" to be moving slowly. This is a well known psychological issue.
Non linear zoom will be enabled on the release product which will allow compensation to offset this perception - right now all we have is indeed true linear zoom.
Best regards,
Lin
-
Bill just loaded our latest Florida presentation on Beechbrook: "Florida Animal Adventures"
This is the third in a series of presentations my wife and I have done based on a Florida trip in Feb of 2006. The second presentation: "Pampered Plumes" is still available on Beechbrook. The first: Feathered friends" is no longer on Beechbrook.
Once again, any and all constructive criticism is more than welcome.
Hi Jim,
Great show! Wonderful collection of great images and very educational.
Just a couple corrections. The animal with the "mongoose" comment looks like a baby capybara - definitely not a mongoose.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Se...ti_Mongoose.jpg
The pronunciation of Gila Monster is "heela monster" - Spanish the G takes an "H" sound.
Beautiful slideshow and great narration!
Best regards,
Lin
-
Thanks Lin,
I follow your argument and understand that if I use the full resolution of my images then PTE will generate output to suit the display up to that resolution.
But, I suggest most users of PTE will have monitors/projectors with resolution less than say, 1920x1080. So my question remains would there be any advantage in an exe file over a wmv or avi file?
If not, then surely a video file is more likely to play without hesitation than an exe file because there is less work for the computer to do.
Keith
There is no problem with executable files playing without hesitation unless the video card is lacking in RAM and only then if there is high RAM loading. You can create low resolution for DVD or HDTV or you can create high resolution for those who have the resources to use it. The same problems exist whether you create AVI or executable files. If you load so much that the hardware rendering can't handle it then the AVI won't be any better than the executable. The program does hardware rendering and the competition is now scrambling to do likewise.
There is no question that executable format produces higher resolution and there is no way without a statistical survey that you can surmise that "most" users of PTE with have lower resolution monitors. PTE is used by numerous professional photographers and by people who create slideshows for slideshow competitions. There is a reason they prefer the executable format to AVI or DVD - hence the name of the program "PicturesToExe" rather than PicturesToDVD or PicturesToMovies, etc., it's the basis of the difference between this program and the rest.
The bottom line is again that you have "choice". You can use it as you see fit. For many of us the executable format is much preferred to any video format and that's why we love PicturesToExe.
Best regards,
Lin
-
I downloaded the smaller puzzle test a few weeks ago and it worked fine with sound. Then for some reason I deleted it, but have in the last week downloaded it again - NO SOUND. Is this something to do with your end Lin? The visuals work fine.
John
Hi John,
No changes in the file John. I would guess that for whatever reason your Midi feature is disabled. Try going to the Contro Panel, then to Sounds and Audio Devices (Audio) and check the Midi - my guess is that if you recently turned on the function you may not have "applied' the change, so it didn't "stick"..
Best regards,
Lin
-
Thanks for the quick reply.
I accept that 1280x720 is low but even if I go up to 1920x1080 (the best monitor I could afford) my question remains the same - would there be any advantage in an exe file?
I also agree that PTE is capable of very high resolution but this is surely pointless if the monitor/projector cannot display it.
Keith Biggs
Hi Keith,
When you create a high resolution executable show it will remain available to display its resolution advantage whenever the display can match the show's potential. Conversely, when you create a low resolution show - whether executable or AVI, MPEG II or DVD format, it can never exceed the display resolution it was created with.
There is certainly a place for either which is probably why many slideshow software developers standardized on DVD output resolutions. The difference with PicturesToExe over the masses of other software is that it uses hardware rendering which means it renders at the resolution of the input file rather than using a pre-determined maximum such as 800x600 (which is the norm) so that when these programs are used to create an executable file they must interpolate up from the software rendering resolution to match the desired executable output resolution. This invariably causes a degeneration in image quality. Also, there is a loss in variously color fidelity, contrast and different color space. Television can't display the same dynamic range or color range of the CRT monitor.
Of course when one creates a slideshow, they should be aware of their audience and the type of equipment which will be used to display the show. The nice thing about the executable file, as mentioned earlier is that it if flexible and can display on a wide variety of output resolutions.
