Lin Evans

Hi Al, Having the KB effects do allow a longer presentation with fewer slides because it does cause the viewer to "anticipate" what will happen next rather than just stare at a still image. I think perhaps it would be nice to pause on the stills which are not panoramas once the movement has finished rather than immediately fading to the next slide. It's not convenient in ProShow Gold to do because you must insert multiple copies of the slide - that is there is no provision for holding a particular frame once the effect has ended to to achieve that we must insert another and use a fade into it which has the effect of simply holding the last frame for whatever prescribed time. Unfortunately, I have no control over the background sounds which are an integral part of this particular music. If I were mixing background sounds with the music I would have done it a bit differently. When the P2E beta is released I will attempt to duplicate this show and post both so a comparison can be made between the two for file size, smoothness of transitions and effects, etc. It will be nice to see the P2E approach versus the ProShow Gold approach to a similar result. Best regards, Lin

The issue of whether to use pan, zoom, rotate, etc., is highly subjective. We've had much more positive feedback than negative feedback so must go with the majority opinion. The issue is that if P2E doesn't offer what the market wants they will quickly be left behind and soon out of the presentation slideshow business. The market has been quite clear - even from long time P2E users - in asking for the Ken Burns effects. P2E is one of the very few programs with which the developers have offered lifetime free upgrades on, so to maintain any sort of reasonable business model they absolutely must offer what new customers want and that is clearly the direction they have elected to go. There is no mutual exclusivity concerning the creation of good quality mpg files and producing superior pan, zoom and rotate features. I'm certain that Igor, Alex and Sergey will produce a superior product which serves all our needs. The Ken Burns effects will be there for those who need and want them and for others who prefer a traditional approach they will not drag down resources. Best regards, Lin

Hi Dave, The show was optimized for 1024 x 683 pixels (normal dSLR aspect ratio) excepting the pano's which were 683 pixels on the short axis. The images are "fit to screen" so that 1280 x 1024 would be a bit of a stretch. These sizes were chosen so as to not overtax resources on older systems and usually work quite well at 1024x768 screen resolution. The "average" for our customer's screen resolution seems to be around 1024x768 which is what we generally aim for. High resolution images of over 2 megabytes seem to "tax" ProShow Gold's resources and don't generally operate smoothly on less than optimal resources so we tend to keep the images smaller which has the effect you noticed on higher resolution displays when the display is set to greater than 1024x768. Best regards, Lin

These are pretty big files for the small amount of run time - I suspect P2E will be much more like ProShow Gold in that the file size for the specialized Ken Burns effects will not be so big. For anyone who wishes to test a file I have a slideshow which I created for some of my customers and friends with ProShow Gold. The show makes extensive use of the Ken Burns effects and has a running time of about 27 minutes. The subject matter is Colorado nature and wildlife and the download size of the executable file is about 59 megabytes. If you have broadband feel free to download it and test your system to get a feel for how your system may perform with P2E once version 5 is released. There is no way to be certain that it will be exactly the same, but will probably be close in terms of resources required. I suspect that P2E will be more efficient so this may be a "worst case" scenario. Here's the link: http://www.lin-evans.net/coloradonature/rockymtn.exe Best regards, Lin

