Adobe Encore

[dabbler]

forgive me but i'm now in panic mode! i've worked for hours in creating various pte files assuming that i could use PTE to export my work into .avi files which i would then use as distinct pieces in adobe encore. that is, i would use adobe encore to bring all of those pieces together. encore would create a simple menu and link to each separate slide show.

however, when i tried for the first time to export to .avi, it appears that i need to burn a DVD just to store the file, otherwise when i click finish, it would delete the created .avi file.

at the moment, this is what appears to be the case and i'm writing to see if i'm mistaken.

i have yet to burn dvds just to save the .avi files but perhaps that is the only way to preserve them. this seems to me to be very strange and an unfortunate use of dvds. it would at least seem logical to give the user the option of saving or deleting the files after they had been created.

i've looked through the manual but i have not found a section that particularly addresses my question.

i'm in a panic mode because i've got till thursday morning to complete this project and it's already early wednesday morning.

i do hope someone will have a clear and simple answer to my question.

thank you very much for considering this question.

[nobeefstu]

dabbler,

If your using Pte-VideoBuilder ... save/export your shows using Create MPEG2 Files checkbox. Import these MPEG2 files into your Adobe Encore program. VideoBuilder does have dvd menu building features.

If you do not have VideoBuilder upgrade ... you must save your individual shows using Create Custom AVI File radiobox and select your own Video Codec. You can not use PTE Codec for this avi production ... as its only for DVD processing.

You must select something like MPEG4 or similar codec that must already be installed on your pc.

*MPEG2 quality is much prefered over MPEG4 output.

[dabbler]

wait! i see. i'm trying something now. will write again soon.

okay, i exported to my hard drive as mpeg2 but the quality of the images don't appear to match the quality of the images when i test it as .pte files. i set everything i can to max out the quality but the resulting .mpeg2 files do not seem to be quite as good.

any ideas? and of course, thank you very much for helping me to get this far!

-------------------

thank you very much for replying so quickly.

i would love to do what you suggest, however, i cannot find any way of saving or exporting my project as an MPEG2 file. even after looking at the manual, i do not see any reference to being able to do that. i followed the directions page by page and it does not anywhere appear to say anything about exporting as an mpeg2 file. it would be absolutely wonderful if i could, but i don't see how.

would you give me brief steps in how this is achieved? i believe i have the deluxe edition and i got to the video builder screen as depicted in the manual but i couldn't go beyond that.

unfortunately, it's already 3:30 am where i am and i'm dead tired and quite disappointed. i'll probably check again in a few minutes but if i don't see a reply, it's just because i'm exhausted and will check my email in the morning.

thank you again for your help. if i could export my projects as self contained mpeg2 files, the rest would be easy as i'm more familiar with encore than with PTE...

[Lin Evans]

PTE in executable format or 'preview' which is essentially a temporary executable file is in full resolution mode. This means resolution in equals resolution out. If you feed the program a four megapixel image you get a four megapixel image on the slideshow.

When you use "any" movie mode such as AVI, MPEG II, etc., you will get less image quality. Even the very best high resolution television is 1080p which is 1920x1080 pixel resolution or about two megapixels. This, of course is not nearly as good as full resolution executable.

The bottom line is that when you use a movie mode you loose image quality when compared to an executable mode. This is one reason PTE doesn't support native AVI or MPEG drop-in movie clips - they degrade the overall quality of the slideshow unavoidably. MPEG II will never look as good on your computer as it will when you run it on the television or when burned to a DVD then run on a DVD player connected to a television. Movements will not be a smooth on your computer as on the television.

On mpeg II:

First, the User Guide was written for PTE 5.0 and you are now using 5.1. PTE 5.0 exports AVI format so you won't find anything about mpeg II in the User Guide yet - 5.1 has just been released and Jeff and I haven't had time yet to write an addendum, but you can create MPEG II files from your slideshow just by putting a check on the Create MPEG II block in Video Builder. Be sure to uncheck "create DVD" unless you also want to burn a DVD.

Best regards,

Lin

wait! i see. i'm trying something now. will write again soon.

okay, i exported to my hard drive as mpeg2 but the quality of the images don't appear to match the quality of the images when i test it as .pte files. i set everything i can to max out the quality but the resulting .mpeg2 files do not seem to be quite as good.

any ideas? and of course, thank you very much for helping me to get this far!

-------------------

thank you very much for replying so quickly.

i would love to do what you suggest, however, i cannot find any way of saving or exporting my project as an MPEG2 file. even after looking at the manual, i do not see any reference to being able to do that. i followed the directions page by page and it does not anywhere appear to say anything about exporting as an mpeg2 file. it would be absolutely wonderful if i could, but i don't see how.

would you give me brief steps in how this is achieved? i believe i have the deluxe edition and i got to the video builder screen as depicted in the manual but i couldn't go beyond that.

unfortunately, it's already 3:30 am where i am and i'm dead tired and quite disappointed. i'll probably check again in a few minutes but if i don't see a reply, it's just because i'm exhausted and will check my email in the morning.

thank you again for your help. if i could export my projects as self contained mpeg2 files, the rest would be easy as i'm more familiar with encore than with PTE...

