orizaba

Dear Fellows, I am still using Beta 20, and I noticed something "strange": Usualy, when I load the waveform, it takes sometime to load it, and we can see green marks growing till the end. Since I use PTE it has been always like this. Suddenly, using same project and same sound file, I noticed that waveform loading became instantly, I mean, it seams that it was already loaded because it shows at once, no green marks at all. It worked like this for some 2 weeks. I had to replace sound, and situation became like before, I mean, I have to wait for waveform loading, with green marks, etc.. Where is the mistery? What is going on? Can someone explain? Thanks a lot and best regards, Jose

CORRECTION: MAC address is "http://tempodeolhar.com/AveiroMACzip.zip"

Hi Tom and Lin, Thanks four your help and clear (as usual...) explanations. I already created MacZip and hope everything runs well. By the way: concerning this last project of mine, I think I have a problem with "anti-shimmering" factor, because I used it in several slides with "heavy" pans ans zooms, and "anti-shimmering" result is not enough. Is this normal? Does it have only a limited effect, not 100%? Besides this, please let me know: is it impossible to apply "anti-shimmering" to masked objects? Concerning masked objects: is it impossible to apply "shadow"? I had to solve this by means of a complicated process... Please, kindly have a look on this project of mine, and let me know your advice for better results. It is 08:54,413 with 117 MB. http://tempodeolhar.com/AveiroPC.exe http://tempodeolhar.com/AveiroMACzip.zip Thanks again and best regards, José

Dear fellows, Just finished my first project using "new" PTE DELUXE 6.0 BETA 20. Excellent! I have a blog and I use to put my videos and PTE slideshows in my blog, either running as AVI converted to MP4 files, or inviting people to download PTE EXECUTABLE files (which I previously upload to my server). I am used to do this only for PC users. Now, there is the possibility of MAC users run MAC EXECUTABLE files. Ok, I created it. But, instead of a simple and single file for me to upload (and viewers to download), as is the case for PC users, I got a folder with 2 folders inside, besides 2 more files. Folder "MacOS": containing "launcher" Folder "Resources": containing "English.proj" folder and "Viewer.app" folder, and "slideshow.dat" and "slideshow.icns" files. Inside folder "Viewer.app" there is "Contents" folder, and this contains more folders... Well, you know! My question is: what must I upload to server, and what must I tell my viewers to download? Is it as easy as for PC users? Another point: Sometime ago I remember that PTE was making first attempts to allow MAC users have access to PTE EXECUTABLE FILES, but it was not so sure that everybody could get good and reliable results. With this version 6.0 BETA 20 is it final concerning this subject? Every MAC user can rely on this possibility? I thank you very much for your help on this. José

Dear fellows, By the way, I think I am not thinking correctly... I just installed same version 6 Beta 20 (amazing software!!! I was working with 5.6.4), but I can not find a way to put "border" on an object! Can you let me know the trick? Thanks, José

Thanks very much, but I was much confused... sorry! Is v5.6.3 a beta version? I don't think so. I didn't quite follow all couple of pages and boxes to leave un-ticked... Regards, Jose

Thanks very much. Yes, I think this method is ok to download 5.6.3 in order to "have nothing to do" with former versions. Although it is not an UPDATE, may be it is the best way to deal with new versions. Regards, Jose

I see that some fellows are already working with v5.6.3 released 5 days ago, and I could confirm that actual download offered (to buy...!) is v5.6.3. I am working since the start with v5.60 and I must say I only had 100% good results, not one sole failure of any kind. I see that some discussions in this forum turn around all kind of problems, for example, this last topic before mine, with v5.6.3. I should ask if it is worthwhile to update my v5.60? Anyhow, I should like to know what is different from 5.60 till 5.6.3. At last: how to update? Can somebody let me know? Thanks in advance. Jose

Hi, I am following all discussion on this subject which seams very interesting to me, as I feel candidate to use it soon! In fact, I think it would be interesting to "mix" slides with video in the same PTE show. I didn't try it yet, but I should very much appreciate if someone could "put on the air" a slideshow showing this feature, in order to see it working in a practical way. Would it be possible? Thanks very much, Best regards, Jose

John, Thanks for your help. I choosed "CCOUNT", suggested by THEDOM. It is easy to install and run. Best regards, Jose