Some of us use monitors which can display nine megapixel resolution - slideshows done with PicturesToExe from high resolution originals and displayed on a nine megapixel resolution monitor are very, very impressive.
So with PicturesToExe you have a choice. You can render at low resolution for DVD or HDTV or render at high resolution for high resolution output devices. That's the beauty of the flexibility, choice. But in order to take full advantage of the high resolution output with multi-layer effects, etc., the system requires a decent video card. This was the purpose of creating the tests - to allow the user to determine where their individual systems fall in the spectrum of available hardware.
Best regards,
Lin
-
Sorry for the previous blank post!
I have been following this thread with interest.
Can someone explain the merits of a sequence created as an exe as opposed to a video file.
As I understand it, the exe file is a set of instructions and images for the computer to create the sequence in real time. As a video the computation or rendering has already been done, therefore is less demanding.
Until recently an exe file could produce a higher resolution image but is this still true with the new High Definition formats?
I can produce a sequence at 1280x720 either way and not see any preference in quality.
The point of all this is that the video version would appear to avoid the limitations some people have with their choice of video card and/or cpu.
I would be interested to hear if I am missing something!
Keith Biggs
Hi Keith,
1280x720 is a low resolution image - less than two megapixels. Executable files can create resolutions equal to the input resolution of the file. For example, I have images which are sixteen megapixels which I can display with a PicturesToExe slideshow at their full resolution complete with smooth animations, etc.
The term HDTV (High Definition TV) is somewhat misleading in that it's only high resolution for a television. For a photographer, thats decidedly low resolution.
Best regards,
Lin
-
Is there a simple way to convert or import a powerpoint presentation into picturestoexe without individually importing each frame?
Hi,
Welcome to the forum! I'm afraid there is no way to convert or import Powerpoint presentations.
Best regards,
Lin
-
Okay, I'm sure I've done this before, but I cannot remember how. I'm using v4.46. The song track is 18 minutes long. The slide show sequence is only about 3.5 minutes long. I want to copy the slides with their transition effects, and paste them until the music track is filled. I hope that makes sense. It's for a community sponsor recognition show to be played before a festival performance. I've tried selecting the slides in the main window, copying, then pasting at the end and they paste exactly backwards. I don't see ta way to do this in the timeline window at all. I need to have this done tomorrow and I hope I don't have to do it the hard way - one slide at a time. This is possible, isn't it?
~Cindy
Hi Cindy,
You can right click on any single slide in the slide list which will bring up a window with "Copy Slide" as an option. Left click on on this option then move to where you want the slide inserted and right click again and select paste. This should copy the slide and it's associated transition and timing.
To copy them all set up in classical view and select all with right click and choose "Select All" then "Add all Pictures to Slide List" should put them all into the sllide list again (duplicate) in the same order but I'm not certain if they will pick up the custom timings and transitions you may have set. I haven't tried doing that. But if you have chosen them in some different order in the slide list than you have them on the left side of your screen they probably will appear the way they do on the left rather than in your custom order.
Lin
-
After 23 years of making slideshows I am not confuse Lumenlux, I see you at creatingslideshows.com to make 'Light' sequence competition?
Lin, I have not a language barrier
I understand Dutch very wel. In the immortal words of Strother Martin (Captain, Road Prison 36) in Cool Hand Luke - "what we've got here is failure to communicate..........." LOL
Best regards,
Lin
-
I think there is some confusion between "archiving" and "cataloging" in this thread. Losing image files due to hard disk failure is something that I never want to go through again. Most of us have probably experienced this heart-sinking feeling. Programs like Portfolio, Cumulus and iView Media Pro catalog image files using a variety of keyword or category strategies. I don't think of these programs as a means to archive and protect image files, however. They do a great job of creating ways to locate image or a group of images quickly after you go through the pains that Lin describes to get the catalog built initially. Having a good indexing "keyword" or "category" scheme designed ahead of time will pay dividends as the catalog grows. Personally, I use iView Media Pro and find that it works nicely for the way my mind thinks about image organization.