[dabbler]

lin, thank you very much for your comments. at the very least, it puts to rest my anxiety over what i may have done wrong to create a lower quality output. my brain is so fried at this time and i'm so sleep deprived that i cannot think straight!

after i type this, i reread and consider more what you've written. if i understood you correctly, what i should do if i want the best possible image quality is use PTE to do everything vs use encore or some other program. hmmmmm. i'll have to weigh the pros and cons of going with what i'm familiar with and accepting a lower image quality vs going with something new and getting a better image quality AND consider that this project is due tomorrow!

finally, while i have the chance, i'd like to say thank you for creating so many wonderful examples of what PTE can do and for your many insghtful posts at the drpreview site.

[Lin Evans]

I think which to use would depend on the nature of your project and how it will be played. If it will be played on a PC computer under Windows, the executable format is by far the best assuming that the computer it will be played on has a decent graphics card and sufficient resources for the slideshow content.

If it will be "projected" with an LCD projector, then don't use any higher resolution images than the resolution of the LCD projector unless you have deep zooms then on the slides where this happens use higher resolution original slides so you don't exceed the appearance 1:1 as you would when displaying the slide as an individual jpg under Irfanview at full resolution.

If the final output will be DVD or if you have movies mixed in with the PTE content then you have no choice but to either create a DVD using Video Builder or output MPEG II or AVI and take it into Encore, etc.

The only way you can mix movie formats and PTE output in PTE is via Video Builder and not as a contiguous show. That is it would be broken into the PTE part then the movie part, etc.

If you can tell me more about the project, how it will be presented, on what media, etc., maybe I can give you some more suggestions.

Best regards,

Lin

lin, thank you very much for your comments. at the very least, it puts to rest my anxiety over what i may have done wrong to create a lower quality output. my brain is so fried at this time and i'm so sleep deprived that i cannot think straight!

after i type this, i reread and consider more what you've written. if i understood you correctly, what i should do if i want the best possible image quality is use PTE to do everything vs use encore or some other program. hmmmmm. i'll have to weigh the pros and cons of going with what i'm familiar with and accepting a lower image quality vs going with something new and getting a better image quality AND consider that this project is due tomorrow!

finally, while i have the chance, i'd like to say thank you for creating so many wonderful examples of what PTE can do and for your many insghtful posts at the drpreview site.

[dabbler]

hi lin,

yes, you're right on the money; in this case, the DVD will be played most probably on dvd players connected to a TV. keep in mind that this will be a gift to parents of kids (3 - 4 yrs old) so some of them may play it on their computers, tho i suspect most parents will view it on a tv.

yes, i have movie clips that were digitized from a digital camcorder so it is a mixed bag. if i use VideoBuilder, i hope it'll be able to play those video clips.

i'm a little concered and unsure about your statement that "The only way you can mix movie formats and PTE output in PTE is via Video Builder and not as a contiguous show. That is it would be broken into the PTE part then the movie part, etc."

important: i'd like the dvd to play like any store bought dvd: insert, up comes a menu with options, click whichever option and view the contents (slideshow or video clip). end of slideshow or clip? go back to main menu so the user can make another choice.

i assumed PTE/VideoBuilder can do this but is that true? if not, i really have no choice but to output mpeg2 files for each of the slide shows and then use encore to put all the pieces together as a cohesive piece.

thank you again for your help with this matter. it's now about 2 pm and i probably won't sleep at all tonight working on this. sigh..... !

* edit: just thought of a naive question: can PTE/VideoBuilder output DVD files for play on a dvd player connected to a TV AND an .EXE file to play on a PC? if so, that would be a wonderful advantage.

[Lin Evans]

I think in this case using what is most familiar to you would be wise. Later, when you are more familiar and have time to experiment with Video Builder you may find it suitable for doing this type thing, but under pressure you will undoubtedly do better by creating the MPEG II files from PTE output with Video Builder then assemblilng the whole to include your video clips with Encore, a more familiar tool.

Probably under pressure is not the best time to experiment. If you already know how to assemble the whole and create the menu in Encore my suggestion would be to use it for this project. Video Builder is very powerful but does take some time to learn and as you know, it's much easier to learn about new tools when you are not sleepy and under a deadline.

Hopefully, in a week or so Jeff and I will have the updated addendum to the User Guide to include the new features of Video Builder, but since 5.1 was just released we haven't begun because of potential last minute changes. The quality should be identical from Encore. Just include a note to the parents that DVD's are generally better played on a stand-alone player connected to a TV than on a computer. The quality is generally better because a TV is designed for interlaced output while most computer output is progressive. There are always exceptions, but in general DVD's played through a television are preferred to DVD's played over a computer system.

Once this project is over, get some re-writable DVD's and experiment with Video Builder and you may find in the future that it might be preferred especially when there isn't a lot of video clips from your video camera. Video Builder isn't like Encore in the sense that it's not a Video editing tool but really a tool designed primarily to output PTE slideshows with the "ability" to include video clips as a convenience. With Encore you can splice together various clips into a contigious product. With Video Builder you simply have separate little video clips with no editing capability. For what you are doing with this project by all means use Encore for the final assembly. Output your PTE portion to MPEG II with Video Builder then take those MPEG II's into Encore and combine with your videocam clips to make the show.

