Barry Beckham

I was wondering today if something like I have produced here would be of use to us. Its just a two slide demo, use curser keys to move forward and back. First image is with the main image scaling disabled and the second one is at the stardard fit to slide. If we had a test show made to include all the popular sizes we would tell how size and format would look on all size and format screens. The lines are set in from the edge at 5%, 10% and 15% so we could tell how much of our image may be lost off screen Just a thought? http://www.beckhamdigital.co.uk/size.zip Only 300k in size

The borders will vary depending on whether you will you disable scaling of images. Here are how they look on my 1280*1024 monitor. If you create your images in Photoshop and set the ppi to 72, you will see the texture better than 96. When I looked at your image in PS @ 96, then selected the zoom and then print size (ie display size in PTE) The texture was too tight and looked bad. At 72, it reflects what I saw in PTE. Setting 72 has no affect on the image in pte at all, but it does allow us to easily see what we will get in PTE while still in the image editor. The canvas weave is also probably the worst option for that tiling effect you mentioned. There are others, and some buried in the photoshop install files that offer better control than the weave. (IMHO)

George Will this help http://www.beckhamdigital.co.uk/digitalav/...m?idCategory=84

KSF Your missing the point and that can't be helped in typed communications and I am not blaming your for that. I am a fairly thick skinned and a level headed person. The comment doesn't bother me personally. The slide shows being commented on can be found here http://www.beckhamdigital.co.uk/freestuffdigslidesw3.htm Most of them have been put up on this site at one time or another, but they are all recent creations especially to top few on this page. What comments like that can do is drive AV into a narrow channel of acceptability. I forces newcomers to conform and stifles creativity. I know exactly what the person was saying and why. Most of what is created by member of this forum would not be considered by this person as real AV, because it diesnt have some depressing morbid story line. My target audience is me, I like to think others will like it too, because what I like I find other generally do too, but if not, so what?

Peter I have done quite a few of these types of tests over the years and when your honest some of them are scarily accurate. With this one I seem to be 65% and 35% A foot in both camps

The main issue for me is when the establishment takes these views. I am too think skinned and ignorant to take any notice and I go my own way regardless. What the down side of these comments are, is when they are the backbone of the AV establishment. Then they make sure they steer everyone down the same track as was done in Camera clubs some years ago. You just could not stray from the established norm or your work was not treated seriously. That is thankfully now not the case, probably due to the digital revolution. I agree some great AV's can be produced with terrific story lines, but why do so many seem to be centered around attrocities and war. I am not sure I want to see too much of that for entertainment. We have those wall to wall on TV now. (and please no lectures from anyone about least we forget) Leave the boundaries loose and allow people the freedom to push them and experiment with AV. If you try to pigeon hole AV workers then newcomers can easily get pushed out. AV is one of the most exiting parts of the digital revelotion and I want it to have freedom.

Ron I saw the loads of so called proper AV over the years I have been involved with Camera Clubs and most of it was DIRE. I can still see the mould spots before my eyes now from one so called AV worker as as for interesting subjects, you must be joking. It has nothing to do with twin projectors or the method we use to create our sequences. I am very intolerant to this form of predudice, because I have seen it over and over again in Clubs and where has it got us. Absolutely nowhere. We saw it when colour prints started to show up in competitions and the call was to ban or segregate. We saw it again if anyone did anything remotely creative in the darkroom, that the mainstream didn't understand. The comment is not said for constructive criticism, it is said as a put down. Lets hope those who judges AV don't take the same line.

I always get a little nervous when I hear requests like this to be included in PTE5, I have a similar view to requests for sound editing to be included too. I think PTE5 is a superb product, but when software tries to be all things to all people, don't we then risk losing something. That old saying Jack of all trades, master of none, come to mind. Software that does this is often over complicated, difficult for new users to find their way through the myriad of add ons and then doesn't do what it's supposed to that well. There are already software packages that do the sort of thing asked, probably better than PTE could and they have the ability to keep league tables etc. Check our the camera club sites or the Photographic Alliance of Great Britain. They are bound to have some listed. I have used two systems as a judge and they both performed fine.

I had a great feedback line following a full days demo, where 2-3 of my latest slide shows were played. It was a written comment, sent on later, but I thought it summed up pretty well some of the riduculous things people say. Now what do you suppose he/she meant by this? "Don't pass off pictures and music as AV" I would love to meet that person and ask to see what they have created. Stupidity alive and well.

Him - Canon 1Ds Mk3 Her - Canon 5D

I am sure you have to save a new project file after renaming an image, but isn't PTE much like Photoshop when you create an action of add some filters. The software needs to be closed down and relaunched and then all the correct labels will be reflected. Havn't tried it in relation to this thread, but just a guess?

Lin 1. a display size choice could be preserved such as 1000x400 pixels 2. a frame of several pixels in the users choice of color could be maintained 3. a background scaled to fit the display could be used which would prevent the extra display area on the display device from showing at all times. Yes, that is what I would like to see. I would agree that this could be an advantage but for me certainly not at the expense of giving up the option of scaling to fit the available display. Then we need to have both options. Size and format are an issue to grapple with and no matter what Igor can do, it will not solve that, but to be able to create your show at any format and animate it easily without frames or hassle seems to be a goal worth aiming for. If it's possible of course.