My system for archiving and protecting images starts right after each photo shoot (weddings and landscapes). I copy each memory card to two external hard disks to get immediate redundancy. I use Downloader Pro since it allows me to copy each file to two locations simultaneously. I then copy the files to DVD. Then, and only then, I erase the memory cards by reformatting them in the camera. I build a quarterly archive of all images taken in the past 3 months using a program called "Archive Creator" (http://www.pictureflow.com/) This program looks at all the files you want to archive, figures out how to span multiple DVDs as needed based on total file size, generates an HTML index of thumbnails that gets copied to each DVD in the collection, and burns the DVDS. It also allows you to select the level of validation on the archive that you want.
The way I do things may sound excessive to some. I've lost images in the past and my system is built on that experience and recognition that wedding images are priceless and warrant the redundancy.
Lin... you might try the latest version of Picasa (version 2) that is out in beta form. It supports my Nikon NEF raw files just fine. It also opens the door to a nice "FREE" web gallery capability that can be very useful.
Best wishes...
Bruce
Thanks Bruce,
I haven't upgraded in quite a while and it's great to hear that Picasa is now supporting NEF RAW files. I use such a variety of digital cameras including Nikon, Canon, Sigma, Panasonic, Sony, Fuji, Olympus, Kodak, etc., which all have RAW files that I had given up on finding a program which supported all these formats. Even Adobe DNG has trouble keeping up - but I should and will upgrade Picasa to get the latest features.
Best regards,
Lin
-
I know that this question has been raised before and has been answered by many of you. However, I am still not quite certain of the best way of making backups of my images. I thought that a cataloguing program such as 'Extensis Portfolio' was the way to go but have now changed my mind after I lost most of my photo's when my hard drive failed. I now simply make a backup of my entire images folder on to a second hard drive. This is all very easy but it is a tedious task to find a particular image when needed.
What I would like to know is what you professionals do - is there a nice quick and easy way of cataloguing and saving? What about RAW files? I save the original (as shot by the camera) but do you also save the processed image in PSD format?
Please post your own favourite method so that we can all share.
Ron
Hi Ron,
There are several ways - some expensive like Portfolio and some free like Picasa
http://www.answers.com/topic/picasa
Personally I use Picasa which takes quite a while to initially catalog images, especially if you have hundreds o thousands like I do, but it does offer some very nice features where you can insert keywords which allow you to group your images which makes retrieval very painless. Of course if you have huge collections, it takes time to do the initial organization, but once you have that done keeping up is quite easy and it does work with not only your internal hard disk but also with peripheral drives.
It doesn't support RAW files - at least the version I currently have doesn't, an thats a bit of a problem but I always have jpg's as well which I leave with their original names which makes it fairly easy to recover by simply doing a Search on the file name should I need the original RAW file. I don't save PhotoShop in-process files or PSD, only the final product in jpg, tiff or png format myself.
I suspect any software you use will have the initial problem of getting everything sorted out. It's not an easy task unless keep up. I use Ultrium II tape backup for archival and also magneto-optical for critical files. I also have a number of USB 2 hard disks so that usually I have great redundancy on backups. Off-site storage would be wise but my only off site storage is on my web-site. Probably not smart....
Best regards,
Lin
-
Ever since you first posted these execellent comparison demos/tests, I have wondered as to what all the differences are that you implemented to lighten the video card load. Can you elaborate? I apologize if I have missed an already-included explanation.
Sure, when I created the original puzzle I used 30 pieces each created in PhotoShop and with precise positioning assured via the fact that they were all "cut" out from a single layer jpg file. By leaving each piece in it's original position I maintained that position by creating a separate layer for each with the PNG files each having full original pixel dimensions. The pixel spacing not used to display the actual individual puzzle piece was just transparency but acted as a "place holder". Imagine the top right puzzle piece on a file which was large enough for all 30 pieces but which had transparency everywhere except where the actual top right piece lay in its original position. Now imagine the same for each piece. A full sized file with only a 1/30th of it containing an actual visible puzzle piece and the rest of the pixels consisting of transparency.