Hi Patrick, If there will be PTE slideshows in circulation unreadable for a number of PTE users, there will also be dozens of other developer tools creating slideshows also unreadable for the same people. The present direction for slideshows universally is to use these effects. Just because they are available doesn't mean you must use them, and just because you don't perceive a need for them doesn't mean that the many other people who create and use slideshows don't perceive a need for them or won't use them. I'm unsure why you would complain about "optional" features? You "will" eventually purchase a new computer and that computer "will" be more powerful than the one you now use. This is simply the way of technology. When you do purchase a new computer P2E will allow you to not only use these features but to view slideshows created in the past with or without them. You can't view slideshows created on a MacIntosh on your present computer but you will very likely be able to do so on a future system. You can't run CPM programs on your PC even though there are numerous great programs written in CPM and CPM86 which no longer work on our PC's unless we have extremely old technology which won't read today's software. A software developer can't avoid progress and stay competitive. PicturesToExe is, in most of our opinions, the finest tool for slideshow creation available for the photographer but it's falling behind the curve because of not having the Ken Burns effects. Igor has gone above and beyond to bring us the best in refinements and transition effects and now the pan, zoom, rotate which will make P2E not only competitive but better than the competition. Some of our automobiles may be capable of achieving speeds of 200 miles per hour but few of us will ever drive them anywhere nearly that fast. Saying that a certain percentage of us can't drive at these speeds because our roads won't permit it doesn't stop the manufacturer from making vehicles capable of this. Having such a vehicle will allow us to use this power and performance when we travel to places where such performance can be used even though we may not be able to use it where we live. Some day our highways will be improved and we can then enjoy the power and performance which is latent and unusable at present. If you were able to "upgrade" a Fiat to a Ferrari at no additional cost would you complain because you or others you know couldn't "use" or enjoy the additional performance right now? The new P2E is like getting a major upgrade to our automobile for life at no additional charge. We don't have to drive it to the limit unless we want to, but the performance is there for those who need it or want it and at no cost to those who are happy with Fiat performance. Options should never be dismissed just because they don't fit into our own personal needs or desires. If it were possible to create these effects to run smoothly on older technology Igor would do it. Unfortunately there are practical limitations with which we must contend. In a couple years these will all be moot points because everyone will have upgraded systems which will allow the user to choose from all available options. Let's not quibble over progress - it's going to happen whether we like it or not. Best regards, Lin

You need to purchase each individual CD which are each discounted. Even without the discount this is probably the best deal on royalty free music available anywhere. Best regards, Lin

Hi Barry, I received an email from Carol tonight telling me that they would be posted rather than available for download. Thanks very much, looking forward to hearing the whole collection. Best regards, Lin

Hi Barry, Very nice music - I listened to the excerpts and bought the entire collection of 8 CD's. I haven't been able to figure out how to download them yet - but still looking. Best regards, Lin

Hi Alan, One would think that this would be a general "rule of thumb," and in most cases it probably is, but there are some caveats which must be considered. If pixel count were a true measure of resolution this would be true, but though pixel count contributes to resolution there are numerous other issues which impact resolution. First one must be aware of just what is meant by the term "resolution." The amount of detail in a digital image is the result of the combination of pixel count, pixel quality, amount of noise in the image and lens quality. True resolution is usually measured by the number of line pairs per mm which can be discerned from the capture. A six megapixel capture from a good quality dSLR with a decent lens will generally produce more detail and thus higher resolution than a corresponding image from a seven megapixel fixed lens digicam. A 3.4 megapixel capture from a Sigma SD10 with a decent lens will produce slightly more detail and higher resolution than a 6 megapixel capture from a typical CFA (bayer processed) dSlR sensor. So even though the SD10 only produces a file of 3.4 megapixels the capture was made with 10.3 million photo detecting sites (pixels). The directly captured pixel level detail (separate sensors for RBG at a given site) and quality are cleaner and more accurate than the corresponding pixels produced by bayer interpolation from the larger file of a CFA type sensor. The bottom line is that when comparing resolution and detail we need to be attuned to not only pixel count but pixel quality, lens quality and noise performance - all of which impact resolution. Best regards, Lin

There is an easy way to determine which is the better way to go, assuming similar quality pixels, lens, noise ratios, etc., which is called the Figure of Merit. The answer depends on the resolution of the higher pixel count sensor and the degree of magnification of the lower pixel count sensor. Here's a link where you can get the formula, read a comprehensive explanation and simply plug in the variables. http://www.mav-magazine.com/Jun2000/FigureofMerit/ Lin

I assume you mean from the executable code - if so at present the answer is no. But of course you can modify and recreate the slideshow and recreate the executable as many times as you like. One of the requests I've had in the past is to encode and be able to recover the .pte from the executable via password. I'm not certain where Igor is on this at present, but it would be very useful to include this capability in future releases. Lin