Best regards,

Lin

hi lin,

yes, you're right on the money; in this case, the DVD will be played most probably on dvd players connected to a TV. keep in mind that this will be a gift to parents of kids (3 - 4 yrs old) so some of them may play it on their computers, tho i suspect most parents will view it on a tv.

yes, i have movie clips that were digitized from a digital camcorder so it is a mixed bag. if i use VideoBuilder, i hope it'll be able to play those video clips.

i'm a little concered and unsure about your statement that "The only way you can mix movie formats and PTE output in PTE is via Video Builder and not as a contiguous show. That is it would be broken into the PTE part then the movie part, etc."

important: i'd like the dvd to play like any store bought dvd: insert, up comes a menu with options, click whichever option and view the contents (slideshow or video clip). end of slideshow or clip? go back to main menu so the user can make another choice.

i assumed PTE/VideoBuilder can do this but is that true? if not, i really have no choice but to output mpeg2 files for each of the slide shows and then use encore to put all the pieces together as a cohesive piece.

thank you again for your help with this matter. it's now about 2 pm and i probably won't sleep at all tonight working on this. sigh..... !

[dabbler]

thank you, lin. you're very probably right. i'm so sleep deprived now that there's a good chance i'll mess things up and then i'll really be stuck.

yes, i look forward to learning how to use PTE/VideoBuilder. as you say, i'm sure it's a powerful program. i definitely need to learn what its strengths are and how to match those qualities with whatever project comes along. that is, using the tool that best suits the need vs using a hammer no matter what!

off i go!

did i say thank you?!?

[Davidh12]

Thanks to Dabbler & Lin.

That's what I like about this forum you learn such a lot and are reminded of things you know but forget.

Had one of those Doh! moments (with regards Homer Simpson) when reading the above.

I have used up a lot of -R DVD's experimenting with Videobuilder, when I could have used R/W disks, Doh!.

Thanks and a Merry Christmas to all contributors for your questions and answers.

David

[dabbler]

i agree. the comments above definitely helped me with this project. fyi, the project turned out great. i did use PTE to create 3 slide shows and then VideoBuilder to export 3 mpeg2 files. i later used adobe encore to assemble the pieces into a dvd that plays in standard dvd players hooked up to TVs.

since my daughter's preschool teacher will want to create another dvd project sometime next summer, i have some time now to learn more about PTE/VBuilder. knowing a program's strengths and weaknesses will help me to decide which tools to use for that upcoming project.

for this past project, the programs included: photoshop for editing images, audacity for editing sound, premeire for editng video, pte for creating slideshows, videobuilder for outputting mpeg2 video files, acdsee for viewing images, and encore for assembling the various parts into one dvd.

since this was my first dvd project, i'll say that i was definitely learning as i was doing. certainly not the preferred way to go about it. i'll also say that i was being unnecessarily fussy about certain things. i could have saved a lot of time if i had had more realistic expectations. i just wanted the final product to be good for the teacher's sake.

things to learn: a lot!

* i need to better understand the differences between .avi files and .mpeg2 files.

* i need to learn the strengths and weaknesses of PTE

* i need to learn the differences between PTE and ProShow Gold

* i need to understand what PTE's .exe files are and why they supposedly produce images that are better on computer screens.

* i need to understand what the differences are between viewing video & slideshows on a computer screen and a tv monitor

* i need to understand what HD TVs are

* i'd like to experiment with creating animation using Flash and seeing if it can produce usable .mpeg files for dvd projects

* i need to understand what objects are in PTE and what kinds of animation one can achieve with PTE

etc, etc, etc! and that's just off the top of my head!

got about 1 hour of sleep last night, then a nap of about 2.5 hours in the afternoon so i'm still a bit dizzy. will have a good long sleep tonight.

thanks to those who provided suggestions and ideas! i look forward to learning more

Thanks to Dabbler & Lin.

That's what I like about this forum you learn such a lot and are reminded of things you know but forget.

Had one of those Doh! moments (with regards Homer Simpson) when reading the above.

I have used up a lot of -R DVD's experimenting with Videobuilder, when I could have used R/W disks, Doh!.

Thanks and a Merry Christmas to all contributors for your questions and answers.

David

[Lin Evans]

=============================================================================

i agree. the comments above definitely helped me with this project. fyi, the project turned out great. i did use PTE to create 3 slide shows and then VideoBuilder to export 3 mpeg2 files. i later used adobe encore to assemble the pieces into a dvd that plays in standard dvd players hooked up to TVs.

things to learn: a lot!

* i need to better understand the differences between .avi files and .mpeg2 files.

* i need to learn the strengths and weaknesses of PTE

* i need to learn the differences between PTE and ProShow Gold

* i need to understand what PTE's .exe files are and why they supposedly produce images that are better on computer screens.

* i need to understand what the differences are between viewing video & slideshows on a computer screen and a tv monitor

* i need to understand what HD TVs are

* i'd like to experiment with creating animation using Flash and seeing if it can produce usable .mpeg files for dvd projects

* i need to understand what objects are in PTE and what kinds of animation one can achieve with PTE

=============================================================================

Some of the above I can address - other parts will require "independent study" LOL

The primary difference between ProShow Gold and PTE is image qualilty. I use both products and have since before they were released so have a bit of insight on this. PTE is hardware rendered. ProShow Gold is not. What this means is that in PTE the GPU (Graphical Processing Unit) in your video card is used to "render" the images which comprise the executable file. When Pan, Zoom or Rotate are used, up to 60 or more per second are created as intermediary stages from the image you begin with to the image the animation ends with. With hardware rendering each of these created intermediary images are equal in resolution to the original.

