orizaba

Hi Eric, Thanks, and congratulations for your nice presentation which I think made me understand another aspect of this situation. In fact, I already knew this conversion option (asking or not for conversion) and I always have ticked the "Always ask" option. But, as far as I can remember, PTE does not always ask! And I used to interpret this as a "directly accepted movie" by PTE, I mean, if PTE asks is because the file type or codec is not acceptable by PTE, so, PTE asks if we want to convert to an acceptable format. This would mean that PTE also accepts interlaced movies. And this is the new aspect I am now thinking about (as you saw, I asked Igor, stating that PTE only works with progressive, what I think now may not be true). All this is a little bit confusing to me as we all know that any kind of conversion looses quality. So, there are conversions and conversions, and I should like to know every detail about PTE conversion in order to decide of its use, since there are others which may be better and even quality lossless (Virtualdub Lagarith, for example). I hope Igor will reply accordingly...! Regards, Jose

Igor, thanks, result is the same, audio too fast, I mean, video too slow! Is it because I am loading big files (25 Gb)? Why am I using such big files? I am using PTE (v7.0.7) to "frame", with exellent quality, a lot of DV-AVI files which are digitized old BETA video movies. I use PREMIERE ELEMENTS to capture, edit and stabilize, and mainly because of stabilization I use PTE to create a thin variable border for the movie, over a 16x9 background with titles and subtitles. Great! With PTE I get better quality than with PREMIERE!!! Only problem is the audio/video sync, this must be solved. Regards, Jose

In my case audio is CONSTANT. Thanks.

Igor, Ok, thanks. Let me understand: PTE only can work with progressive, is it? Because every movie we load is always subject to de-interlacing (auto, weave or bob), and there is no option to keep it interlaced. Beeing this so, which is the "auto" criteria? I would thank you as well for explaning why PTE converter converts a 25Gb DV-AVI file (100% quality) into a 200Mb AVI file (no resizing, no changes at all) but with a bad quality. Anyhow, it seems that PTE perfectly accepts native DV-AVI files, not asking for conversion, and running perfectly smooth. What kind of conversion could it be? Regards, Jose

Yes, same results, and as far as I can see through this forum, v7.5 still is far from reliable. Anyhow, for my projects, I don't miss more than v7.0 can offer... may be a 64-bit version only! Thanks.

PTE 7.0.7 DV-AVI file audio/video 100% lip-sync, as verified in any video edit software timeline, plays correct in VLC and others. When loaded in PTE, audio runs faster and in a moment is completely out of sync and increasing, not constant. I must say this happens with big files (20 GB), not converted (PTE does not ask for conversion and it really runs smooth, perfect) but out of sync. Why? Thanks.

PTE 7.0.7 Why MEDIAINFO says a file DV-AVI is interlaced and PTE says progressive? I am now working with DV-AVI files obtained by capturing old BETA videos with PREMIERE ELEMENTS. Analogue to digital conversion is real time hardware made using a DV recorder: analogue signal inputs, DV signal outputs. I am not quite sure, but I think I had similar "error" before, every interlaced file I load to PTE is identified as progressive. Why? Thanks.

If your problem still is that TV SAFE ZONE, you just have to create a frame, put everything inside that frame, and than zoom-out the frame to 81% in order to put everything inside the TV SAFE ZONE. I enclose this done for you as "To PTE Forum 01.pte". Please note that I am working with PTE 7.0.7 I could see that your second slide does not include your picture "School_0280.jpg". Instead, in "Customize Slide", you put it under "Tiled background picture". Any reason? I had to replace it by puting it under that 81% frame in order to zoom it out like other objects. Jose To PTE Forum 01.zip

Hi Steven, May be 2 problems: 1. Did you respect the so called "Show Safe TV Zone", in O&A? 2. Can your 42 inch LCD flat screen TV (and same with 55" LCD) show "Overscan/Underscan" modes? Because in one of them (I can't remember which) image is croped and does not show the 100% image you can see on your computer. Jose