The "beauty" of this model is that each puzzle piece occupies its original position assured by the fact that proper placement is guaranteed as long as each layer has the same original dimensions. This made it extremely easy to assemble the puzzle by simply using zero pan, zero zoom and zero rotate for the final assembly on each piece of the 30 separate layers. So do whatever in terms of animation - zoom, rotate, transparency, pan, etc., but at the end of the timeline just set all the PZR, etc., back to zero and everything aligns perfectly. The problem? Huge overall RAM requirement because the transparent portions of a file are only visually transparent, they still have significant memory requirements so the final product was the sum of 30 pieces each having a significant file size plus the two additional layers incorporated by the seamless end and text - a total of 32 layers and huge RAM requirements.
With the small RAM model, I cropped away all excess transparency leaving only each puzzle piece and a tiny bit of "rectangle" of transparency surrounding it. This effectively lowered the RAM to nearly the requirements of a single file of the physical dimensions of one puzzle piece with the surrounding transparency. Of course the down side was that all precise positioning was destroyed and I had to manually place each puzzle piece in its correct position for final assembly. To do this I had to carefully size each piece then tweak its position to fit perfectly with the adjacent pieces. After getting everything lined up perfectly for the assembly I had to manually copy down the zoom and pan coordinates for each piece so that after applying various animations, opacity, etc., I could put the proper numbers into the program for final assembly. It wasn't easy and took several hours. Of course unless one is creating puzzles, this precise placement is a moot point and for "normal" slideshows it's unimportant. What is important to remember is to crop away all excess transparency when creating PNG files, and to not make them any larger than necessary for creating the resolution desired.
Best regards,
Lin
-
Hi Ken,
That's the problem - I downloaded the tests, they both play the 1st one but neither will look at the second.
I just get a black screen!
What's the score?
Peter Frampton
Hi Peter,
Run dxdiag and I think you will find that the reason you can't run the large RAM model is the need to upgrade DirectX which is a free Windows download. The latest version is 9.0c.
No one in their right minds would ever create a normal slideshow with the RAM load I used in puzzle.exe - it simply pushes the envelope on RAM use, but it does provide a way of testing the efficiency of one's system. Even if your system had a mediocre video card (it doesn't - you have decent hardware) it should play the high RAM puzzle, just not very smoothly. The fact that you get nothing indicates an earlier DirectX version. So as Ken suggested - from the START/RUN prompt type in "dxdiag" and click on O.K. This will run a diagnostic and reveal among other things the version of DirectX being used. If it's not current, just go to Microsoft's Windows upgrade center and install the latest version and everything should work perfectly.
The AVI files you have been running for the past few years with pan, zoom, rotate were made with software rendering and low resolution. Typically programs such as ProShow Gold, ProShow Producer, MemoriesOnTV Pro, etc., render at 800x600 or less for DVD output. Even if they create an executable file at higher display resolution the files are interpolated up from the rendering resolution so that the final model is a low RAM, low resolution show. Hardware rendering such as used in creating PicturesToExe Beta 3 shows renders at the resolution you use for the originals. The higher resolution images coupled with multi-layer presentations raises the bar both on video card RAM requirements and on producing beautiful high resolution displays.
As I said - no one would normally use 32 layers of full resolution objects on a single slide as I did in the high RAM requirement puzzle. As you will see when you get your DirectX upgraded, the actually appearance of the two puzzle models is quite similar but the video card RAM requirements have enormous differences. When we create our shows we quickly learn what to avoid to make them palatable to the majority of average video cards.
Here's a link to one of my shows which uses high resolution images, but doesn't push the envelope on RAM. Try this and I think you should get excellent results with either system - but by all means test for the latest version of DirectX and make sure you are current with each computer.
http://www.lin-evans.net/p2e/vger2.zip
Best regards,
Lin
-
available on the site of "avdigifoto.nl" a promo of PTE 5.0
Very nice promo Gilio! I loved the sound of the burner's on the balloons when they descended for landing :-)
It was a bit confusing for me to negotiate the menu's because of the language barrier, but quite intuitive once I understood that the promo was not underneath your "Arrow" on the JPG but that the arrow was simply part of the jpg with hyperlink to the promo show!