With ProShow Gold and other presentation slideshow software, because they were originally oriented toward the end product being DVD (low resolution NTSC or PAL), the original image is resampled down to about 800x600 pixels which is still a bit higher than DVD resolution, then the software rendering creates the intermediary steps (multiple images) and only about 30 frames per second maximum. This is all that is required to produce optimal DVD at NTSC or PAL resolutions. When you ask ProShow or other non PTE products which create executable slideshows to make a slideshow at say 1200x1600 resolution, they then resample these previously downsampled images back to 1200x1600 resolution for the executable file. This has the unavoidable consequence of much lower image quality than PTE which only downsamples the original to create a DVD, MPEG II or AVI file. This is why image quality is much better with PTE than with competing products.

Because ProShow Gold is always rendered at about DVD resolution anyway and because there will be no need to change from perhaps 60 or 70 frames per second like PTE, it's rather easy to drop in an AVI or MPG movie clip. This is an advantage for those using lots of movie clips with their slideshows. But for "quality" slideshows in executable format "NOTHING" else comes close to PTE.

So PTE's executable slideshows are the highest quality because computers are designed to use high resolution images. Standard NTSC and PAL pretty much are optimized for the low resolution of "standard" television. Once you downsample images to NTSC or PAL resolution for DVD, AVI or MPEG output, the quality is just not the same as High Definition TV or the ultimate, executable code on a computer.

HDTV right now has a maximum resolution of 1080p. This means an image of about two megapixels (1920x1080 horizontal pixel count by vertical line count and progressive rather than interlaced display). Two megapixel resolution in standard computer monitor aspect ratio is 1600x1200. In other words there is no difference in the display resolution between 1920x1080 and 1600x1200. The difference is in the aspect ratio of the display. PTE can produce much higher resolution shows than two megapixels so a computer show made with PTE at high resolution and displayed on a high resolution monitor will be sharper and have more detail than even the best HDTV.

PTE can create animations not possible with ProShow Gold. It has features such as Parent/Child relationships which when coupled with complete opacity control can do things simply not possible with ProShow Gold (hereafter PSG). PTE has the ability to move the center of object rotation anywhere on or off the display - this is not possible with PSG. PTE has complete custom control of linear and non-linear movement.

On Flash: Flash is essentially another way to encode movies or slideshows which is highly compressed so as to allow viewing over limited bandwidth media such as the web. There is absolutely zero advantage to creating a Flash show then converting to AVI or MPEG. It's counterproductive and is usually done in the opposite direction. The advantage of Flash is small, tight code which has some unique features making it very useful for internet displays. It's advantages are not higher quality. Some new Flash iterations are coming which may change this - but presently the only advantage is as a means of displaying your slideshows over the web. Lower quality is unavoidable.

Objects in PTE: Objects are a way of describing slides which reside on separate "layers" in PTE. The "Main" slide is on the top layer and sometimes that's all you will have in a slideshow. But if you want fancy animation with a 3D effect where one object passes in front or behind another object, then you create objects in Photoshop, etc., which have transparent backgrounds (usually PNG format) then place these objects in separate layers in PTE. Each object can have its own rotation, zoom, timing, opacity, etc., and you can have unlimited (only by resources) objects on a single slide appearance.

If you read the User Guide carefully, most of this is explained. If you email me I will be glad to furnish you with samples showing some of the things which are unique to PTE and which can't be done with either ProShow Gold or ProShow Producer. I can also provide you with links to various audio/visual tutorials I have created to show you how to accomplish some of these effects with PTE.

Hope this answers some of your questions....

Lin

data2@lpbroadband.net

[fh1805]

Lin,

In your reply above, when discussing PTE "objects", you stated : "The "Main" slide is on the top layer"

Would it not be better to describe the "Main" image as being always on the lowest "layer". When you add objects these always obscure part of the main image. Therefore, to my logical way of thinking they sit above the main image and not underneath it.

[fh1805]

Hi Lin,

On reflection I think I see the point you were trying to make. In the Objects "stack" at the right side of the O&A window the "Main" image will appear at the top of the list. But from an optical appearance point of view the entries in this stack are inverted and so each lower item will cover all or part of all of the items above it in the stack.

I've probably confused the whole issue by raising this point. Sorry everybody!

[Lin Evans]

I think the confusion comes from position versus layer level. When you add new objects to the Objects List they are by default added to the "top" layer and displace whatever previously existed at that position. However the top layer is the "bottom" position on the objects list. From the perspective of layers the top layer is the visible object where other objects will be partially or completely obscured depending on relative opacity settings and extent of visible object portion. When a non-transparent background file occupies the "top" layer it will, depending on opacity setting, obscure any other objects on layers beneath. The underlying assumption is, I suspect, that since the "main slide" is usually a jpg, bmp, etc., it should occupy the lowest layer if subsequent PNG objects are added above it so they may be seen. This is why the displacement of the top layer by subsequent object entries which are "usually" transparent background PNG's or other jpgs which are to be made smaller to fit side-by-side in some situations.

It's much easier for new users of PTE to simply experiment and "see" what happens rather than trying to explain it verbally.

Best regards,

Lin

Hi Lin,

On reflection I think I see the point you were trying to make. In the Objects "stack" at the right side of the O&A window the "Main" image will appear at the top of the list. But from an optical appearance point of view the entries in this stack are inverted and so each lower item will cover all or part of all of the items above it in the stack.

I've probably confused the whole issue by raising this point. Sorry everybody!

