Barry Beckham

Igor More practical work done today with the Envelope tool adding commentary and adjusting the music volume. I found it frustrating that every time I went back into the Envelope tool the magnification I needed to apply the settings in the first instance were reset and I had to enlarge the wave form and locate the area I was working again and again. In the practical world we will need to go back and forth to get things right and I think the magnification should remain until the user decides to change it.

This issue is probably down to me, but I am not sure I am using Windows 7 on a new PC running 64 bit. I also use a Wacom Bamboo graphics tablet. When working in the Objects and animation screen today I wanted to lose the green bounding box around the edge of the image and did what I always do. I clicked into the grey area. However, on this occasion it took me from the current OA screen/image the the preceding one. Another click took me back another image and so on. I have diabled the flicks in Windows, but it still jumps to the preceding image. On checking my older PC, using Vista and the same graphics tablet all is fine, which leeds me to belive that it is a setting somewhere. Does anyone have a similer setup and can try and repeat this.

Colin I have been making larger slide shows for almost two years now and I admit my style of animation is a lot more subtle than some I see. Having said that all our PC's handle what I make fine, but you could check your PC and monitor easily, by trying one of my sequences. Go HERE and you will find that Everlasting Home and Botanical Artistry both have animation, see how one or both of them perform on your current Computer/screen setup

Igor While doing some practical work today using Bets 10 a couple of issues came to me, not faults, just ideas. I was adding a sound comment (Commentary) to individual images on the slide list and got frustrated that I had to select the sound comment and then OK the Audio Clip Properties Window for every clip I added .Does that need to be the case and wouldn't it be better ( if possible) for the Audio Clip Properties to be either called up when needed. ( I doubt when adding sound like this we would want it every time) or perhaps it could float on screen and not have to be clicked every time a sound comment is added to a slide. I also needed to add text to a number of images in the Objects and Animation screen and found it frustrating that I have to select the properties tab to add the text and select the colour, but then have to move to the Common tab to remove the drop shadow, which I didn't want. Shouldn't the shadow controls be repeated in the properties tab for when we use text.

Colin A quick look at the file size as displayed in PTE for my 1920*1200 images they average around 250k. I think you may be pleasently surprised at how your PC handles the slide shows, even with animation. A PC I have just retired handled all my shows fine and that was about 7 years old, sinle core chip, but I can't recall what the graphics card is, but probably on par or even less then yours. Give it a try because a 1024*768 show on a large 1920*1080 monitor does look a little small these days, we have come a long way from those old 800*600 slide shows havn't we?

I have downloaded and installed in on a Windows 7 64 bit machine and it all seems to be working fine. I created a test doc and sent it to another PC running MS word and it read the Open Office Document just as it was. I think I will live with it for a while and see how it goes, but first impreseeions are that it will do all I ever want Thanks for the feedback

Thank you Crossfade. I will give it a go

I have need of a basic word processor and simple spreadsheet and I am considering Open office. I have heard of this "FREE" option before and always wondered about it. http://www.openoffice.us.com/openoffice/free-open-office-writer-download.php?brand=openoffice.us&s=google&country=INT&c=openoffice.us_writer_alotpf_pg&k={keywords}&pk=1549-4 Does anyone here use it or have used it and can give a bit of feedback and experiences please ?

Good rules, but 15 Euros to enter a sequence seems a bit steep

Maureen Here are the Experts, This small section from what 8321 posted about the Hayange AV competition instantly tells you those who set the rules here, know what they are talking about. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS * The computer generated entries in our festival may be created by using various types of software (eg. Pictures to Exe. Wings Platinum, M-Objects, Flash, Pro-Show, Magic Lantern, etc.) in order to produce an auto-executable file. The organisers will accept productions using other software provided that a pre-supplied sample will prove that they are able to read these files. * We recommend formatting AVs with one of these resolutions: 1920X1080, 1600X1200, 1400x1050 or 1024x768 pixels. [To users of PTE, we recommend using a maximum resolution. The projector will fit the size if the author does not check the option "Fixed size of the view (in pixels)" (see menu "Project / Project Options, Tab Screen ")], * The maximum duration of each AV is limited to 12 minutes. However, this festival also offers a special section for short sequences not exceeding 90 seconds.

John although obviously the format varies where ever they are shown The format cannot vary, that is the whole point of a one size fits all. You can have confidence that what you have created will show at the same format on any monitor, but yes, you will see black bars around the edge depending on what screen you are showing it on.