Hi, all of you who really helped me a lot! I thank you all very much! I can count all clicks, at last! I choosed "PHP CLICK COUNTER" from "PHPJunkyard.com - Free PHP scripts" (suggested by THEDOM), and it is really very easy to install and manipulate. My blog is a Blogger blog, nothing special It is dedicated to family videos and slideshows. Host server is located in Lisbon, Portugal, as all my viewers are mainly located here and this way everybody can get very high download speeds (around 4,8 Mbps), allowing high video bitrates and good video quality. To deal with host server I use a software "FLASH FXP v 3.6.0" which permits a very easy access to all properties, including CHMOD attributes, as required to install PHP CLICK COUNTER. Best regards, Jose

Hi, Thanks for your suggestion. In fact, I think that in my case I can not use Mediafire as a hosting service because I checked and I found it very slow (server must be located far away and download speeds are very poor). Besides, I opened an account and tried to make an upload, and for 3 times upload failed! Anyhow, thanks for your help, and I keep trying to find an easy way to count the downloads of my "pte.exe" files. Regards, Jose

Thanks very much for your help. In fact, my question is as you understood it: "How many people downloaded my "PTE.exe" files? I followed the link you suggested, but I am sorry to say that such site is very misunderstanding...! I tried to download several tutorials but none of them (free) was available to download! However, I do not know how to deal with PHP and SQL, etc. etc., so I think that this method would be impossible for me! My "PTE.exe" files are hosted in a server. In my blog I have a link to each one of them, so people can click and download. I wonder if there is some "pre-built" trick, ready to use, which we add to link indicated in blog, and when such link is clicked "something" counts 1 and 2 and 3, etc., writing this indication somewhere. Hope to have good news about this! Thanks and regards, Jose

Dear Fellows, 1. I wish to profit this occasion to say that I am really happy with PTE 5.6! In fact, this software exceeds all my needs and expectations, mainly in terms of final quality of projects, either under ".exe" final files, or under HD video (.mp4) final files. This last option (.mp4) is really a very, very good option, highest quality (2 passes, H.264 format, high bitrates, etc.). I already made some slideshows and I got no failure at all, I never had the minimum problem. In fact, I never had the minimum technical problem with PTE in general, it shows a really good software. My best congratulations to creators and developpers! Next PTE generation for MAC users is a must, and I am glad you are working on it because I am sorry that my MAC friends can not have access to my actual PTE .exe files. 2. Now, is there any easy way to have control over number of downloads of our ".exe" files? Please, kindly let me know. Regards, Jose

Hi, John I didn't download, yet, your slideshow because it will take sometime due to its big size, and I am not available now. But I will do it soon because it must be a very good show and I am interested in Edimburgh. In the meantime, I am sorry to ask you which technique are you using to "count" number of downloads (244, as you say)? And what is the difference between "244 downloads" and "mediafire 69"? In fact, I should like to know how many downloads people make of my slideshows, but I don't know how! Thanks very much in advance and best regards, Jose

Hello Lin, I will miss you, all of us will miss you, your nice on line company and helpful advice, but I understand your actual problem and I only hope to have you back in a very near future, mainly because it will mean good news on your family health. Good luck and regards, Jose

Hi Lin, "My gut feeling is that these "accelerator" type programs don't really work". I couldn't think that you are not used to DAP, I am sorry for the trouble I am causing. On the other hand, I am glad to call your attention to DAP, because I really find it a 200% necessary tool to have. I am using DAP for the last 4 or 5 years, first the free version (5 connections possible and lots of adds), and latter the paid PREMIUM version (10 connections possible and no adds at all). It really works, it's really true that acceleration is always 200%-400%, 2 minutes instead of 8 minutes, big difference! I agree with you, I think it downloads several pieces of the file, in my case, 10 pieces, which process we can follow, seeing each piece downloading, all 10 at the same time, from only one server (in my case, my POWWEB FTP address, when for example I download a PTE executable). At the end, only one complete file is available, of course. In terms of a FLV/MP4 player, considering Progressive Download (the one I use), even if we should wait for the complete download of file in order to start playing, I think I would prefer, instead of beeing obliged to practice lower bitrates and lower quality, and even so, beeing still dependent of usual Internet low speeds. Because DAP is really very fast...! So, as I dream, in case a type of DAP could be "introduced/embed" into a FLV/MP4 player's "code", viewers of our videos (in a blog) could have very fast downloads and much better image quality. I find strange, and curious, that neither DAP nor JW builders, reply to me on this subject, only JW said that it was forbiden...! Strange... Best regards, Jose