[phirchrds]

Greetings Mr Evans

My name is Phil and I am an aspiring photographer not quite good enough to even refer to myself as an amateur. I have recently had a lot of free time on my hands and have been testing the various attributes of photographic software. After trying several such softwares such as Microsoft's Photostory 3 and Nero I had discovered the wonderful Pictures2Exe program in an amateur photography discussion. I was amazed at the crisp and clear quality of image representation but found many drawbacks chief amongst them being the inability for the addition of video clips.

It is for this reason I began studying other options outside from Pictures2Exe and the closest I was able to find was Pro Show Gold. Although Pro Show did not quite have the same quality of image there were many other factors that made it a worthy addition to my software library. Making careful comparisons I ultimately decided, in part based on information found in this very discussion group, that Pictures2Exe was the utmost in software for making AV presentations for running on the computer. However I found Pro Show to be more suitable for making DVDs as well as High Defintion video files and Flash video.

Still I prefer Pictures2Exe so it is with deep regret that my first post to be made to this group might be perceived with negativity. This is not my intention but rather is an attempt to prevent the esteemed reputation of Pictures2Exe from being sullied by untruths and misinformation. In this case I am referring to the post you made Mr Evans concerning Pro Show's ability to process High Definition video. In particular you made claims that Pro Show could not create video output more than 30 frames per second. It is my understanding that video cannot be referred to as High Definition unless it is at 60 frames per second. This finding also proved absolutely false in my own tests so I thought I would write to Pro Show themselves to set the record straight.

I was quite surprised to not only get an answer back almost immediately but to get an answer back from the president of the company himself, Mr. Paul Schmit. This gentleman told me that not only does Pro Show create video with a 60 per second frame rate that even shows running on a PC produce a much higher frame rate than 30 frames per second. This gentleman also told me that it was quite possible to render image in Pro Show at much higher rates than the 800 by 600 you quoted and is in fact capable of rendering at whatever resolution the image originally exists in. Mr. Schmit did indeed say there would be a slower performance in this case which strengthened my belief that Pictures2Exe is the best for performance versus quality of image. Mr. Schmit's failure to say anything negative regarding Pictures2Exe also showed just how reputable the software is. However it also strengthened my belief that for video rendering Pro Show is similarly unmatched.

What is more upsetting is Mr Schmit's following claim -

'Although I am unsure whether or not Mr. Lin Evans is a crackpot or a liar, I am sure he is one or the other (or perhaps both.) At the very least, he is uneducated about these topics he claims to have experience with. He probably just made some bad assumptions and hasn’t bothered to check to see if he’s right or not. This is quite a sad behavior for one who purports to guide others. His claims are dangerous in a competing product’s forum and may border on libel. Mr. Evans was not and is not a beta tester for Photodex and I would hope that any beta tester of ours would be smart enough to not make obviously flawed claims in the face of logic. Mr. Evans’ assertions are easily proven false. If he were a beta tester, this would have immediately gotten him removed from the group permanently.'

I am not about to accuse anyone of deliberated being untruthful however it is my belief that this type of misinformation is wholly inappropriate. I am not above recommending Pictures2Exe to others with an interest in photography but I hesitate to do so if it gets me branded as being untrustworthy. Mr Evans, I ask you to clarify your statements and present the information you are basing these claims on. Pictures2Exe is top notch software worthy of a worldwide reputation for professionalism. I do not think these types of mistruthful distortions are necessary or called for. Mr. Schmit was kind enough to offer to discuss the matter with you personally you need only pm me for his email address.

I realize I am unleashing a hornet's nest here and I hesitated as to whether I should say anything at all. However my experience with Pictures2Exe has brought so much delight that I don't believe I can sit back and allow your post to go untouched. Please take my words as a courtesy to prevent further rancor from those that are not as sympathetic as I am towards this great software. I only with for the truth to be heard so Pictures2Exe can achieve the glory it deserves.

Sincerely

Phillip 'Phil' Richards

=============================================================================

i agree. the comments above definitely helped me with this project. fyi, the project turned out great. i did use PTE to create 3 slide shows and then VideoBuilder to export 3 mpeg2 files. i later used adobe encore to assemble the pieces into a dvd that plays in standard dvd players hooked up to TVs.

things to learn: a lot!

* i need to better understand the differences between .avi files and .mpeg2 files.

* i need to learn the strengths and weaknesses of PTE

* i need to learn the differences between PTE and ProShow Gold

* i need to understand what PTE's .exe files are and why they supposedly produce images that are better on computer screens.

* i need to understand what the differences are between viewing video & slideshows on a computer screen and a tv monitor

* i need to understand what HD TVs are

* i'd like to experiment with creating animation using Flash and seeing if it can produce usable .mpeg files for dvd projects

* i need to understand what objects are in PTE and what kinds of animation one can achieve with PTE

=============================================================================

Some of the above I can address - other parts will require "independent study" LOL

The primary difference between ProShow Gold and PTE is image qualilty. I use both products and have since before they were released so have a bit of insight on this. PTE is hardware rendered. ProShow Gold is not. What this means is that in PTE the GPU (Graphical Processing Unit) in your video card is used to "render" the images which comprise the executable file. When Pan, Zoom or Rotate are used, up to 60 or more per second are created as intermediary stages from the image you begin with to the image the animation ends with. With hardware rendering each of these created intermediary images are equal in resolution to the original.