Colin Yes, I don't disagree with what you say, I have just schooled myself over the years to fill the frame and can usually get away with a slight trim top and bottom for 16:10. I would use 16:9 if that was available at a good price. I don't think there are any rights and wrongs here, just preference. I did recently start to make a show at 3:2 and found it looked squashed me when viewed on the monitor. My eyes must be getting too used to the 16:10:blink: . The poll is showing some interesting results and there does not seem to be much in it between 16:9 and 16:10 I was thinking about making my tutorial videos larger for DVD use and going widescreen, but was not sure about the 1024*768 users who may then not see a crisp video. This poll seems to suggest that among enthusiasts, wide screen has been accepted.

Brian Absolutely right

DG Probably 16:10 I think it just has a slightly better format, but its negligable. 3:2 would be fine too. I could even use 1920*1080 and may be doing so soon for one of my PC's.

Colin Its what Lin Evans said earlier in this thread, 1920*1080 is the way we are being taken like ot or not? I started to look for a new screen to replace an old 1024*768 one I have used for recording tutorials for years. Most of those that are reasonable for what I need and a decent price are 1920*1080, so I don't think it is a great surprise to see that resolution out in front. Personally I prefer 16:10 as it is so close to 3:2 it hardly makes any difference to the composition, 16:9 does.

I'm no expert on resolution of projectors. However, I imagine that the format of the projector used would matter; if it is designed to show 1920 x 1080 images and the screen is in this format, then any Sequences produced in any 4 x 3 format would be at a disadvantage as they would not use the whole of the screen. At the present time isn’t it more likely to be the other way around? A 1024*768/ 1400*1050 projector being used to play a 1920*1080 /1920*1200 sequence. However, even if it were the way you suggest why is that a disadvantage? With a projected image the size difference isn’t going to have much impact. The judges are still going to see a large image on screen and any judge who marks down a great sequence because it was not as big as the preceding one should not be asked to judge again. Most UK and European Festivals seem to have used the 4 x 3 format and until recently have specified 1024 x 768. Isn't that because projectors were mostly 1024*768 resolution and slide show software of a few years ago could not cope with larger images anyway. That isn’t the case anymore as we see with PTE, which can handle far larger images and we can see the monitor resolution/format trend by looking at the ongoing forum poll. I think the biggest issue by far for those enthusiasts who create images at the size they want them to project (I guess that includes most enthusiasts) are the settings in the Project Options > Screen Tab > Size of slide and the Fixed Size of Slide (in pixels) That is what I set first of all when making a sequence and then projection on any projector/screen resolution will be fine. Those settings lock in your selections for resolution and display size and no animation will be seen outside of those settings. I think this is one of the best changes made in PTE. For the future, I suppose it will be possible for another issue to crop up for those who create a sequence at 1024*768 and then have it displayed on a projector running 1400*1050. While it will not affect the format, unless those settings are set correctly in the Screen tab the slide show may be enlarged from its 1024 size to 1400 with a slight loss of image quality. Perhaps the major AV events of the future may have to state the intended projection resolution in the original invitation to enter? It doesn’t alter the fact that the size the slide show is made and the Jpg quality settings are the choice of the author and have no place in any rules.

It doesn't sound as though this is possible, but if you can get the show back to the original computer with the M drive. Do a File > Backup to zip, then take that zip file to the other drive, unzip it and open the project file within the unzipped folder and all will be OK

DG That is exactly my point, they can't tell and it's rules for the sake of rules. I entered an AV comp last year and got a first place and nobody was aware that it was a 1920*1200 show and why should they be. I will enter the same sized show this year, but next year, if these proposed rules changes go through I will be outside those rules, but how will they know. I think I know what may be behind it in the case I mention and I don't mean this as a knock at PSG. Many entries where made with PSG, many were animated and they did not come across very well. The laptop they were played on, whatever it was, couldn't cope. I made a daft suggestion that perhaps next year we could use a good powerful desktop rather than a laptop and it might help these shows to display a little better, but it was not considered a serious request. I think the idea may be to reduce the file size to make them run better, but then why specify Q12 jpeg compression that will push the size up again.