Best regards,
Lin
-
Hi Lin,
Yes, I realized after I had sent my previous message that I had misunderstood what RAM was being referred to.
I did check the DirectX version and it is up to date - version 9.0c
The diagnostic tool tells me that I have an NVIDIA RIVA TNT2 Model 64 video card, with integrated RAMDAC, and 32 MB memory.
Ahh, that pretty well explains part of the issue. The 32 meg RAM on the video card is marginal at best and though some slideshows will work well ones with high RAM requirements will not. If you plan to use the pan, zoom, rotate features along with several objects on some slides, it might be best to think seriously about upgrading the card. There are a number of good video cards available, some of the older ones (not necessarily less-powerful) such as the ATI RADEON 9800 Pro card (the one I use) can sometimes be found on the web for as low as $100 (original cost well over $500 U.S. Dollars) and these are dynamite video cards which can run about anything.
Others could perhaps make suggestions here as well......
Best regards,
Lin
-
When watching shows lately, I realized that some of you are really experts with "extracting" an image.
I still have a lot of trouble to do it.
I have Photoshop CS and here are the method avalaible I know to do such a job :
- Filter > Extract
- Magic Wand Tool
But both methods take a lot of time, at least how I do the job.
And the result is not precise.
Could you please explain how you proceed, or if you know an other method or an other tool to extract an image.
Thanks to all of you for you help and suggestions.
Hi Dom,
There are perhaps as many ways to do this as there are photographers - LOL. There are myriad masking tools - some work better than others. Years ago I went through the majority of these and finally decided that the best and most precise way for me was to simply use the eraser tool and sometimes the history brush.
It's time consuming, but do get a perfect extraction you really need to work at the single pixel level. What I do today, for example to make a PNG file containing an extracted image, is to first determine the original image dimensions in pixels (Image, Image Size) in PhotoShop, then create a new transparency of the same dimensions. Next I do a Select All, Edit, Copy on the image to be extracted. Close that image then do Edit, Paste over the open transparency which leaves a two layer file with the transparency under the original image. I use the Eraser tool at 100% opacity with a very large brush to quickly cut out the rough image I want then zoom in close and select a smaller brush to cut to the pixel level. If it's something which then needs all or some or part of the edges feathered - I just set the opacity levels on the Eraser Brush to various values and lightly brush the edges to make them slightly less than opaque so that they blend at the last couple pixels or so with the background the image will be overlaid with. Finally, I crop as closely as practical to minimize the PNG file size. Working this way I can get as perfect an extraction as I need depending on the final use of the image.
This method may not work for everyone and using various masking tools is quicker, but there is no way which is more precise.
Best regards,
Lin
-
Thank you to you both, Lin and Ken. Unfortunately, your suggestions did not lead me to understand what might be causing the problem. However, I did apparently discover a solution. Sadly, this only deepens the mystery as to the real cause of the problem, but at least I can now watch the presentations.
Some specific replies to you both:
Ken: I suspect the first of the two links you supplied in your second response was in error (a typo, maybe). That link takes me to a Google search results page regarding "wood furnaces."
As to the second link, I tried the DirectX diagnostic tool and it did not indicate any errors.
At first, I thought you both (Lin and Ken) might be right - that this could be arising because I did not have enough RAM. However, the more I thought about it I realised, just as a friend pointed out to me, that I had a gig of RAM and that should have been enough. I was not running any other applications when I tried to run the slide shows.
In any event, Lin, I decided to try your RAM test. The small one ran fine and, as you expected, the large one only resulted in a black screen.
However............along the way, I discovered quite by accident a way to see the video portion of the presentations, including your large "puzzle" test presentation.
I would click on the presentation, as I always do. And, as it has been doing of late, the show would start and I would hear the music begin but the screen would go totally black. Quite by accident, I clicked the left mouse button when the black screen had appeared. Lo and behold, the video image now appeared!
So now, when I want to play one of these newer presentations (mind you, this is not necessary for all of the new ones I have viewed), I click to start it and then click again to make the black screen go away and the images appear.