With ProShow Gold and other presentation slideshow software, because they were originally oriented toward the end product being DVD (low resolution NTSC or PAL), the original image is resampled down to about 800x600 pixels which is still a bit higher than DVD resolution, then the software rendering creates the intermediary steps (multiple images) and only about 30 frames per second maximum. This is all that is required to produce optimal DVD at NTSC or PAL resolutions. When you ask ProShow or other non PTE products which create executable slideshows to make a slideshow at say 1200x1600 resolution, they then resample these previously downsampled images back to 1200x1600 resolution for the executable file. This has the unavoidable consequence of much lower image quality than PTE which only downsamples the original to create a DVD, MPEG II or AVI file. This is why image quality is much better with PTE than with competing products.

Because ProShow Gold is always rendered at about DVD resolution anyway and because there will be no need to change from perhaps 60 or 70 frames per second like PTE, it's rather easy to drop in an AVI or MPG movie clip. This is an advantage for those using lots of movie clips with their slideshows. But for "quality" slideshows in executable format "NOTHING" else comes close to PTE.

So PTE's executable slideshows are the highest quality because computers are designed to use high resolution images. Standard NTSC and PAL pretty much are optimized for the low resolution of "standard" television. Once you downsample images to NTSC or PAL resolution for DVD, AVI or MPEG output, the quality is just not the same as High Definition TV or the ultimate, executable code on a computer.

HDTV right now has a maximum resolution of 1080p. This means an image of about two megapixels (1920x1080 horizontal pixel count by vertical line count and progressive rather than interlaced display). Two megapixel resolution in standard computer monitor aspect ratio is 1600x1200. In other words there is no difference in the display resolution between 1920x1080 and 1600x1200. The difference is in the aspect ratio of the display. PTE can produce much higher resolution shows than two megapixels so a computer show made with PTE at high resolution and displayed on a high resolution monitor will be sharper and have more detail than even the best HDTV.

PTE can create animations not possible with ProShow Gold. It has features such as Parent/Child relationships which when coupled with complete opacity control can do things simply not possible with ProShow Gold (hereafter PSG). PTE has the ability to move the center of object rotation anywhere on or off the display - this is not possible with PSG. PTE has complete custom control of linear and non-linear movement.

On Flash: Flash is essentially another way to encode movies or slideshows which is highly compressed so as to allow viewing over limited bandwidth media such as the web. There is absolutely zero advantage to creating a Flash show then converting to AVI or MPEG. It's counterproductive and is usually done in the opposite direction. The advantage of Flash is small, tight code which has some unique features making it very useful for internet displays. It's advantages are not higher quality. Some new Flash iterations are coming which may change this - but presently the only advantage is as a means of displaying your slideshows over the web. Lower quality is unavoidable.

Objects in PTE: Objects are a way of describing slides which reside on separate "layers" in PTE. The "Main" slide is on the top layer and sometimes that's all you will have in a slideshow. But if you want fancy animation with a 3D effect where one object passes in front or behind another object, then you create objects in Photoshop, etc., which have transparent backgrounds (usually PNG format) then place these objects in separate layers in PTE. Each object can have its own rotation, zoom, timing, opacity, etc., and you can have unlimited (only by resources) objects on a single slide appearance.

If you read the User Guide carefully, most of this is explained. If you email me I will be glad to furnish you with samples showing some of the things which are unique to PTE and which can't be done with either ProShow Gold or ProShow Producer. I can also provide you with links to various audio/visual tutorials I have created to show you how to accomplish some of these effects with PTE.

Hope this answers some of your questions....

Lin

data2@lpbroadband.net

[Lin Evans]

Greetings Mr Evans

My name is Phil and I am an aspiring photographer not quite good enough to even refer to myself as an amateur. I have recently had a lot of free time on my hands and have been testing the various attributes of photographic software. After trying several such softwares such as Microsoft's Photostory 3 and Nero I had discovered the wonderful Pictures2Exe program in an amateur photography discussion. I was amazed at the crisp and clear quality of image representation but found many drawbacks chief amongst them being the inability for the addition of video clips.

You mention "many" drawbacks but only delineate one - care to add to your "list" of one??

It is for this reason I began studying other options outside from Pictures2Exe and the closest I was able to find was Pro Show Gold. Although Pro Show did not quite have the same quality of image there were many other factors that made it a worthy addition to my software library. Making careful comparisons I ultimately decided, in part based on information found in this very discussion group, that Pictures2Exe was the utmost in software for making AV presentations for running on the computer. However I found Pro Show to be more suitable for making DVDs as well as High Defintion video files and Flash video.

Have you made a High Definition video file with either ProShow Gold or PicturesToExe. Care to post a link? ProShow is "more suitable" for making Flash video - PTE doesn't make Flash video.

However others who use ProShow Gold definitely don't agree with you about it's suitablity for making DVD's. Try this link:

http://www.proshowenthusiasts.com/viewtopic.php?t=5496

Still I prefer Pictures2Exe so it is with deep regret that my first post to be made to this group might be perceived with negativity. This is not my intention but rather is an attempt to prevent the esteemed reputation of Pictures2Exe from being sullied by untruths and misinformation. In this case I am referring to the post you made Mr Evans concerning Pro Show's ability to process High Definition video. In particular you made claims that Pro Show could not create video output more than 30 frames per second. It is my understanding that video cannot be referred to as High Definition unless it is at 60 frames per second. This finding also proved absolutely false in my own tests so I thought I would write to Pro Show themselves to set the record straight.