Peter "An expert is a drip under pressure" !!! Not heard that before, very funny Here is one sent to me today that I thought was good too While sewing a cut on the hand of a 75 year old Aussie farmer, who's hand was caught in the gate while working cattle, the doctor struck up a conversation with the old man. Eventually the topic got around to Kevin Rudd and his role as our Prime Minister. The old farmer said, 'Well, you know, in my opinion, Rudd is a 'Post Turtle''. Not being familiar with the term, the doctor asked him, what a 'post turtle' was. The old farmer said, 'When you're driving down a country road and you come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, that's a 'post turtle'. The old farmer saw the puzzled look on the doctor's face so he continued to explain. 'You know he didn't get up there by himself, he doesn't belong up there, he doesn't know what to do while he's up there, and you just wonder what kind of dumb bugger put him up there to begin with.

Now there is another humdinger Denwell, the level playing field. It seems we live in a world (especially Club committees) where we must NEVER do anything that might discourage some poor sole, so we end up with a huge list of competition categories that remind me of buses in any world city. You have to live there 20 years before you understand them. Apparently some people when they enter a competition and don't win, get discouraged, run away and hide and that's the Clubs fault...............? Competing with the best should inspire and if they are discouraged so easily, then they have chosen the wrong hobby:P

DaveG I think it may be interesting to see what the enthusiasts are using. I have had my 16:10 Dell monitor for almost 2 years and I could not go back to a 1024*768 or 1280*1024 screen now. What is your thinking behind the 16:9 option next time ? I have been thinking of upping the resolution of my DVD videos to a wide screen format from 1024*768 to 1280*800, but not sure if it is a bit too soon for some. This poll may indicate how close we are to 16:9/16:10 taking over from the old formats.

Maureen An "Expert" is someone who doesn't feel the need to drum up rules where none need to be applied. They should also understand that stating that Jpegs must be saved at Q12 will not, as they say Assist in providing smooth transitions and projection of entries and avoid large file sizes. As you can gether I am sick of stupid rules being applied to photography, especially those that can't be policed. Rules for the sake of rules. To challenge some of them I can attend a meeting, but I would have to do a 140k trip just try to make them see sense.

There really is no problem in making a slide show at 1920*1200 or 1920*1080 so that you can see it beautifully on your own large widescreen PC Monitor. PTE will then handle the downsize via a 1024*768 monitor or a projector perfectly. I do this all the time for demo purposes and I have mentioned this a few times before. In fact many of you have downloaded some of my slide shows that are made at 1920*1200 and I guess some of you have 1024*768 screens and some 1280*1024 and they play OK right. The top ten slide shows on this page are all 1920*1200 bar Forever Floating to be free http://www.beckhamdi...digslidesw4.htm If you're into wild animation and make images much larger than 1920*1200 for those zooms or pans that go on forever. Then you can introduce some moire effect if you're not careful because you're cramming a large file into a smaller resolution, but I have managed to avoid that without difficulty it's the best of all worlds in my view to do this. You get probably the best looking slide show you can get when the show fills a 27in (or larger) wide screen monitor. If you're a 1024*768 monitor user there will come a time when you scale up to a larger monitor and then those slide shows look a bit lost on the larger flat screens, not the be all and end all I admit, but a good big one will beat a good little one every day of the week. 1920*1200 fits better when made into a DVD and of course 1920*1080 fits perfectly for flat screen TV's of course. The slide shows can be entered into competitions and shown on a 1024*768 projector without any problems. I have done that and won the competition and the "Experts" and viewers had no idea they were looking at a slide show made at 1920*1200 _______________________ On another tack, these same AV "Experts" are suggesting that AV rules next year state what resolution the slide show should be made at (Yes....you have guessed it 1024*768) and they are even stating what jpeg compression setting should be used (Q12). Can anyone tell me why these "Experts" seem to think it is right to lay down rules that cover the creative decisions of the author only? Even if they adopt rules like that, how will they know if I break them? Is it just me getting crankier or is there an army of Camera Club Committees getting their rocks off by coming up with daft restrictive rules that they cannot police anyway. Is it only me who feels that if the "Experts" don't know that themselves, perhaps they should stay well away from making any rules at all

Peter Try ticking the box in the Project Options Screen tab that says Fixed size slide (in pixels) and make sure the size of the slides boxes reflect the 1920*1080 size of your show.

I suppose it could be put there, shall I or you? Barry cant do that - i would have to move the whole thread or take each of the responses and cut and paste into a new thread ken