Picsel

Hi Dave, In my point of view, without adding some more information I fear that your comment will not be understood at all by any PTE user. Your illustration is quite obvious and if it was a real case I am sure that the PTE user will correct it by himself. See the figure in attachment which illustrates a real case, you will notice there is no information which can reveal the problem and justify the unexpected sound effect. The problem happens because the audio files are jointed on the same track and linked to the slides. If you customize the first slide duration, then the keypoints may be hidden. best regards Daniel

Thanks Igor and Dave. Dave, I would just add some more words to your sentence for a better understanding (please correct my english if it is bad) , something like that : "Please note that if an Audio Clip having Key Points at the extremes (beginning or end) is customized by having its Duration altered (Start Time and/or Duration) either in the Project Options/Audio Tab or by dragging in the Timeline, it is possible that these Key Points will no longer be seen (hidden by the previous or the following audio clip on the same track) but will still be active. This might result in an unexpected sound level effect. The Fade In and Fade Out Brackets in the Timeline are not affected in the same way." and for the picture :

Igor, Ok I understand your point. Now that is no longer a problem for me as I know it, but I would just suggest to add a comment inside the v8 user guide in order to inform other PTE users. I agree with you, there is no sense to add keypoints outside the slide duration, but it is quite common to adjust slides duration after in order to fine tune them with the music. In fact I cannot explain when and how the keypoint has been translated of 4/1000s ahead in my project, that remains a mystery for me. As I replied to Dave I worked several times on this project without having noticed this problem. Checking the created HD video before the projection in our slideshow festival I was very surprised to hear the sound fading abnormaly between the two sequences. For people who know the problem, it is very easy to overcome it by adding another keypoint at the end of the audio clip. Daniel

Dave, I do not want to build something different otherwise it will be more difficult for Igor to point out which does not fit. That is a fact, there is no overlap and one key point has been unfortunately dragged (4/1000s!!!) from the second audio file to the first one. Why? how? I do not know. I worked several times on this project without having experienced this problem. As the global project is rather big around 2.4Go I made an export by creating an HD video. In checking the HD video before its release, I was very surprised by this phenomena and came back to the PTE project looking for a solution. As I said, I solved the problem easily by putting another keypoint on the 0.0db orange line level before the end of the audio clip. Daniel

Igor, I sent it to you via email.

Dave, Had you received my last post ? No there is no overlap between the two audio clips : see attachment. As I said in my last post, I think that the problem happens because the time point B which should be located at the very beginning of the second audio clip (see the orange line) is in fact located 4/1000s ahead on the fisrt audio clip. So there are two problems which might have the same cause : 1- the orange line on the first audio clip remains at a constant level (here 0.0db) while the sound level is declining regularly 2- it should not be possible to drag the point B outside the audio clip limits Daniel

Following Peter and Dave suggestions, zooming on the timeline it appears that time point B is located at 2.55.751 while the junction of the two audio clips is located at the time point 2.55.754 So there are two problems 1 - time point B does not belong to the second audio clip but to the first one and should not impact the second audio clip. In order to fix this problem it should not be possible to put, by error, a time point outside an audio clip limit. 2 - As the point B belongs to the first audio clip the orange line of the first audio clip should decline from level A to level B, in accordance with the fact that the sound is regularly declining from level A to level B but that is not the case the orange line remains at a constant level (0.0db) . Daniel

Hi Peter and Dave reading your posts this morning I understood that I missed to give an information concerning the problem by itself so I added the sentence in red in my previous post. The sound level declines regularly from point A to the end of the audio clip. If I add a time point on the orange line, not necessarely at the end of the audio clip then the problem disappear. Please refer to the attachment for the answer to your questions. Daniel