Speaking of "untruths and misinformation" First let's get something straight. I did not say ProShow Gold "couldn't" create video output more than 30 frames per second. If you are going to quote me, get it correct:

"Because ProShow Gold is always rendered at about DVD resolution anyway and because there will be no need to change from perhaps 60 or 70 frames per second like PTE, it's rather easy to drop in an AVI or MPG movie clip. This is an advantage for those using lots of movie clips with their slideshows. But for "quality" slideshows in executable format "NOTHING" else comes close to PTE."

What I said was concerning why it's very easy to drop-in video clips and I also said it was an "advantage" for those using lots of movie clips. So your entire premise is flawed to start with.

I was quite surprised to not only get an answer back almost immediately but to get an answer back from the president of the company himself, Mr. Paul Schmit. This gentleman told me that not only does Pro Show create video with a 60 per second frame rate that even shows running on a PC produce a much higher frame rate than 30 frames per second. This gentleman also told me that it was quite possible to render image in Pro Show at much higher rates than the 800 by 600 you quoted and is in fact capable of rendering at whatever resolution the image originally exists in. Mr. Schmit did indeed say there would be a slower performance in this case which strengthened my belief that Pictures2Exe is the best for performance versus quality of image. Mr. Schmit's failure to say anything negative regarding Pictures2Exe also showed just how reputable the software is. However it also strengthened my belief that for video rendering Pro Show is similarly unmatched.

What is more upsetting is Mr Schmit's following claim -

'Although I am unsure whether or not Mr. Lin Evans is a crackpot or a liar, I am sure he is one or the other (or perhaps both.) At the very least, he is uneducated about these topics he claims to have experience with. He probably just made some bad assumptions and hasn't bothered to check to see if he's right or not. This is quite a sad behavior for one who purports to guide others. His claims are dangerous in a competing product's forum and may border on libel. Mr. Evans was not and is not a beta tester for Photodex and I would hope that any beta tester of ours would be smart enough to not make obviously flawed claims in the face of logic. Mr. Evans' assertions are easily proven false. If he were a beta tester, this would have immediately gotten him removed from the group permanently.'

That's a sad commentary from a President of a company and simply demonstrates that he is unaware of who beta tested early products for Photodex. I was a beta tester before ProShow Gold was introduced. The product at that time was called ProShow and I believe it is still available. I, along with several early adopters who well remember and can so attest beta tested the product before it was sold to the public. I have emails from the company in my archives attesting to this. It's very interesting that you even mention "beta" testing because nothing was said in my post about this. What I said is that I had used both products since before they were marketed. So your or the President's mention of this at all seems not only strange but designed to create an issue which didn't exist until now!

I am not about to accuse anyone of deliberated being untruthful however it is my belief that this type of misinformation is wholly inappropriate. I am not above recommending Pictures2Exe to others with an interest in photography but I hesitate to do so if it gets me branded as being untrustworthy. Mr Evans, I ask you to clarify your statements and present the information you are basing these claims on. Pictures2Exe is top notch software worthy of a worldwide reputation for professionalism. I do not think these types of mistruthful distortions are necessary or called for. Mr. Schmit was kind enough to offer to discuss the matter with you personally you need only pm me for his email address.

The "misinformation" is the result of your inability to properly read and interpret what I said. If Mr. Schmit wants to discuss these issues he has access to my email address - I have no reason to discuss anything with him but if he persists in attempting to sully my reputation by calling me a "crackpot" or "liar" or "both" based on your misinformation then we may well have something to discuss as do you and I. The rest of your complaint is predicated on your misunderstanding or purposeful misrepresentation of what I wrote.

In the past and even on this forum I have sometimes suggested that people buy and use Photodex products, especially when they need to drop-in video. I have always told those who enquire precisely why I like one product or the other and when, and what I preceive the strengths and weaknesses are. I very much suspect that I know why the President of Photodex feels the way he does and who has fed him a line and misrepresented my statements and why. That's another issue entirely and not for open forum discussion.

I realize I am unleashing a hornet's nest here and I hesitated as to whether I should say anything at all. However my experience with Pictures2Exe has brought so much delight that I don't believe I can sit back and allow your post to go untouched. Please take my words as a courtesy to prevent further rancor from those that are not as sympathetic as I am towards this great software. I only with for the truth to be heard so Pictures2Exe can achieve the glory it deserves.

I find it "very" interesting that your very first post on this forum is what I see as an attack on my credibility and a public post of a private email from the President of another company. This makes me extremely suspicious of your expressed altruistic motives. What "truth" is it that you wish to be heard? Your post is pretty well self-explanatory.

Lin

Sincerely

Phillip 'Phil' Richards

[cjdnzl]

Mr Richards,

I was disturbed to read your attack on Lin Evans, one of the most knowledgeable experts on this forum. You, in your very first post after being a member of this group for just one day, a self-acknowledged "not even amateur level" in photography and slide show making, had the temerity to attack Lin without knowing anything of his background and expertise in the subject, using language like 'crackpot' and 'liar', and calling into question his (accurate) description of the difference between PTE and PSG - all couched in weasel words and mock concern and righteous-sounding apologies.

For myself, if you post again on this forum it had better be an apology to Lin for your incredible gaffe.

