fh1805

In terms of smoothness of movement, I cannot tell the difference between the two versions. In terms of sharpness during the panning I feel that Igor's version might just have a slight edge over the original from DaveG but it is difficult to be sure. However, I have noticed something slighty unusual. If I use DaveG's zipped backup file and use PTE v5.6 beta 4 to open his project file and then Preview the project, I see noticebale stutter in the right hand panel of the "two up" on the first time through. If I allow the project to loop then on the second time around there is less stutter and on the third time around the loop there is no visible stutter at all. In the "four-up" section there is visible stutter in the lower right panel first time round, less stutter there the second time round and no stutter the third time round. If I then create an exe file and play that, I see the same stutter that slowly gets better with each iteration around the loop - and it is always most obvious in the right panel of the "two up" section. If I run Igor's exe file round the loop three times I see exactly the same stuuter that gets better each time around until it has vanished by the third time around. I can only conclude that it must be an effect of memory management and/or variable initialisation. First time through there is most to do (memory to load and variables to initialise), second time round there is less to do (memory still has some of the old content and gets reused?) and third time round it's all done (memory load is now optimal) and only needs playing back! Weird or what? Testing done on a 1280x1024 monitor driven by an nVidia GeForce 8400GS with 256MB of dedicated graphics memory on a system with Intel Core2 Duo 2.33GHz processors and 2GB of RAM running under Vista Home Premium SP1. regards, Peter

Previewed smooth as silk as my nVidia GeForce 8400GS. regards, Peter

Jim, Are you down to your last handful of free GB on your hard-disk? regards Peter

Eric, What is the Text Template wizard? I've never heard of this in the context of PTE. regards, Peter

Bobo, If you are applying the same customization to many slides you can select them all using either Shift+Click (for a contiguous group) or Ctrl+Click (for a broken collection). regards, Peter

Ray, I'm working with JPD on an explanation of the "Cale" method in English. I hope to have something to post in a day or so. As I have pleaded elsewhere on this forum in the last 48 hours - patience, please!!! regards, Peter

Gary, I don't think it's a bug. Try unticking the "In pixels" box, setting the two values from 10 to 20 and then click on the C button. This will align the orange grid intersection with the centre point of the image if the image is at pan = 0. regards, Peter P.S. I didn't know any of that until you made your post and I did the research. Thanks for increasing my knowledge of PTE.

Gary, Igor uses the same name for the file everytime: apr-deluxe_beta.zip. So you will always get the latest beta no matter which of Igor's posts you use for the link to it. I can understand why he does this. He doesn't want a new user downloading an old beta and then finding faults that have already been reported and fixed! I always rename the zip file as it gets saved: to, for example, pte560b4.zip. And I will keep all these and all the installed betas until Igor ships the final release code and that has ahd time to prove it is stable. You'll just have to start keeping them all again from beta5 onwards. regards, Peter

Gary, you can have all the beta versions installed at the same time. They each go into their own folder. The only thing you need to watch for is whether you let each install change the file associations (two tick boxes on one of the install screens). I always ask for a desktop icon and always turn off the file associations at that screen. Once the install completes I rename the icon to, for example, "PTE v5.6b4" for beta 4. I've currently got all four betas installed but I only test in the latest version unless I suspect things have gone backwards in terms of a bug fix. Then I will use the older versions to check that it was working in an earlier version but isn't in the latest version. Savvy? regards, Peter

It is more than just the number of clicks or the presence/absence of "Original" as a mode. A significant number of users of PTE have developed a way of working that enables them, quickly and easily, to change a sequence so that it appears correctly on a 1024x768 projector, or on a 1280x1024 PC screen or any other size of screen and also within the TV safe Zone when produced as a DVD-Video. I am in a very active dialogue with JPD to understand both the current method and the implications of his proposal. JPD explained his proposal using precise mathematics to illustrate its behaviour. I am now learning about it so that I can try and explain it on the forum in simple terms without all the mathematics. Emotions have already been aroused elsewhere on the forum in discussions about this subject. As I have pleaded elsewhere on the forum: please give JPD and I more time for me to get a thorough and accurate understanding of both the old method and the new proposal. Further debate based on mis-understandings and mis-conceptions will serve only further to inflame those already heightened emotions. Patience, PLEASE!!! regards, Peter