Using v8.0.10 There is a strange behaviour of the sound level when there are two audio clips jointed on the same track. The sound level fades from point A to the end of the audio clip .The problem occurs when the first audio clip ends at 0.0db (as an example) and the second begins with a time point at a different level - infinity (as an example) see attachment. To correct this unexpected behaviour, I have to put another time point on the orange line at the end of the first audioclip. Daniel re edited : the sentence in red added on the 19/01/2015

Thanks Tom I will make some tests with Hybrid in order to see how it works transcoding h264 into h265. But I should wait for 4K video. That would be much more appealing if FZ1000 could create 4K videos directly in H265 rather than in H264. Perhaps a new release in Panasonic plans for 2015? Daniel

Hi Tom interesting experience about h265, thanks for information. It was said that h265 was twice more efficient than h264 at the same quality level, it seems that it did not reach the target there is a big difference! As you, I hope that PTE will support h265 directly for the future, not specialy for TV set applications but mostly for large screen projection. Something is puzzling me about 50" 4KTV. The normal human eye limits have already been reached with 50" TV Full HD screen definition. So if you watch at your TV set at a distance longer than 2m you should not be able to see all the full details of a 1920x1080 image except if you have a very supra normal view. This limitation is biological. The main interest is the use of h265 which provides much more details in colors (coded in 10/12 bits rather than 8/bits as before with h264). So I can guess that the big difference lies much more in the screen quality itself and the use of h265 coding rather than in the 4K definition of your TV set. On my point of view 4KTV is only a marketing concept. But it could win! That is always very difficult for the customer to make a right comparison. Daniel

Hi Igor Apparently the problem with ClamAV has been solved. After checking with EXE file test created with PTE, the problem does not exist any more neither with PTE v8.0.9 nor with PTE v8.0.10. Have a good week-end Daniel

Hi Igor, Thanks for your help. As soons as I receive an answer from ClamAV, I 'll let you know. Daniel

Thanks Igor for your reply. So, we will send them a report following your suggestion. But in the time between, our members ask how to come back to the previous version v8.0.8 after having installed v8.0.9. During the Christmas time they are used to exchange their "Exe" greetings cards via our server It seems that reinstalling v8.0.8 on top of v8.0.9, v8.0.9 remains active ; the same thing happens (they said) when they uninstall v8.0.9 and reinstall v8.0.8 I must confess that I did not make the test by myself. Is there a very simple solution ? Best regards Daniel

Hi Tom, Thanks for your post; Yes, I am quite convinced that is a false positive answer. But with the same server and so with the same antivirus engine, the exe files created by PTE v8.0.8 are accepted without any problem while, those created with PTE v8.0.9 are rejected and automatically erased by the server manager. So it seems that the origin of this new problem comes with the software modification inside the PTE v8.0.9 version. Igor is looking on this problem. Best regards Daniel

Hi Igor, There is a problem when downloading a safe executable file created with PTE v8.0.9 from some hosting servers, which did not exist with previous versions. One of our club member had uploaded such a zip file using Filezilla on an hosting server. Other members have tried to download this file without success : Filezilla displayed an error message saying : - 550 Can't open projectname.zip : no such file or directory - critical error with the file transfert. Then the server delete the file automatically. I have made the same test with the same result on the same server. It seems this happens with some servers and not with others (I have tried to download and upload the same file with another server without any problem). So I can guess that could be a problem of security checking with some servers. Do you know how to solve this problem ? Thanks in advance. Best regards Daniel

Interesting, thanks to you both! Daniel

Dave, you divert my wordings ! What I said in my post (see last sentence) : "it is quite easy to create HD Videos which can be recorded on DVD or BD with standard third party softwares..." So , yes, I agree with you and Eric, it could be easier to send DVDs to friends rather than memory stick but why not including HD Video mp4 files rather than old DVD format? Most of DVD players are able to explore folders and read mp3 or mp4 files. NB : it is also very easy to send a link for downloading. Lin, imagine that you want to order a video report of a special event, one photographer offers you to make a standard DVD (0,44M) the other one, for the same price, offers you a DVD with an HD Video mp4 file (2M). Which one will you choose? Which one is the best professionnal? Laszlo, I have just a comment to add. I agree on what you said about electronic or magnetic devices. But I just want to draw your attention on the fact that there is no lifetime guarantee with customized DVDs. One of my friends have lost a lot of DVDs he burnt only six years ago. Personnaly I prefer to save my AV files directly on HDDs always onto 2 different supports. Daniel