Hi Lin, OK, no problem at all. My ATI RADEON Graphic Card X800XT is 32 GB/s. Thanks for your help concerning "DOWNLOAD SPEEDS" (other Topic). I did "ping" and "tracert" all Internet around, and I discovered an European Hosting Service in Amsterdam with ping 67 ms (compared with my actual POWWEB 120 ms). I contacted them, I made a test download and I got 1,8 Mbps average (compared to POWWEB/USA 850kbps average). This is not bad...! In case I transfer my hosting to them, it will be to a VPS, which is more expensive than actual shared POWWEB, I hope it is a good service. Lin: what about second part of my question? Concerning the use of some kind of download accelerator like DAP? Forbiden or not, possible or not, too much "silly" or not...? Thanks and regards, Jose

Hi Lin, Yes, I sent it to you, and you comented it, on January 14, under topic "SCROLLING TEXT... By the way, I just started a new topic under "DVD, Video,..." because I am getting really upset with download speeds from my host server. I need some help and I risked to put some (silly?) questions... Regards, Jose

Dear PTE Experts, I decided to open this new topic in "DVD-Video, AVI, VideoBuilder", not exactly because of some PTE problem, but because of a more general situation which includes PTE users as well, mainly when a PTE user wishes to post some PTE-AVI file in a blog, which is my case. I know that instead of puting a PTE-AVI Project file in my blog, it will certainly be better to put a link to EXE file itself, ok. Anyhow, in terms of my blog, which is exclusively for videos and slideshows, my real problem is to get higher download speeds, in order that I can increase video bitrates in my movies, and get a better presentation quality in the blog. This takes us to recent discussions about TRANSPARENT PLAYER, started by Lin Evans, and I copy/paste part of my last post on this subject: Concerning TRANSPARENT PLAYER, I have missed your recent first article on this subject, but I went to it now and read all 18 posts, including long Josh explanations, as well as visited Josh's site, saw demos, etc.. Inclusive, I asked Josh a lot of information because I became very much interested in this new TP for my "unique" private video blog...! I considered your opinion, of course, about TP beeing, now, the very best FLV H.264 or MP4 H.264 web player in the world, and I am considering buying it to install in my blog. The purpose is almost exclusively to get a much higher download speed, and so, to be able to put much higher video bit rates in my videos and get more quality. But, in fact, I doubt...! As you say, TP does not turn download speed higher. That's what I think as well. But Josh says that everything is instantanely! He gives his embeded demo video as example, made with some 128 kbps video bit rate, or so. As I can understand, 128 kbps is not a good example at all in a steady video piece like his. I don't like to be "convinced" with such tricks! In my videos to post in blog, I always use FLV H.264 800 kbps plus 48 kbps for audio, so a total of 848 kbps, 25 fps. I wished I could use the double! But I have a download speed 1000 kbps maximum from host server, so it is necessary to pause a little at start before playing without interrupting. On the contrary, downloading HD from Youtube, I have a 2400 kbps download speed. I measure all these speeds with DU METER. My point is: could TP get a download speed similar to this 2400 kbps? And I could start using MP4 H.264 instead of FLV H.264. Ok. Josh replied to questions I put, but I really regret to say that (for the 3rd time in 1 month!) some of my emails get loose, disapear...! And Josh's reply has disapeared from my computer. However, I remember he stated that his TRANSPARENT PLAYER does not increase download speed, just as I thought! Josh said something like "... only video bit rate has something to do with download speed...", just as I thought. So, honnestly, I can not find any reasonable argument to sustain that TRANSPARENT PLAYER is very fast, it starts playing at once, etc., etc., unless video files are converted at very low bit rates... In conclusion, I think I can go on saying that time of miracles has not yet arrived, concerning good video quality at the web, facing actual download speeds from host servers. I am sorry for the time I am taking to all of you... but I should like to put some questions, trying to get reasonable thoughts on this subject, as usual among PTE users. 1. I am using a host server which is POWWEB. I host there all my FLV video files as well as my EXE PTE Projects. It is from POWWEB that my blog's viewers download my files. POWWEB is a paid service, not expensive. In POWWEB I use a FTP account (which seams to be faster...) 2. I never got more than 1200 kbps maximum download speed, which leads to some 800-900 kbps average. 3. When I download HD Youtube, I get 2400 kbps average download speed. So, my computer, my connection and my service provider allow, at least, this 2400 kbps download speed. 4. POWWEB says that they can not increase my download speed. (I worked before with WEBNG, which download speed was 600 kbps maximum!) 5. QUESTION: Can somebody let me know of some "high speed" host server service? At least 2400 kbps, like Youtube? 6. Another point: all of you know DAP- DOWNLOAD ACCELERATOR PLUS 9.0, which in its paid version (PREMIUM) allows 10 connections to server, so downloads are really very fast. Would it be possible to "incorporate" some kind of DAP in our FLV Players? I asked this to the builder of my player, which is JW FLV PLAYER 4.3 (the best player in the world, #1 in quality and versality!), and his answer, till this moment, was: "DAP 10 connections are forbiden, and you risk to be banned from servers and sites...". I was astonished with this! Is this true? I asked details but got no reply till the moment. I put same point to DAP itself, some 5 days ago, but got no reply till this moment. I put this point now to you, dear PTE experts: #1 - Forbiden or not forbiden? #2 - Technicaly possible or not possible? 7. As you can easly understand, I am not at all an expert... but why not "embeding" a kind of DAP in our own player "codes"? Click "PLAY", real download speed around 4000-5000 kbps, big cache, start at once, no interruptions till the end. High video bit rates, excelent quality! Is this a dream? It is most probably a big mistake of mine... I only should like to know where and why! Regards, Jose