Hi all, My idea was only to discuss file types and how to get them in order to have a super quality result when using a Media Player! But I can see that discussion is turning on to use or not a Media Player, or USB pen or HDD instead. Considering this other point I would say that, for me, the Media Player was a good solution: hundreds of 8mm family movies (since 1942...!), hundreds of Super8 movies, hundreds of BETAMAX videos, as well as Hi8 and miniDV, lots of PTE slideshows, all this material is now in my Media Player, and I must say that it is the nice way to show something to others, at home or other places, providing there is a TV set available with HDMI or some other more classic input. The Media Player "delivers" the best video and audio, nothing else is necessary. My Panasonic TX-P65VT30E also have USB inputs, and its own media player and everything else, but it's nice for me to have all my stuff put together and ready to use in all circunstances. By the way: concerning old 8mm and Super8 movies, I had to digitize them and I did it by means of projecting them directly to the full frame sensor of my Canon 5D MkII. Result is super good! Do you wish to discuss this? Because I think that a big lot of members have their own old 8mm and Super8 movies. The digitizing process I use gives far better quality than commercial photo shops can give. I took this idea from James Miller (UK) and just modified it a little bit. See http://vimeo.com/20950590 and enjoy the most acclaimed invention of James Miller! Regards, Jose

There are several ways of watching a PTE slide/video show: using the .exe file on a computer, using DVD or BD discs, USB pendrives directly on a TV, etc.. When we have a lot of media projects, either PTE or video projects, and we want to have all of them ready to be watched on a TV, my personal experience says that a Media Player (all projects are stored in its HDD), is the best and easiest solution. There are lots of media players in the market and one of the best is POPCORN HOUR A-210. Last month came model A-400, with new Sigma chipset 8911 (dual core 800 MHz, VXP image processor, 512 KB L2 cache). Mine is A-210 (Sigma chipset 8643, 667 MHz CPU with floating point coprocessor) a model dated 2009. I believe A-400 is much better, but my A-210 is reliable and very good indeed. Best file type for POPCORN, in my own opinion, is M2TS, the one I use. M2TS is used in commercial BluRay discs (25 or 30 fps, interlaced). MP4 files like the ones produced by PTE, often loose video-audio synchronization in the media player, I don’t know why, but it is a real and annoying fact. Mainly when PTE projects include a lot of video. In case of PTE projects, in order to produce the best image quality to be watched on a HDTV, I use a method which I am pleased to share. First thing is to produce the best MP4 file in PTE. I use 1920x1080, 60p fps, two-passes, 24000 kbps, audio bitrate 320 kbps, 48000 Hz, Stereo. I always adopt 60 fps progressive even if my videos are recorded at 25 fps interlaced. From this MP4 file I must get a M2TS file to save on my POPCORN. I know some programs for such conversion but all of them do not produce a 60 fps progressive file, as this is not the BluRay standard, so, they only can produce a 25 or 30 fps interlaced M2TS file (in order to record a BD disc to be played on a BD player). Result is bad in terms of image quality, mainly because in fast moving scenes the image “jumps”, presenting a non-continuous movement. However, there is a program which allows to produce a M2TS file, 60 fps progressive, which runs 100% smooth on the media player, beeing it a super quality image. Such program is free. It is “SUPER” from “eRightSoft”, now in its version 2012, dated Nov 18, 2012. In SUPER I adopt video codec H264/AVC and audio codec AC3. Than I adopt 1920x1080, 16:9, 60 fps, 30240 kbps (BD standard is 30000 kbps), Hi-Quality, CABAC off (in H264 profile), 1.3 (in H264/AVC Level), and for audio I adopt 48000 Hz, 2 channels and 448 kbps. For example, a 21 minutes PTE project with lots of videos takes 1h:50m to convert. The result is a super quality M2TS file, 60 fps progressive, which plays smooth in the media player, showing a fantastic image on TV (HDMI connection) and a fantastic audio as well (A-210 optical connection to Hi-Fi). All file parameters can be verified using free software “MediaInfo” from DigiMetrics. As I said, this is only my opinion, and I should like to discuss it with members.