While this solves my immediate problem of trying to view these shows, I still have no clue as to why this is happening. I gather, by the lack of any similar entries in this forum, that I am the only one who is experiencing this problem. The fear that I am being singled out by the computer gods aside, I am simply perplexed as to why this glitch is showing up now.
Anyway, I just wanted you to know what the results were based on your responses to my query. Thank you, again, for your help in this matter.
Peter
Hi Peter,
Some slight misunderstanding - the issue at question isn't the amount of system RAM, but rather the amount of RAM on the video card itself. What the high RAM use puzzle tests is the video card not the system. The new version of P2E (version 5 beta 3) depends almost entirely on video card performance rather than the user RAM in the system.
Ken's suggestion to test the DirectX is designed to see if the version you are using is the latest up-to date version available. Could you tell us which version of Direct X the test revealed? So you don't need to look it up again - just click on RUN then type in - dxdiag - and click on O.K. When the diagnostic runs you will see a version number (Direct X version ........ ) which is what we need to know. The latest version I believe is 9.0c . Anything smaller than 8 is probably not going to work properly and "could" explain the problems. Of course the important thing is that you can now see the shows, but if you run the "dxdiag" again, get the version number then clilck on the "Display" tab it will tell you the brand Video card and the amount of video RAM it has. This information could be also vital to figuring this out.
Best regards,
Lin
-
Today I have uploaded a short sequence on to Beechwood Cottage (Butterflies), I would be very grateful if you would have a look at it and give me any tips for improvement, I am desperate for any hints and tips on this wonderful programme.
TomUk.
Hi Tom,
This is a beautiful sequence with great photos and presentation. My only suggestion for possible improvement would be on the portion where you have the two framed images joining the background. If you were to slow down the "fly - in" on the two frames and move your keypoints so that the transition to the next slide begins while the two frames are still moving it would avoid the rather abrupt stop necessitated by the present iteration of PTE beta 3. The release version will have non linear capabilities which can be used to effect smooth starts and stops, but with the present beta stops are rather abrupt. The best way I've found to avoid that is to start the transition to the next image sooner so that the movement is still happening on the current frame as the show progresses to the following frame. To do this I've found that allowing slightly more time for the slide, then pulling the ending keypoints into the region beyond the time line (where the image disappears from view) and setting the starting keypoint on the following slide before the time line (again causing the image to disappear) in effect gives you a cross-transition where one slide is still going while the other is opening simultaneously. By pulling the end keypoints for the movement of the two objects into this "nether-region" you can, in effect, have the transition from the one to the other before the actual movement has reached the end point thus avoiding the abrupt stop.
Best regards,
Lin
-
Not sure of what you mean with this question, can you give us more details of what you are trying to do please?
Ron
He asked the same question some time ago and finally in Spanish with the translation:
==========
"Hello, I am going to put my message in Spanish, since in ingles I do not find out to me. I am making a presentation with a called program "formulagraphic", of the sort of Neobook, Builder Multimedia... and a problem has arisen me when I want to connect it with a file exe done with Picture to exe. The problem is that if at certain moment that I want that the file of Picture is executed to exe from the FormulaGraphic, if I press the screen of FomulaGraphic with the mouse before exe of Picture is executed to exe, the presentation of picture to exe is behind FormulaGraphic in the screen of the computer and it is not possible to be seen. This would be solved if feasible of Picture to exe had the property to see itself on any thing that this then in the screen, is to say that it can happen to first plane when it is being executed. Thanks. I hope that somebody understands Spanish and it reads it."
Ken
===========
It doesn't seem that any of us have an answer to this question. To do what he is asking would require controlling Windows rather than the other way around. Normal executable code doesn't allow hooks into the operating system to control the order of presentation when two or more competiting programs vie for position. It's sort of like PhotoShop where you have the ability to bring one layer to the top or send it to the bottom. This can be done within a program but not within an operating system unless there is some provision made allowing this by the operating system itself.
Lin
-
I tried three different PC's and did not get any sound on any of them. All these video tests are interesting but... it's not YOUR video card that matters. What matters is the video cards in the PCs of all the folks to whom you give a copy of the slide shows!