Members of this forum (whatever your nationality and mother-tongue), I speak to you as a Moderator of this forum and as someone whom, I hope, has earned your respect. The direction in which the recent posts are taking this thread is totally counter-productive. Personal arguments should not be part of this forum. The latest version of PTE (v5.6) has caused severe problems for some users of PTE because Igor has withdrawn a feature (Original size) that they use extensively in building their sequences. This feature, and the way in which they used it, enabled them to build a sequence at a single resolution that could quickly and easily be resized to any other resolution. For example: - they could build a sequence at 1024x768 and then quickly and easily resize it to fill a 1280x1024 screen - they could build a sequence at 1920x1280 and then quickly and easily resize it down to a 1024x768 projector JPD in his two lengthy posts has explained a new method that could be used in PTE that would achieve the same result in a different manner and, moreover, would do the resize totally automatically. Using JPD's technique the exe file would be created at whatever size the user wanted it at but would automatically adjust to the resolution of the PC monitor on which it was played or to the resolution of the projector through which it was beamed. I am in the middle of a dialogue (off forum) with JPD trying to ensure that my understanding of his proposal is absolutely correct. I will also be trying to understand how we, as users, would give the algorithm the five parameters it needs to do its work. I ask you all: please show a little more tolerance of one another's views. And a final BIG please... please give JPD and I some more time for me to get a full understanding of his proposal and how it might be implemented. If it is as I currently understand it, then it offers an opportunity to both simplify and enhance PTE for all users. regards, Peter

Gary, In my limited experience of using the various "video" options of Create in v5.6 beta, that progress window is incomplete. After getting a full set of "Done"s you should have speed values against all of them and a big green tick icon in the space above them. It looks to me as though it has not completed successfully. regards, Peter

Gary and others, JPD has asked me to study his proposal and comment on it. I am in the middle of an e-mail exchange with Jean-Pierre to clarify my understanding and will post a summary statement here once that dialogue is complete. Patience everyone, please! regards, Peter

Jean-Pierre, Do not worry, you have not offended me. I have read your posts and think that I understand the concept of your proposal. I will spend some more time reading them again and try to understand the details as well. I will reply to this in the other thread. regards, Peter

Jean-Pierre, You have expressed the same thought that I made in a post earlier this year. See here. We are of like mind on this point. regards, Peter

Robyn, Does it behave the same when you run the exe file off the hard disk drive or off a USB memory stick? regards, Peter

Daniel, I, too, use Audacity but I can see that being able to position the pieces of music against the slides in PTE could be very helpful. For example it would show up those places where the transition from one piece of music to the next was going to need extra care during the mixing of the final soundtrack. But I would still use Audacity to do the final mix of the soundtrack. regards, Peter

I would respectfully remind all users of this forum that use of humour in a post can be counter-productive. Not everyone has the same sense of humour. Nor do they necessarily share the same attitude to the subjects that are often implied within the attempt at humour. I would especially remind all the forum members for whom some form of English is their native tongue that not all forum members are blessed with a skill in our glorious language. Some of our overseas friends rely on web-translation packages to assist them in converting posts from English to their own native tongue. These packages are rarely adept at translating humour. The problems can be made worse if the basis of the humour is sarcasm or sardonic wit. These rely on subtle nuances in our language which often do not translate well, even in the hands of a skilled translator - and in extreme cases might come out as a direct insult! Humour has it's place in this forum as it does in like itself. But do please think carefully before using humour to get your point across. Mis-placed or mis-handled humour could well have directly the opposite effect to that which you intended. regards, Peter