Hi Lin, I just had a look (I didn't know none of them). Mercalli 2, at a first glance, seems very much similar to Sony Vegas in which I use to get similar results. But, as I understood, it is only for "from Vista on", and I still work with XP. Anyhow, I just pointed Sony Vegas in my suggestion as an example (3 degrees, roller compensation, etc.) and mainly to point out that it is far better than Adobe Premiere. Regards, Jose

Did you try "WM Capture" v6.0.4 (28 April 2012)? I use this one, after trying Camtasia and others. Video till 50 fps, 12000 kbps, MPEG-4(AVI) or MPEG-2. Audio till 384 kbps. Excellent results. A suggestion for a free video converter: SUPER v2012.build 54 (Nov 18, 2012) by eRightSoft. This is the far best video converter, the one I use to get M2TS files (Blu-Ray class) at 60 fps progressive (which is a frame rate that does not exist on BD...!) No other converter can do it! In fact, when I publish my PTE projects in HD video for PC (1920x1080, 60 fps p, Two-passes, 23000 kbps, audio 320 kbps, 48 KHz, Stereo), I use SUPER to get correspondent M2TS file, in order to save and play them in my Media Player (Popcorn Hour A-210, which clearly "prefer" such M2TS files). Result is super! Regards, Jose

Igor said (09 JAN 2013): The idea is really interesting, but I can't answer now. Please create a new topic for image stabilization in "Ideas and suggestions for next versions". The suggestion is to introduce in PTE (video section) an image stabilyzer. Almost all video editors have this feature. My experience shows that SONY VEGAS stabilizer is far better than any other, it has 3 stabilization degrees and it is very much effective in each degree. For people including videos in PTE projects, this feature in PTE would avoid at least 1 video conversion and consequent quality loss, because, as Igor says, stabilized image should be the original one, and after zoomings, fades, etc., it would be rendered only once (on the PTE converted video file), or so I understood. Jose

Igor, Your English is perfect, explanations not complicated, thanks for all your information. What about my own P.S.? Regards, Jose

Igor, Thanks, that is good. That is even better because I already noticed, since long time ago, that quality of PTE zoomed images is far better than same zoomed pictures using a video editor like SONY VEGAS or ADOBE PREMIERE, which I also use. You know, as you already understood, I work with film and video since more than 50 years. When PTE introduced video in slideshows I started using PTE to "edit" my films and videos! No more, no less! With PTE I can frame, zoom, fade, etc., with better quality, that's my conclusion. That's why I am very sorry indeed that PTE is not a native 64-bit program... I told you before. Because 32-bit is very much limitative and forces me to have a lot more of a long (and stupid) work not to follow in an out of memory situation. Please, tell me that you will produce a native 64-bit version VERY, VERY SOON! I have dozens of films and videos to edit... and I am not so young...! Best regards, Jose PS: By the way, can you provide exact parameters of your PTE video converter? I mean, video and audio codecs used, bitrates, etc., which real values - of what? - correspond to quality percentage (from 0% LOW, to 100% HIGH), etc.. At, last, a suggestion: is it too difficult to introduce in PTE (video section) an immage stabilyser? Almost all video editors have this feature. My experience shows that SONY VEGAS stabilizer is far better than any other, it has 3 stabilization degrees and it is very much effective in each degree. This feature in PTE would avoid at least 1 video conversion and consequent quality loss, because, as you say, stabilized immage should be the original one, and after zoomings, fades, etc., it would be rendered only once (on the PTE converted video file). Is this so?

So, this clears my only doubt (as per my last post). Thanks, Jose

DG, Lin and Xaver, Thanks so much, all of you understood my question quite well, and now everything is clear for me! I mean... almost...! Regarding PTE methodology, as DG and Lin explained, things are quite clear for me and I agree: no degredation. Period! But this last post from DG, concerning Photoshop process... Does this mean that Photoshop does not follow the PTE process? Always using the original picture? I do not work with Photoshop, so I am away of this problem, but I would find curious (at least) that Photoshop use "a less clever process" than PTE! Even beeing PTE not an image editor. Regards, Jose

DG, Thanks for your explanations. Anyhow, I think I am not still convinced...! You say "... zoomed in and out to whatever percentage is required and is never saved how can there be any degredation?" This is the point: You zoom in. Result is "degredation" (even if you don't save the project at this time), is this so? After this, you zoom out (even to the original percentage). Image which will be zoomed out is not the original one, but it is already a degretaded one instead, is this so? I say this because PTE (and almost all video editing softwares) execute successive "operations", one after the other, according to "up-to-down" order, is this so? This is my doubt... Can you clarify? Of course, I always use original picture size (36Mp), but problem (and doubt) above still exists. Regards, Jose