Hi Lin, I am amazed with all your interest, and fellow PTEs as well, trying to find reasonable explanations for (not only mine!) problem of "step-by-step" fades in Youtube HD. I have been away for some days, that's why only now I step in the discussion. Ok, my report is: 01. I have indeed latest version of FLASH PLAYER ACTIVE X (10.0.12.36) installed. 02. I didn't have SHOCKWAVE PLAYER 11.0.3r471 installed. I installed it but problem persist. 03. My computer: INTEL PENTIUM 4 CPU 3.60GHz (2 CPUs) Memory: 3072 MB RAM Graphic card: RADEON X800 XT ATI 400MHz 256,0 MB Driver: ati2dvag.dll v 6.14 dated 29.09.2007 (there is a new version 8.12, dated October 2008, and I will install it soon, trying to see if problem is overpassed) Considering your own reports, Lin, and other fellow who made his report, I am starting to think that "step-by-step" fades are due to Graphic Card's memory: problem occurs with 256 MB, and it does not occur with 512 MB. Besides, I think it's logic. May be that updating driver (as told above) problem is overpassed, but I doubt. However, I don't see why your GATEWAY (512MB) "sometimes" gives problem...! Is it because Memory RAM 2GB is not enough? By the way, I saw somewhere that more than 3 GB memory RAM in XP is of no effect at all, 3 GB is maximum usefull. Is this true? So, I agree that 1600x1200, is perhaps too much for many, many people who only have 256 MB in Graphic Card. But 1024x768 I think is too "little". I know that you want to keep 4:3 format, but I should prefer changing format a little bit and have more resolution, such as 1280x1024 (5:4), which runs perfect with 256 MB graphic gards like mine. The small slideshow I sent you, Lin, is 1280x1024, lots of fades and one big pan, and no problems at all. Best regards, Jose