JPD I accept what you say, but remember the vast majority of users to PTE do not have our knowledge and skill level. I don't want to have to use utilities and complicate the slide show process, it should be simple. I want all you saw in that demo as part of PTE, if it is possible

Try this little demo too Download the following zipped files http://www.beckhamdigital.co.uk/demo.zip The zip contains two files, but don't click the familiar PTE icon, keep both files in the one folder they are unzipped to and click the one called Start. You will see that I have created a very small window (so I know the 1000*400 demo slide show will cover it) that contains a start button. That start button will fire up a short animated slide show with just a few images at 1000*400. (no sound) If I am right here, this will play a restricted slide show on a solid black background on all resolution monitors from 1024*768 upwards. I have created the white line too, but that has been done as a png frame.

Well, as far as I am aware the original mode and the diable scaling are the same. One affects just one image via the O&A screen and the other does it globally from project options. I suppose the question was not put as a solution for me, I know how I could do this, but it would mean making 2-3 different shows. It is one of those issues that baffle the hell out of newer users of PTE, PSG is the same. It is tied into the automatic scaling up of images to a larger monitor, which I/we don't want. (do we?) Especially as we have spent so much time getting the right size, sharpness and quality. I want the show to run at 1000*400 on a textured background and I want that show to play at 1000*400 on any PC (1024*768 and higher) The background colour, texture should then fill any space between the edge of the image and the monitor limits. I use a piece of Multi Media software to create menus for DVD's, I have mentioned this before. I can create a small window for the menus and have that placed on a background of my colour choice. I can also set the background to be full screen and I assume that full screen colour will be applied to any resolution. ________________________________________________ Take a look at the example below. http://www.beckhamdigital.co.uk/example.zip Just unzip and double click the exe file inside. You should see your entire screen in white with a 1000*400 pixel image in the centre. You should be able to click and drag that image around too as it is just a frameless window. Escape will end the demo That is how we should be able to present our slide shows, but with the added advantage of being able to use textures and edge lines

I have been using a set of speakers from Acoustic systems for about 4 years for our lectures and AV shows and they are superb http://www.acoustic-energy.co.uk/Product_r...ries/Aego_M.asp They have filled the largest hall with sound and seem to amaze people with their quality. You get one base box and 2 tiny table top speakers and the cost is around £100.

Igoforit Are you any closer to finding a solution to your problem, or have you just lost the will to live.

Igor I have mentioned this before in the distant past and I raise it again not knowing of course what the technical difficulties are. It is the issue of presentation, how our slide show is finally seen on screen, not only by the author who created it, but also by others running different screen resolutions. For me AV is all about presentation and I think this issue is an important one to tackle if it is technically possible to do so of course. I want to have the ability to create a slide show at any resolution I like. For the sake of my explanation, let's assume I want it to be 1000 pixels wide and 400 pixels high. I want to be able to animate that slide show and present it on any screen colour of my choosing or any texture of my choosing. I want to be able to animate the show, but have the animation restricted to within those 1000*400 pixels so that anyone with a higher resolution monitor does not see any animation outside of the 1000*400 format. I don't want to have to use Png frames to accomplish that. We are close to it with the window mode option in Project Options, but that has limitations. If I restrict my slide show to 1000*400 pixels, anyone running my 1000*400 format show will still see parts of the desktop of the PC it is being played on. That is what is unacceptable to me as it destroys the visual effect of the slide show. If that is not enough, I also want the opportunity to create a fine line around the edge of the 1000*400 format for those times when I want to present dark images on a dark background or light images on a light one. This all has to be tied in with that other option on the effect tab "Disable scaling of images". To accomplish what I am asking images would have to be displayed at the size the author created them, rather than expanded by the software to fit a higher resolution monitor. I want my 1000*400 pixel show to display perfectly for 1024*768, 1280*1024, 1280*800 etc. No black bands anywhere on the screen at all. If I choose a textured background I want it the same on all monitors edge to edge. Left, right, top and bottom. I also want a button in PTE that tells me what the winning lottery numbers are for next week. Only joking about the last part. Barry

Oh please don't have an argument over the word animation. All this laughing is putting a strain on my heart The word has settled into the PTE talk to mean movement of an image or object. I suspect most forum members will accept the word animation to mean............... Some form of movement in PTE We can accept that can't we? Please? Pretty Please? PS, Lets have another one about image quality, that's much more fun

I have had a similar problem to this, but it was caused totally by me. I created a second variation of the show I was making and saved that to another location on my PC. Then I had a break for a couple of days and did nothing to it. My show was almost identical, but now in two places. On coming back I forgot about the variation show I made. I was then looking at one set of images (in preview) and all was well with the changes I had made. When I created the EXE file it was being created in the wrong location and I was continually opening the original exe and wondering why it did not reflect my changes. I though I was going mad until the penny dropped. Could this be that simple because you wouldn't have an issue with just two images in a sequence, well it's unlikely?

I have to be honest here and say this was a thrown together slide show, everything the Purists hate. Just a some pretty pictures hung to some music and not much thought al all the which image appeared with which image. Just a lucky batch of pics I guess.

Isn't this just a Beta thing? I seem to recall PTE did this all the way through the V5 beta testing, but all came right at the end. I think it may just be a Beta issue that Igor as to unhook so to speak until the final version is released.

Geoff Is your question more aimed towards the image looking right when it is converted to a DVD and played on a widescreen TV. Currently people can look short and fat(er) when the image in played back on a widescreen TV. Was that your question?

Sorry Xaver, I don't understand what your telling me !