alrobin

Good afternoon, Dave, We missed you yesterday! We seem to have different views on "fit to screen". Of course you can get a 1820x1024 image to "fit" a 1280x1024 or any other size screen, for that matter. By the "previous" definition under PTE 4.x and earlier, the definition that I subscribe to, you would simply shrink it to 1280x720 pixels. It would not "cover" the screen, but it would "fit" it the best way possible. And, I'm not talking about pixel dimensions, either - that's a whole different ballgame. I think we're dealing with square pixels here, but that might be the answer as to what Igor is involved with in v.5 design. I know that in making menus, etc., for some of the video programs, using photoshop, one gets into the subject of rectangular pixels, but that is way over my head. But the size of individual images in pixels is important, as it is individual images that make up a show, so we can't forget about them. I'm not sure that a border around the "show" is always the answer either. (Looks like we also need a definition for "size of show". I suppose it would be something like: "whatever size fits the monitor being used to view the show and still maintains the aspect ratio set in Project Options/Screen"). I don't mind a simple border. However, whether there is a border or not, I hate to see arbitrary cropping and "fitting-to-screen" of images that one wants to retain in their "original" size, in which case a border might be a distraction. By the way, in "Windowed mode" in v4.x, you can have PTE put a border around the show for you. As far as I can tell, this is the only way one can define the "size of a show", but this feature is inactive so far in v.5 and, besides, is an option that not too many slideshow designers care for. It may change the size of the black box in v.5, but as far as I can tell, does not have any effect on the previewing of the show, and it doesn't seem to limit the size of the show on-screen. Looks like we may just have to agree to differ.

I'm sorry, Ken, but with your example I can't see the borders of the image, so will have to take your word for it that it just fills the frame in all aspect ratios. That's why I developed my transparent grids - so you could see what's underneath, and also so the edges of the images were well-defined. Also to keep the image sizes down (like Dave did in his example). I included a circle in the middle of the grid so as to test for the proportionality of the result, too(i.e. no "squished" images). However, this example, as adjusted, seems to be consistent with the results I reported in the Excel file included with my previous test examples. (i.e. that the images will always be "fit to screen" in the best possible way.) This doesn't mean that we don't have a potential problem here, though. A successful show will depend on the maker always setting the same aspect ratio in "PO/Screen" as the images used. Human nature being what it is, this could be overlooked in putting together a show, and is one more area for potential error. Also, if the maker needs to use an image only 1024x768 in size, or smaller, in a show indicated in "PO/Screen" as a "1280x768 show", the image will not be shown "full screen" in any direction. Now, maybe this isn't so bad, as the vertical dimension will be maintained at 576 pixels, the same as the height for the 1280x768 images on the same monitor. I agree, provided that "fit to screen" means "best fit", not "completely cover the screen". In PTE v.5 we now have the capability of indicating this option on an image by image basis. You're on - my next trip down to Big Bend.

Robert, Don't apologize - this is rough stuff - the kind that makes you stay awake at night!! And, I agree, the language factor makes it 10 times worse. In fact I think that Gee, Nickles, and I are not talking the same language all the time, either, and we're all supposed to be speaking English! But, you can rest easy, as in no way is anyone saying that the end result on any monitor should or will be out of proportion. This is why Igor is struggling so hard to provide a reasonable treatment under all different scenarios. Of course, if someone has a 4:3 monitor and has it set at 1280x768, for instance, everything will look squished, including the PTE shows, but the relative positions of objects should not change. It all basically comes down to whether images should be arbitrarily cropped, and whether small images should be stretched to fit the screen. At the moment, there are some scenarios where the images don't completely fit the screen, either vertically or horizontally.

Ken, Glad we're in basic agreement on the definitions. That's a good starting point! I used a monitor setting of 1280x1024 to run Dave's test, without adjusting anything in PO or O/A, other than to substitute my own image, size 3072x2048, a ratio of 6x4) . It clipped the image on both sides, as shown in my previously-attached illustration. The border area fitted the screen perfectly, but the image inside it was cropped. I'm not sure I agree with you here - in PTE 4, unless one selects "fit to screen", images are shown at their original size, and might neither fit the screen nor cover the screen. This is the way PTE 4 was designed to operate, with the option to select "fit to screen", only if desired. Igor is giving us this mode of operation now as an option in v.5 (called "Original mode"), which is fine, as long as the latter is still available for images which don't look good when they are "blown up". I suspect I will continue to use "original mode" myself, except where PZR effects are required.

Interesting modification to your magic show, Celou! Another demonstration of the potential in PTE 5! I can see we're in for some very sophisticated slideshows once v.5 is oficially released!!