Peter, Thanks. I had never tried to apply Unsharp, neither to slides nor to video. Just now, I applied Unsharp = 200 (maximum) to video and difference is great! Such video is an old Hi8 video, which I digitalized (AVI file). Original quality in terms of sharpness is not so good, mainly when we are already used to Full HD quality... so, this Unsharp Mask helps a little bit to quality image. Regards, Jose

Thanks Peter, In your example, in a first glance, I can not really see any difference. I never made a test like yours, in order to compare. I just should like to know, under a pure technical point of view, if there is any reason for a quality degradation. I compare this situation with audio hi-fi: Human ear can detect a maximum 20 KHz, however, we can not notice any difference between 19 Khz and 20 KHz, but difference is really there! So, I insist: what happens with PTE? Is there degradation or not? Even if we can not notice. Regards, Jose PS: By the way: does "unsharp mask" (in Project options) apply to video, or only to pictures (slides)?

Just a question: 1. As an example, let us suppose we have a slide (or video). In O&A it is with zoom = 100. 2. Let us put it inside a Mask Container, beeing this with zoom = 70 3. Let us put this Mask Container inside a Frame 1 with zoom = 200 4. At last, let us put this Frame 1 inside another Frame 2, with zoom = 120 5. Let us "imagine" that final result for the slide (or video) is an "equivalent" zoom = 168 (just an example). My question is: - Is the final image quality 100% equal to the quality we would obtain if we would apply only one zoom = 168 directly to the slide (or video)? - Or, each time we apply a zoom (mainly a zoom in, as I think) picture quality is reduced? - This point has to do with usual down sequence processing of several effects (from top to bottom). So, I think that quality reduces each time a zoom is applied, I mean, PTE does not process a sort of "counter balance" of successive zooms. Is this so? Jose

Hi Lin, Thanks for your help. By the way, do you really think that WnSoft is working on this...? I am not so sure, as per their silence! I think I understood your solution and, as a matter of fact, that is exactly what I have done with my project in order to overpass the situation. However, it was a lot of stupid work because project was not thought for that from start. After such project I already made another one including lots of video as well, and I structured it from start for this purpose, which made things a lot more easy. However, I insist: WnSoft made possible the use of video (even Full HD video!) in the projects, what is of a great interest indeed! But Full HD demands a lot of memory and processing. I think that WnSoft should have made a 64-bit native software at the same time in order to allow, in an effective way, the use of video. As I said before, they have a pitbull inside a caniche case... In relation to this, did you ever noticed that "publishing" HD H.264 mp4 files is not possible when included video is very large? I mean, I had a 51 minutes AVI video (PTE converted), 2 GB, and tried to publish. MP4 resulting file is truncated after 14 minutes! It happened several times, truncating at diferent times. Solution: divide the video in several slides (around 13 minutes video each) and publish several mp4 files. Then, using YAMB 1.6.0, I joined all mp4 files (no recoding). Thanks again and regards, Jose

Artem, Still "working on them"...? It must be a big, big bug! Jose

Hi Artem, I hope that this is not your answer to freezing, crashing, unhandled exceptions, "D:Wnsoft" and other error situations which I am dealing with. In fact, I am aware of "link video clip option" but I am not using it because, from User Guide, video objects (on one or several slides) linked with one video track share common parameters: Start time, Duration, Offset, Mute audio. As you may have noticed, my "not linked" clips have diferent start times, diferent durations, diferent offsets, besides the fact that in some of them I use their own audio and "mute" in others. So, in general, I can not use this option. Yes, I can imagine that having tens of video clips inside one slide is hard for the computer, despite the fact, as you may have noticed as well, that I am using the smallest possible video segments (not the full original video track). I get such segments from the original video using my video editing software. Separating/spliting, that's what I am doing now, whenever adequate and whenever possible, but it's not so easy, as my final goal is to produce a final mp4 file of the whole project, not to show the project using the "enchaining method". So, such spliting, originating several mp4 files, forces me to use again my video editing software in order to join the pieces. At last, I would say, PTE would make it possible to build more complex projects if it was a native 64-bit program using all own 64-bit resources. That's what I am sorry for in present moment. In the meantime, I keep waiting for your support related to all ERRORS occuring. Regards, Jose