If you didn't get sound, then you have an issue with sound set-up on all three systems. The sound is recognized by the vast majority of present systems it's been tried on (hundreds now) and only those which have not had midi enabled have had issues.
It's both "your" video card and the card of any "other" user which matter. All PC's in the near future will have decent video or they will be unable to run the new Windows Vista operating system so it will soon become a moot point. So all Windows based PC's sold in a year or so will be able to play high resolution video type slide shows with Ken Burns effects. Some of the older equipment can't do it without upgrades. Progress is a simple fact of life with technology. If you have a system which only runs DOS and doesn't have sufficient resources to run Windows they you either must upgrade or run DOS. If you have a system which has limited resources for video then you can't run 3D games or high resolution video with multi-layer slideshows.
This is why the release version of PTE will have both engines. Don't give slideshows with Ken Burns effects to your friends who have systems with limited resources - instead use the older engine which will play on nearly all video equipment. It's a very simple choice. If you want smooth pan and zoom effects with mult-layer effects you need sufficient hardware resources to run it. Other slideshow programs which use software rendering for Ken Burns effects can't produce the smooth pans and zooms with high resolution images - in fact few, if any, can produce smooth pans and zooms with any hardware. I have some of the most powerful hardware available with huge RAM (4 gigabytes), state-of-art video (ATI Radeon 9800 PRO), 800Mhz front side buss, 3.2 Ghz Pentium 4 processor, etc., and I get jerky pans and zooms on panoramas with nearly all programs having Ken Burns effects except PicturesToExe which works flawlessly. This is the way of the future. Other slideshow software manufacturers are scrambling right now to try to implement hardware rendering like Wnsoft has done with P2E.
So the bottom line is that we must build slideshows for the level of sophistication of our viewers. If you suspect that they have low resolution systems with limited resources, then create a low resolution DVD or executable slideshow without Ken Burns Effects for them. If they have upgraded hardware then give them all the great quality which the program can produce.
Use the two puzzle files as a test to determine whether or not the user's equipment can run a high resolution slideshow. Include them with a menu on your CD along with both a high and low resolution slideshow- they are quite small in terms of storage. If the user can see and hear both and even the large RAM model runs reasonably smoothly, then they can be assured that their hardware is up to the task of delivering superior results from a P2E slideshow with multi-layers and PZR effects. If not, then suggest they run the low resolution version. As I mentioned earlier, soon this will all be a moot point because all systems sold after Vista is standardized will have hardware capable of supporting high resolution video and 3D games.
Best regards,
Lin
-
Hi,
I don't get any sound with either version; I'm using a Creative Sound Blaster sound card which normally works very well indeed.
My computer is not too happy with the 'big' version, but runs the low ram version OK. Should the final 'uncut' puzzles be different sizes? On my machine, one has the words underneath the puzzle and the other has them over the puzzle, is that right?
John
Hi John,
Yes, the final sizes should be different and the large RAM version has the words "Ta Dah" underneath while the small RAM version has the word "Ta Da" in the center. They were intentionally made to appear differently so you can easily determine which puzzle program is being used without checking the file names.
The sound for both is a midi file which may explain why you are having problems hearing it, however the large RAM vesion will tell you about your video card's capabilities. If the movement of some or all of the pieces is jerky, then you know that your video card may present issues with some shows which have very large RAM reqirements. The small RAM version usually runs fine on most any video card with at least 64 meg RAM.
You may want to check your Sounds and Audio Devices via the Control Panel to see what you have set for Midi sound defaults. Not being able to hear either means there is likely a setting which is incorrect. If you could not see the image at all with the large RAM "puzzle.exe" then I would suspect your video card was not up to the task, but since you can see it you "should" be able to see any slideshow created with the beta versions of PTE. The fact that you can't hear the Midi sound is almost sure to be a setting issue.
Best regards,
Lin
-
I would like to reorganize my photo folders, but when I move folders that contain jpgs used in various P2E projects, P2E cannot locate them.
Is there an easy work around short of retyping all the captions, and slide customizations etc? I run version 4.48.