Ken, I'm not sure I understand you 100%, but I think in your last post that you're saying what I've been pointing out all along - i.e. that the treatment of different images is not consistent over different aspect ratios. I'll try to make some screen-captures to demonstrate the different effects I'm getting. But, on second thought, maybe that won't help, because everyone will be looking at them under different aspect-ratio conditions! For now I just want to point out my understanding of the definition of the different treatments being considered: 1. Windowed mode: doesn't enter into the equation right now as it is not activated in v.5. 2. Cover screen: the monitor's screen should always be filled, even if this means cropping the image. 3. Fit to screen: the size of the image being shown should always be fitted exactly to the size of the monitor in either the horizontal or vertical dimension, (not necessarily both) but without cropping any of it. 4. Original mode: the images should appear as they do now in v.4, without the "fit to screen" option being selected. Of course, in all cases, if the image needs to be resized to be compatible with a certain aspect ratio, it should be done proportionally so that it does not appear distorted. Igor, maybe you can confirm whether or not this is consistent with what you are trying to achieve? Happy weeding! In the meantime, maybe we should just sit back and see what Igor comes up with in beta 3.

Well, on my system, the image doesn't "fit the screen" - it is cropped on both sides. It "fills" the screen, but is not "fitted to screen". That is the purpose of "cover screen". (See the "definition" of "fit to screen" under v.4.) But "windowed mode" is not active yet in v.5.

Dave, I set my monitor resolution to 1280x1024, opened your demo, resized an image of my own to 3072x2048, renamed it "Photo_6x4.jpg", and set the screen aspect ratio to 5:4, in "windowed mode" as you suggested. (by the way, "windowed mode" is not yet activated in v.5). The following screen shot is the result, with severe cropping on each end of the photo as indicated by the arrow. "Normally" in PTE, the image would be shown with black bars top and bottom so as to avoid truncating. You can see the way it should look by putting the 6x4 image into PTE 4.x and selecting "fit to screen" in "PO/Screen".

Dave, I'll give it a try. By the way, did you have a chance to try out my two demos? They too were prepared so that shows created under different aspect ratios, etc., could be tried out on different monitor configurations. I'm not too concerned about windowed mode, although it should certainly be tested too.

Inge, Sorry for not replying to your previous posts, but I have had the same problem with Pinnacle. However, I got around it by saving each PTE show, one at a time, in Pinnacle as an permanent "avi" file and closed PTE after each one. Then I opened each avi file in Pinnacle again and this time I was able to see the 3 shows. Lately, however, I have been using Adobe "Premiere Elements", and don't have that problem. However, Pinnacle has some great menu and title presets, so it is nice to be able to use it to put together the final dvd.

They were really made for two different purposes - one just to line-up objects, and the other to test the effect of different actions. I think they each have their place. It would be nice if we could add them as plug-ins, and have them handy when wanted by clicking on a menu item. In fact it would be nice if we could save a limited number of object arrangements, and recall them by clicking on a "preset" menu. Maybe in version 6??

The original grids that I made for PTE 4- work quite well in v.5. There is one for a 1024x768 screen at this address: www.alrobinson.com/grid_50p.gif . It has grid lines every 50 pixels, and is transparent.

Lin, Another way to ensure the objects are not associated with another is to click anywhere in the list of objects on the right-hand side so that no one object is highlighted, and then add your next object. It will be placed at the bottom of the list, and not associated with any of the objects above. Then you can simply select "Order / send to back" if you want it at the top of the list.

Dave, I believe that there has never been a problem with scaling, etc., in windowed mode. However, this mode is not acceptable to some AV producers. Did you have a look at my two test shows (see separate thread)? There is a spreadsheet included which summarizes the effect of different aspect ratios for various combinations of "fit to screen" and "cover screen". Ken (Texas) and I have both experienced unexpected cropping when switching to different monitor aspect ratios.

Tony, Try this: Open the timeline - every slideshow in v.5 has a "timeline" now on which you can arrange your show, whether you have music added or not. Click on the timeline to position the cursor where you want a new slide, and click "Insert slide". The new slide will be positioned both in the slide list and in the correct position on the timeline. (make sure you have "View / Auto adding of new transition" checked).

Thedom, Glad you found the grids useful. I found them very helpful in rationalizing the effects of "cover screen" vs "fit to screen" under different aspect ratios, even though they are pretty roughly drawn. I find it easier to carefully examine an effect with more precise images as with a "normal" photo, I keep forgetting what part of the image showed up in the previous test. If I have time, and don't forget, I'll put together a better grid, similar to the one I did for the older versions of PTE for lining up objects (you will probably find a reference to it if you do a search on past posts).