Hi Lin, Thanks for your comments which are very reasonable, as always. I went back as well, and I can confirm that I used HD mode fullscreen. Fades are seen in a "step-by-step" mode, as well as water drops. Besides, I downloaded 100% MP4 file before start playing, so I think that it can not be a broadband problem. On the contrary, seeing in Standard mode, fades are perfect but image quality is "bad". So, I can not understand how is it possible that you get good results in your system. My CPU, memory and graphic card are very, very good, so I can not imagine that it is a problem of my computer. At last, what I mean when I spoke about Youtube/Vimeo low quality, is exactly what you said: "HD on the web is still in its infancy"! Concerning TRANSPARENT PLAYER, I have missed your recent first article on this subject, but I went to it now and read all 18 posts, including long Josh explanations, as well as visited Josh's site, saw demos, etc.. Inclusive, I asked Josh a lot of information because I became very much interested in this new TP for my "unique" private video blog...! I considered your opinion, of course, about TP beeing, now, the very best FLV H.264 or MP4 H.264 web player in the world, and I am considering buying it to install in my blog. The purpose is almost exclusively to get a much higher download speed, and so, to be able to put much higher video bit rates in my videos and get more quality. But, in fact, I doubt...! As you say, TP does not turn download speed higher. That's what I think as well. But Josh says that everything is instantanely! He gives his embeded demo video as example, made with some 128 kbps video bit rate, or so. (I can not go back to his post to confirm, because this is second time I am writing all this again, I lost first script...!). As I can understand, 128 kbps is not a good example at all in a steady video piece like his. I don't like to be "convinced" with such tricks! In my videos to post in blog, I always use FLV H.264 800 kbps plus 48 kbps for audio, so a total of 848 kbps, 25 fps. I wished I could use the double! But I have a download speed 1000 kbps maximum from host server, so it is necessary to pause a little at start before playing without interrupting. On the contrary, downloading HD from Youtube, I have a 2400 kbps download speed. I measure all these speeds with DU METER. My point is: could TP get a download speed similar to this 2400 kbps? And I could start using MP4 H.264 instead of FLV H.264. I don't use MP4 now because I don't want to wait for total download to start playing. That's what I am waiting for Josh's reply. What could be your comments on this subject? Thanks, and best regards, Jose

Hi Lin, I just saw your Youtube HD Slideshow, which is marvelous in terms of pictures and music, and HD as well, but... Youtube HD is still missing a lot! Look at your fades in/out, always "jumping", look at "bubles" in water, near the end... May be it is HD but it is as well Low Quality in terms of Internet video, don't you think so? I don't like Youtube, neither Vimeo, for these purposes because both suffer from this low quality in terms of movement. Besides, when you say that we must avoid pan, zoom and rotate (and "bubles", I would say...) you are puting aside necessary items to build a good slideshow, and PTE doesn't deserve such a punishment...! This is just my opinion, for sure, but I am so much enthousiastic of PTE that I can not consider to minimize all its great performances just because Youtube and Vimeo have still a long way to walk. Besides this, PTE "invented" this fabulous ".exe" way of sending and viewing at once in true HD, I think it's not at all necessary to use Youtube or Vimeo. I had to say this... I am sorry to insist, Lin, but could you give me some advice about what I asked in my post dated 15 Jan in topic Scrolling Text Over Multiple Slides, concerning size of my project (100 MB)? Is it possible, when project is ready, to split it in 3 or 4 parts, I mean, executable parts.? Thanks and regards, Jose

Hi Lin, It worked!!! You can not imagine how helpful you have been! I thank you very much! This project will be around 200 slides. Now it is 42. Using JPG I changed from 192,3 MB to actual 51,3 MB. Audio (42:06, mp3) is 38,5 MB. So I think final project will be around 100 MB. To convert BMP to JPG I used my favourite image software ARCSOFT PHOTO STUDIO 5.5, which I always use to work on my pictures. I used a 90% quality and I got the mentioned 51,3 MB estimating a final 100 MB. What do you think? Is it a great mistake? I can imagine my viewers downloading 100 MB... and waiting for a long, long time! The problem is that all these slides (and some more thousands...) were shot in 1968/1970 with a CANON QL 25 (aperture 2,5), in Africa (hot, high humidity, etc.) and they are not in good order. I have scanned them now, the job was not brilliant, so, actual quality is not so good. This is why I use 90% because I can not sacrifice even more their poor quality. Am I right? What would you suggest? Best regards and thanks again, Jose

Lin, thanks for your opinion and advice. You are right, I never used (I never tried!) the anti-shimmering, but I will pay attention to this in the future. Can I profit to ask you something? The other project I am building with PTE is now with 8 minutes and 42 slides. This project I started before the "Invitation" and I will return to it now. But... I used BMP slides and project is already some 200 MB! And it will have some 200 slides when ready... So, I must convert BMP to JPG, all slides. Ok. No problem. Problem is: is there any way to replace actual used BMP slides without loosing all timings, effects, zooms, pans, etc., etc.? Please, don't say that I have to build everything again from start... Hope to have good news! Best regards, Jose