As I have read the many posts in this thread I slowly formed a vision in my mind of a radically new layout for the PTE user interface. I have tried to describe it in the attachment. When reading the attachment please think along these lines: In my vision, the headings Images, Music, Transitions and Objects would be tabs at the top of the screen (just like the tabs in Project Options or on the O&A window). They would be laid out in that order left to right. The headings Preview, Create and Save would be buttons at the bottom of the screen. These would also be laid out in that order left to right. The underlying code would be absolutely identical for all three "skill levels". The software would simply "grey out" buttons, icons and command options according to the selected "skill level". A new user could operate the software at "Beginner" level until they felt comfortable with that. By changing their "skill level" to "Intermediate" they would see exactly the same screen contents but now some more buttons, icons and command options would be "blacked in" and active. When they felt they were ready for the final step up they would simply change their skill level to "Advanced" and there would be no "greyed out" items. I don't claim that this is a fully thought through design; but I felt that the debate had arrived at the point where this was, perhaps, a suitable next step in the discussion. New_PTE_User_Interface.pdf regards, Peter

Steve, Now I understand where you're coming from! And I agree with you. If Igor cannot easily allow us to add nominated folders of our own into the view then he could, at least, provide all the top level folders that Vista gives as standard to a user. regards, Peter

Eric, Xaver isn't suggesting making PTE a sound editting program. What he is suggesting is that there should be some capability to have more than one "timeline track" of music. And on each of the tracks to be able to place sound files exactly where we want. And having placed them to be able to apply fade up/down in a selective manner (as we can with the Envelope tool in Audacity). This is a long way removed from PTE becoming a sound editor program. It is simply providing a new feature for the advanced user (or professional user as some call us). The proposed feature will make the final assembly of a more complex sequence a little bit easier to achieve. If this feature was added it would not make PTE a sound editor but it would give it sound mixing capability. And as A-V workers we need that capability to come from somewhere. Currently we use the likes of Audacity or Adobe Audition. And many of us would probably continue to use those to assemble our complex sound tracks. regards, Peter

Umberto, Take a look at View...Timeline Options. The first three items in the drop-down menu are different auto-scrolling settings. Try each one and see which you prefer. regards, Peter

Ken, I'm sorry but I fail to see what benefit we get from having the option to turn Synchronize music and slides on and off. If the box is ticked then, when we Preview from Slide 1 the music plays from Slide 1 and when we Preview from Slide 5 (say 20 seconds into the show) the music plays from 20 seconds into the show. If the box is unticked then, when we Preview from Slide 5 the music plays from Slide 1. Unticking the box doesn't stop the music from playing. It stops it from playing in proper synchronization with the images. I ask the questions: Who wants this to happen? How does it help them build their sequence? I would have thought that, if playing the music alongside the slides causes problems and for diagnostic purposes we want the ability to turn the play of music off, then we need a "Mute" button on Project Options...Music tab that allows the playing of the music to be disabled without removing all the music files from the list. And while we're on the subject of music/sound files. Why do we need two ways of adding sound to an individual slide? Why do the two ways produce different results? This has been the cause of confusion in the recent past for some users. For those who aren't aware: in PTE v5.5 you can add music/sound to an individual slide by either Customize Slide...Music tab or by the Add sound icon on the upper toolbar of the main window of PTE. They do not give the same result. regards, Peter

Eric, Could you post an example of a 300dpi and 150dpi image that you have actually used? I find it hard to believe that simply changing the dpi value could have any effect at all on shimmering. As Malcolm has indicated, the dpi value is simply meta-data associated with the image file and has no direct bearing on the data content of the image file. regards, Peter

BB, In respect of the add-ons... You say your deadline is this coming Sunday. I would recommend that you keep things as simple as possible in order to meet your deadline. After Sunday you will then have time to explore all the various new features and be ready for your next event whenever that comes along. Good luck! regards, Peter