Jim, Welcome to the Forum! It depends on which website you were trying to use! If you were using the official PTE website, then it is perfectly safe.

Yes, Ken, those are really awesome images! Makes me want to go back to all the different places I've been and shoot everything over again! Really amazing photography! Thanks for sharing.

Very nice, Jeff! Good piece of work - it should be quite useful.

Lin, Although I haven't had occasion yet to add several objects at a time, I can see where such an option would be useful. We can add several slides to the slide list at a time, so why not several objects at a time, too?

Thanks, Ken, for your kind comments. Yes, the notes in red indicate a potential conflict with other monitor aspect ratios. Just something to be aware of if the author is planning on distributing his or her show. If only shown on one's own personal system, then nothing to worry about. I can set other aspect ratios on my monitors, but the images will be distorted somewhat. It's sufficient to test for two "extreme" conditions, however, to get a sense of what is happening. No need to make things more complicated than they are already! And, you're right, I'm a retired telecommunications engineer - no where nearly as efficient at this stuff as I used to be!

I have uploaded a zipped FILE with some tests I ran for two aspect ratios of the new "cover screen" options in Project Options and Objects & Animation. The results are quite revealing - there could be some serious problems if these options are used incorrectly. These tests were partly an outcome of Texas Ken's queries on image aspect ratios vs monitor sizes, and some tests I was doing on linearity. (by the way, my tests on linearity proved that PTE is linear in all respects, even speed of PZR). I have included an Excel spreadsheet summarizing the results as well as all source images and a text file summarizing the conclusions. Please let me know if you would like further clarification, or discuss any of the results in more detail.

Jeff, Thanks for the info - that's basically what I have been experiencing, too. But, if you are building shows for aspect ratio 5:4, and using images 5:4, or other ratios adjusted in Photoshop to 5:4, why would you need to use "cover screen" at all? In my case, I'm aiming for a 10:6 aspect ratio, so the cropping on a 4:3 image would be quite severe, and I would therefore not use it. I would do any required cropping in Photoshop. Even if I did set the option to "cover screen", and I gave the show to someone with a 4:3 monitor setting, the option would not help them view the show any better, either. Bill, A child object is one "subordinate" to another object (i.e. indented). It is just another object on the screen, but one which you want to have the same "Pan, Zoom, Rotate" (PZR) characteristics as the one to which it is "attached", or "subordinate". You indent it by first highlighting (clicking on) the name of the object with the actions you want the new object to take on, and then click on "Add image" or "Add frame", depending on what type of object you want. The "main image" function is used to indicate which object in the "O/A" list you want to be displayed on the "slide list" in the main window. You don't have to display the first image in the list - you now have a choice, if it helps you remember what objects are included with that slide. Hope this helps. I can't wait to see the balloon show - I can just imagine balloons careening through the sky all over the place!! Should be a good application for v.5!

Thedom, From what I can tell, "cover screen" only applies to the aspect ratio chosen in POptions. In this case, you are correct in that the option does work in the O/A window. However, setting this option in POptions does not automatically set it for all objects added in O/A (at least on my system). Also, for those viewing using a different aspect ratio, this option can possibly give some undesirable results. However, I'm still in the process of testing, and will report my findings when completed. Lin, I found a handy way to move and resize objects "under" other objects. If you highlight one of the "hidden" objects, click in the pan or zoom box on the right (with the numerical values), and then click on one of the corner points (little rectangles, if the object is highlighted), you can use the arrow keys to adjust the size or position of that object. "Leaning" on an arrow key will move the object until you un-press the key.

Jeff and Thedom, Further to the original topic of this thread, you are both correct, provided you have selected an aspect ratio the same as that for the monitor you are using to create the show. However, I am using a monitor with aspect ratio 4:3 to create a show in 10:6 aspect ratio with wide-screen images 1280x768. When I set "Cover screen" in project options and run the preview, all the wide-screen images are croppped to fully cover the 4:3 monitor. And, of course, the 4:3 images fill the screen without requiring cropping. But, if I set PO to "fill screen", and O/A to "cover screen" for all images, save the show, and then run it on a wide-screen monitor, none of the images, even the wide-screen images, fill the screen - all are cropped to fit a 4:3 aspect ratio. So, instead of cropping to fill any screen, it appears that the cropping is only carried out for monitors set at the intended aspect ratio. This is not as serious as I had originally thought - that the "cover screen" option would crop for any size monitor, regardless of the intended aspect ratio. In other words, the originator, by having control over the aspect ratio, does have control over which images will be cropped, and by how much. Igor, you are still one step ahead of us!