Never ! Something is puzzling me. Most of PTE users and forum members are asking for best images quality and advanced features. Nowadays most of digital cameras can shoot photos of 12M pixels, most advanced up to 25M... most of TV set are able to display 2M (1920x1080) pixels and in the few years to come 8M (3840x 2160 that is called 4K). But reading the previous posts, I understand there is still a strong demand for 0,44M (764x576 which is the equivalent DVD quality in sqared pixels). Where is the consistency? With such requirements, it is quite difficult for Igor to find the right track for the PTE's evolving! All features to be maintained have a cost, each time new features are added, old ones have to be tested again and again in their new software environment. The DVD building function was essential when we cannot create other outputs except EXEs but it is no longer the case since several years ! With PTE v8 it is quite easy to create HD Videos which can be recorded on DVD or BD with standard third party softwares or even saved directly on USB or HDD. Daniel

Thanks Stu, Interesting, I did not know either (or I forgot it ) ! Something that Dave should add to his very useful Hotkeys list! Daniel

Hi Judy, I agree with you and support your proposal for points 1 - 2 - 6 Your points 5 - 8 I did not understand your need Point 10, already you can open O/A by clicking on a slide : see Settings /Preferences/System/Double click in the slide list Daniel

Today, the digital camcorders provided by world leader manufacturers are using h264 AVCHD and the videos are delivered under .mts or m2ts file extension. If we want to reuse this kind of video clips inside a PTE project we have to convert them again in order not to "optimize them" as PTE said but to ease PTE work and avoid jerky effects. The problem is that PTE converts them into an .avi file using a h263 coder whose performances are weaker than h264, and if, at the end of the PTE project we want to create an HD video, PTE will reconvert h263 into h264. In fact to simplify we have the following process : h264 AVCHD=> mpeg4 ASP h263 => h264 AVC We are cascading coding disagreements and lowering the signal/noise ratio of the video. For editing videos, it is quite difficult to avoid this cascading process but the result could depend on the data compression used by the intermediate coder. I promote PTE for slideshow and video editing but I still must use Adobe Premiere (CS5) for h264 AVCHD conversion into an Mpeg2 High@High profile / GOP N=3 whose quality should be better than Mpeg4 Advanced Simple@L1 profile (h263) provided by PTE converter. Should it be possible that PTE provides a video conversion which minimizes the cascading coding noise effects even if the resulting ("optimized") video file size is bigger (less data compression) than the original one? Daniel

Hi Igor, thanks for the news! Good luck ! We are eager to taste it. Daniel

Dave, I can guess, you are trying to answer to my previous post...??? If it is the case, sorry but you are making confusion, rather than speaking about converter (PTE uses the english word "Convert") I shoud have spoken about coder which is more convenient. And so your picture is not relevant in that context. See my attachment. Best regards Daniel

Just a small problem by my last experience in creating HD video files with PTE 8.0.3 under Win7. At first I had created 3 HD video clips with different file names, let say video1, video2, video3 Then after some required modifications in my project I wanted to created them back. So as usual after setting video parameters I browsed video file names and found the existing video1, I decided to overwrite it, I got the message (in french! the selected language was english) "The video file already exists do you want to overwrite it Yes or No", I clicked on Yes and eveything seemed OK, the converter ran and made is job properly So I was expecting to find my new created video under the same name "video1" as it is usual with most of softwares but in fact it was created under a new name which was video4 very surprising and strange behaviour? That is not a very important problem but can lead to some confusion and errors. Daniel