Colin

[JudyKay]

I don't know Mr. Evens personally, but in several years of posts I have been impressed at his vast knowledge, sensitivity, clarity and fairness. I have never known him to be either a crackpot or a liar. But he is very nice. That counts for a lot.

His clarification regarding PSG doesn't seem to be taking any side--but explains the advantages of both PTE and PSG. He even says he owns and uses it. Nothing about it makes me think less of PSG. In fact everyone can download a free trial version and see for themselves.

Which is better, a pickup or a sports car? Depends what you want to do with it. Results are more important to me than what people say, anyway. I have tried many products over the years including Proshow back when I downloaded a trial version from a bulletin board at 2400 baud (remember those days?). It was good then and is undoubtedly much better now, though I haven't used it in a long time. I am more loyal to a result than a product. PTE gives me what I want.

But let's leave that behind us for now, OK? This is Christmas. I am enjoying a lovely screen saver of my family based on Mr. Evans Snowglobe template--it is so peaceful.

Silent night,

Holy Night,

All is calm,

All is bright...

That is the song it plays as the snowflakes fall.

jk

[phirchrds]

Greetings Mr. Evans

It is not my intention to engage in a tit for tat exchange of words. You did not provide the clarification I desired and that is disappointing. Like others here I valued your advise as posted here and elsewhere. It is in part your claim to be a beta tester for both Pictures2Exe and Pro Show Gold in other places you have written that led me to respect your knowledge which is why I brought up this subject when I contacted Pro Show. I was shocked by Mr Schmit's response and perhaps acted rashly. While I will not apologize for things I have not said I do regret that my first appearance here was not more tactful.

You still have not clarified what you meant by the following paragraph -

'With ProShow Gold and other presentation slideshow software, because they were originally oriented toward the end product being DVD (low resolution NTSC or PAL), the original image is resampled down to about 800x600 pixels which is still a bit higher than DVD resolution, then the software rendering creates the intermediary steps (multiple images) and only about 30 frames per second maximum. This is all that is required to produce optimal DVD at NTSC or PAL resolutions. When you ask ProShow or other non PTE products which create executable slideshows to make a slideshow at say 1200x1600 resolution, they then resample these previously downsampled images back to 1200x1600 resolution for the executable file. This has the unavoidable consequence of much lower image quality than PTE which only downsamples the original to create a DVD, MPEG II or AVI file. This is why image quality is much better with PTE than with competing products.'

It is in this paragraph that you made claim Pro Show was incapable of renderings above 30 frames per second, was it not? This paragraph does indicate a claim that Pro Show is incapable of renderings totaling beyond 800 by 600? Perhaps this is a misreading on my part of your original statement hence my request for further clarification. It seems that you are avoiding a direct answer here. And it is my belief one will never be forthcoming. As my reception here has been less then warm, perhaps rightfully so, I will now withdraw from this discussion and will not return unless you agree to answer these claims straightforwardly.

In closing I am not sure who to believe in this matter which is my primary motivation for my presence here. Whether you believe this or not is none of my concern. I do not wish to throw tarnish on anyone's holiday so will leave things as they are and bid everyone in this discussion group farewell.

Sincerely,

Philip Richards

[dabbler]

To everyone here who helped: a great big THANK YOU! Just wanted to let you know that the final DVD gift was warmly received by the parents at my daughter's preschool. As you can imagine, they're not interested in being harsh critics; they LOVE their kids and appreciate seeing pictures and videos of their little one. I happily agreed to help my daughter's preschool teacher put together a DVD and I didn't realize that it would turn out to be as challenging as it was.

Thanks to your help, it was completed and it works and the parents are very happy.

In case anyone out there has ideas of a similar project, I'd say 'go for it!' It will take a lot of time but the final product makes it all worth while.

Ingredients

* blank DVD cases

* a program like photoshop to create an insert for the DVD (they usually have a clear plastic cover and you just need to slip the insert under the plastic.

* in my case, i designed everything in photoshop (make sure the print size (not image size) is something like 300 dpi, 10.75 x 7.25 inches and then took it to kinkos. after they printed it (about $2 per sheet, glossy paper), i used their on-site cutter to make straight cuts. (i could never do it with a regular pair of sissors.)

* blank dvds (i didn't have the time to create stick on labels for the dvds so i just bought a pack of verbatim digital movie dvd+r; they already have the look of a film roll already printed onto the dvds.)

* my daughter's preschool teacher hand made little messages which she placed inside of the case where one usually finds some kind of printed material with info on the dvd

finally, to mr. richards, a lot could be said but i'll just say this: i came to this forum as an unknown guest with a problem. what did i get? i got advice, suggestions, help and encouragement from people who were not required to help me in any way. i sometimes check the dpreview site and i've often read posts by lin evans. in the years i've been reading and posting there, i don't recall a time when i thought to myself that he was off target or misrepresenting the facts or pushing an agenda. i only recently learned about pte and this forum and i was very thankful when lin took the time to help out a total newbie. what can i say? based on what i've seen and read, lin gets my vote of confidence.

ps: i apologize for not posting this follow up message sooner but i immediately got sick as soon as this project was completed! i'd been up all night the day before it was due and my body just had enough juice to keep me going till it was done and then WHAM! i'm down with a cold! i'm feeling better but it'll take a few more days for my body to recover.

ps: did i say THANK YOU?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

=============================================================================

Some of the above I can address - other parts will require "independent study" LOL

.........................

Hope this answers some of your questions....

Lin