Hi Eddie, First, it's better to wait and see before drawing conclusions. Second, all programs which use the Ken Burns effects (pan, zoom, rotate, etc.) have this common problem. It simply takes a decent hardware complement to allow smooth actions when dealing with the amount of data necessary to make these features happen. I also use ProShow Gold as well as P2E and frequently my executable files are jerky - text scrolling is "iffy" and so on when played on different machines. One work-around is to convert to DVD but this has its own issues such as image quality and the inability to use manual features such as manual advance and back, print image from the slideshow, run external code, etc. There is no "perfect" solution and probably won't be one until all the older PC's have been replaced with upgraded units which have reasonably large memory video cards made for action graphics. The world is full of compromise, but P2E is and probably always will be one of the very best solutions for presentation slideshows. Lin

But "bogus" from your perspective, not from everyone's. DVD creation seems more important to you than versatility in executable creation. As another who uses both P2E and ProShow Gold, I find the flexibility lacking in ProShow Gold for creating usable manual slideshows with the ability to manually advance, go back, go to end, print, etc. - things which P2E does very smoothly. We all have our "preferences" and though self-contained DVD creation is nice, it doesn't always work well for everyone with ProShow Gold as is evidenced by the numerous issues reported with hardware and driver incompatibilities. Perhaps the author's of P2E are more cautious about choosing the best of available alternatives? Best regards, Lin

No, there is no way to do this with an existing executable file, but you could use the AVI creation capabilities and convert to another web usable format. We use third party software to create Flash slideshows from the P2E generated AVI. Lin Read here: http://www.picturestoexe.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=3547

I think I've had it with AVG. I just noticed that my subscription expires on the 22nd of this month and I think I'll try Panda which has a much better track record of both detecting and removing viruses and of not rendering false positives. Lin

Hi Ken, I emailed both Grisoft technical support and their sales with the problem. I also called their U.S. distributor who was less than helpful. My first contact at the distributor was a woman who informed me that AVG doesn't "erase" Trojan Horses. She then tried to explain to me the difference between a "virus" and a "trojan horse". I spoke with her supervisor and again explained the situation as well as explaining that I was unsure whether my message to technical support would get through because their auto-response kicked back my email explaining that they didn't have me on record as a "registered user" of AVG even though I've been a paid registered user since they left beta. The manager at their US distributor told me I would need to contact Grisoft and I asked him for a phone number. He said they could only contact Grisoft by email (frankly I find this hard to believe). I explained to him that delays in correcting this situation would result in considerable bad press for AVG since I had posted a warning on dPReview which is visited by millions of people each month. He didn't seem to be at all concerned so I suspect I will post the warning on all forums I visit - in total read by over 1,000,000 visitors DAILY. I've had the same experience as you. Files recovered from the Virus Vault have been damaged and no longer run. The program didn't even say it was moving the files to the virus vault, instead it said it had "healed them" (probably where the damage occurred) and "deleted" them. I did find all five of my executable files in the Virus Vault and non of them are usable any more. I'm very dissapointed with Grisoft - not because of their making a mistake because that's sometimes unavoidable, but because there is no telephone number where someone can immediately report such problems. I find it very difficult to believe that a company with the amount of business that is generated by AVG does not have a telephone where they can be reached. Further, the distributor told me that it sometimes takes 48 hours or even 72 hours to get a response from their technical support. That's simply unacceptable. Best regards, Lin

AVG got me as well - erased five of my commercial executables before I could kill the program. AVG "Says" it has "healed" the files when in fact it erases them. They do not subsequently appear in the Windows trash bin so it will be necessary to use commercial hard disk recovery software to recover the deleted files. Fortunately I have them backed up on media not available to AVG, but it's very annoying that I was given no choice in what to do. After I saw that five of my slideshows had been tagged as having a Trojan Horse I immediately stopped AVG, but instead of immediately stopping it proceeded to erase my files. This is not a good way for a program to behave - I emailed both sales and support and told them what happened. Lin