Thanks,
Dennis
Right now the only way I know is to inform P2E by locating the files (or see below)- in version 5 (see it in the beta) there is a provision to create a zipped file which contains all the jpg's, etc., and p2e template so you could easily re-create the information in any folder in the future.
The way it works in the present release is that the pte file contains all the links to the files in terms of folder paths, etc. So you can always use a text editor to see where the folders were previously located and put them back in that location, or you could modify the pte file by substituting the new locations. It's always tricky to do this but if you keep careful track of where they are located you should be able to tweak the pte file with a text editor in the ASCII mode. Be sure to make a backup of the pte file before embarking on this so if you screw it up you can always start over.
Best regards,
Lin
-
I have a family history project with 300 slides. I have typed comments for most of them in the Comment dialog box under the image preview, thus customizing them.
When I make ANY change in ANY of the Project Options, I lose my typed comments and the comments revert to what i have selected in Project Options/Comments/Customize comments.
Can anyone reproduce this? Is this the way things are supposed to perform? If so, you had better be certain of ALL your global selections before you start typing and customizing your comments.
thanks,
Dennis
Hi Dennis,
Which version of P2E are you working with? I'm assuming the release 4.48 because the comments feaure is not yet turned on for the beta. If so, I'm not able to reproduce this problem. Could you possibly make screen captues of your Customize Slide Comments Tab and Project Options Comments Tabs so we can try to duplicate the problem?
Best regards,
Lin
-
I've been downloading and enjoying presentations, both from this forum and from Beechbrook Cottage, for a couple of years now. I am really impressed with the quality of shows I have seen.
Out of all the many shows I have seen, I have experienced very few problems. Most of the time, it is something relatively minor, like stuttering in the audio portion, etc. I have always assumed these were flaws that occurred in making the presentation, rather than something my computer was introducing.
However, I have just recently started experiencing a major problem in playing back a number of shows, and I have no idea what is causing this problem, let alone what the solution would be. I am hoping some experienced member of this forum, or several of you, might have some insight into this dilemma, along with a fix.
Simply put, the problem occurs when I start the presentation. The music starts, and plays, fine, but my screen immediately goes totally black and remains that way. Further confusing this issue is the fact that this is happening to some of the recent presentations, but not all of them.
In case it might help, here is a list of the recent presentations that give me only a black screen:
Colorado Through My Lens
Roma, black and white
Vger2
Towns of Spain
The Doll's House, Beta 3 (this was the first one in which I discovered the problem.)
Another new one, "Florida Pampered Plumes" plays just fine. I have also gone back and played several of the older presentations I have saved, and they work fine as they always did.
Like I mentioned, some of these (above) shows were downloaded from this forum, and some from Beechbrook Cottage. While I cannot be sure, I believe that all of those from Beechbrook were created using some version of PTE.
Any ideas as to what may be going on? Any suggestions?
Thank you so much to everyone who takes the time to read this plea for help, and responds.
Peter (Scribe)
Hi Peter,
There is a very simple test - follow the link below and download these two puzzle files. If the low resolution one "puzzlesmallRAM.exe" plays fine and the other causes a black screen, you can pretty well be assured that you need a different video card. Check to see which iteration of DirectX you have installed also by clicking on RUN then enter dxdiag and press O.K. -
Here's the thread with the links to the high and low RAM puzzle....
http://www.picturestoexe.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=4604
Lin
PicturesToExe v5.00 beta #3
in General Discussion
Posted
Hi Steve,
I haven't tested beta 3, but the earlier betas tested correct in linear zooms, by Al and in my own tests. I wouldn't totally rule out any issues but Igor has also said that it's true linear zoom. Of course non of us except the developers really know precisely what is going on in the program but we can be sure that with the inclusion of non-linear zoom in the release version that we should be able to get whatever effect we really want. Of course with keypoints we can actually alter the visual effect as we see fit even now. I sometimes change the zoom percent nearing the end of a zoom out so that in the final few seconds the objects appear to slow. With non-linear zoom incorporated this should be easier to accomplish.
Best regards,
Lin