I'm not familiar with worldwide copyright laws, but here in the U.S. any copy made of a photograph whose copyright is owned by another without express permission is a violation of copyright laws. The fact that the image is of one's self and that one would be using it for non profit purposes has no bearing whatsoever on the copyright. Using a copyrighted image without compensation to the photographer who owns the copyright is, defacto, depriving that photographer of compensation. The photographer makes his/her living from photographs and in the case of a wedding, sold prints to the bride/groom, etc. Subsequent use of those copyrighted images without either express permission from the copyright holder or payment to the copyright holder violates the copyright laws. Now, whether or not this is "fair" or "right" is another issue altogether. In my own case, when I shoot for clients I give them joint ownership of the photographs so that they may, without further compensation to me, do what they please with them. I charge sufficiently up front to give myself fair compensation for their future use. But remember - in the days before digital, the photographer always owned not only the copyright but the "negative" and never relinquished ownership unless the client paid for the negatives. In such a case the "copyright" passed to the owner of the negative. In Ron's case, I would assume that he now owns the copyright to the image from the negative given him. The fact that the photographer for Ginger's wedding placed text over the images furnished to her on the CD means that they were not intended to be used for reproduction and that the photographer expected the client to return to him for copies. Since he no longer has the originals, in some sense this is like destroying the negative. In such a case there may be grounds for a claim that copyright ownership has been passed or at least shared with Ginger so that it may be possible to make a legal case for reproduction from the demo disk but probably not for "altering" the image by removing the text. This is legal "muddy waters" and the advice of a copyright attorney would be advised. Lin

Hi Ginger, You should take the "draft" CD back to your photographer and let him deal with getting the images for you. If he uses PicturesToExe then he will know how to best deal with recovery of the images and how to remove the "draft" information and print them for you. Photographs made by a professional photographer are copyrighted by the photographer and most likely the reason the images on the CD are marked draft were to prevent them from being printed without compensation. If your photographer is willing to let you print them, then he should give you written permission to have them done, otherwise you would be in violation of copyright laws and you will not find many professional printers willing to do so without express permission from the photographer. Best regards, Lin

Great news Igor! These changes will elevate P2E to the "head of the class" for presentation slideshow programs. Congratulations and we're all anxiously awaiting the first beta to test!!! Lin

I'm assuming you mean "80" second slide show - each slide staying on screen for four seconds. If so, you could use Audacity to do two things. First set the timing to somewhere close to 80 seconds and then fade the volume for the last couple seconds. You "could" set it for exactly 80 seconds, but unless you have a critical need to have each slide remain on screen for "precisely" a fixed amount of time, it would be easier to just set the song for perhaps a little longer than 80 seconds and fade the last few bars out. Remember, you also will have some time devoted to transitions. Usually four seconds isn't sufficient time for someone to really digest an image. Perhaps eight seconds would be more realistic and then you would have some time to devote to the transitions as well. P2E can easily sync to the exact length of the selection, however long it ends up after you modify it in Audacity. Probably rather than look for an exact amount of time, find a "logical" break point in the music after a reasonable play time and do the fade from that point. Best regards, Lin

First, you will probably want to convert your audio to MP3 for inclusion in your slideshows. You can do that with any number of inexpensive software solutions. Next you need to edit the songs and as mentioned in the other threads that takes a sound editor. I'm not certain about some types of "copy protection" on the downloaded songs, but it's quite likely this will be lost when you convert from the base format to mp3, etc... There are many good ones including the ones mentioned. Audacity is free and very powerful but you will need to pay a small fee to get the codec for using it to convert to MP3 from the default format or from WAV format. Editing sound in these editors is very, very easy once you get the hang of what's going on. Essentially you can simply select a portion of the song just like you would select a few words or a sentence using a text editor. You can then cut, paste, etc. You also can select a "portion" and apply effects such as fades or change volume, etc. You can cut and paste ad string together segments of numerous songs and save as a new mp3 file. You can combine any number of selections into a new file. In short, you have nearly complete control with a good sound editor. Use the links provided in the other posts, download and try them - you won't be dissapointed... Lin

Rename the extension to wmv and it should run - I've corrected it on the link... Ha! LIN

LOL - yes indeed, a video is no longer a slideshow, but sometimes you have something you want to "say" which can't be said as "effectively" with still slides.... Click the link below to see what I mean for broadband only.... Lin

Hang in there Harry, our prayers are with you. At your age it's unlikely that it has spread beyond the prostate itself. Many who are diagnosed at your age and not treated at all live for over twenty years because it's a slow growing type and the prognosis after treatment is excellent so keep the faith! Best regards, Lin