alrobin

Bill, The easiest way to "unlock" an indented object is to copy it and paste it as a new image where you want it, and then delete the original.

Maybe not in the O/A window itself, but have a look at the "cover screen" option in the "Preview" window. Please check your "PO/Screen" settings and let me know what is the value of the aspect ratio you are using, and also the screen resolution of your monitor.

Yeah, I agree that it's probably just as easy to include the slide you want to match with, over on the O/A timeline along with the second image, itself, and the same for any following images, instead of trying to match up with preceding or following images on the main timeline. In fact, having two timelines is a bit of a nuisance, especially since we don't have sound capability yet with the O/A timeline, and since we can't see objects on the main timeline. If there were a music capability along with the O/A timeline, one could do an entire show on one image, using objects alone. I'm not sure how Igor is going to sort all this out.

Thedom, I find that the "cover screen" option in the O/A window has no effect. If I select "cover screen" in Project Options, then the images out of proportion are cropped to fill the screen whether I have selected this option for individual images in O/A or not. I can visualize a danger with this option in that if an AV maker sets it by mistake, unknowingly, he or she may not notice it if the aspect ratio of the monitor is the same as that of the images, but it could pose a problem for certain viewers. So, we also need a command for the viewer to "-uncover", as well as "-cover". I also feel that this option is an unnecessary complication, and I don't think I would ever use it if it meant one of my images would be cropped. I prefer to do my cropping in Photoshop. If a viewer wants to crop the show because he or she is using a different aspect ratio to view one of my wide-screen productions, then that is up to him or her (bearing in mind that important parts of some images may be lost). But, as an option for the AV producer - I'm afraid I don't get it. Anyone else feel the same way? Or am I misunderstanding the situation?

Thanks, Lin - I'll remember that the next time we're staying there.

Thanks, JP! I can't even spell my own name right this morning!! By the way, I included circles for testing whether the images look proper under different aspect ratios.

Lin, I recognized that clock right away - my wife's sister has one exactly like it in her dining room. We stayed a few days at her place this spring, and how I hated that clock!!!! (You'll probably know why. )

toolman, Welcome to the Forum! There have been a couple of preliminary tutorials, and several demos, complete with project files (to show how they were made) posted on the Forum, which you will easily find if you do a "search" on the link above. However, there will not likely be a full tutorial until the initial "official" release of v.5 as Igor and his crew are still busy making changes to the program.

For anyone who is interested, I have posted four transparent grid files here on my site: www.alrobinson.com/grids.zip . I developed them for some tests I am running on the linearity of the various effects one can achieve with multiple object "levels" in v.5. They may be of use, too, for lining up images, as Thedom is trying to do in order to achieve smooth transitions from one slide to another. I have included a pair of grids for each of the two main aspect ratios that I use: 1024x768 and 1280x768, one in grey and one in colour to help distinguish between two images. I would appreciate any feedback, particularly any suggestions for improvements which would help others in their similar testing.

John, There are several detailed explanations given HERE . See posts # 129, 135, 138, etc. It all has to do with 2 layers of the map in register, transparent cut-outs of the route, and coloured underlays.

Ken, Now that you've got our attention, could you please tell us what you have concluded from this exercise? Everything seems to be behaving as expected.

Patrick, Everyone can and will eventually be in the first group. This is a transition we are going through now - it's called "the bleeding edge"!! All technological changes in our society have gone through this stage - some for better, some for worse. If you don't want to drive a Mercedes, you don't have to. Igor has said he is willing to keep fixing your old Citroen!

Very well done! I've tried to do something like that with the older versions of PTE, but of course it was never as effective as your example. I'm sure with a bit more work, it would be possible to smooth out the transitions between slides. It would be difficult to make them perfect, however, as Google is zooming on a 3D basis, whereas PTE is linear. I had to touch up the Google map in my "map route" example, too, for that reason.

Yes, Igor, keep up the good work! A few of us on the forum, and I suspect many of the others "lurking" behind the scenes, are having a ball! And the "proof of the pudding" will ultimately be "in the eating" - the surge of new creativity that will come from these improvements and exciting new capabilities. (and hopefully more money in the bank for you too!!)

You're welcome. It's now gone nuclear: www.alrobinson.com/nuclear.zip !! It's amazing how just widening the coloured rectangles (as suggested by Ralph) completely changes the overall effect!

Igor, Thanks for clearing this up. I didn't know what to think at first, as it looked very authentic, but it sure didn't sound like it would be from you, and I didn't see how you would be profiting much from it! The hackers knew when to strike, too, at the start of the weekend. But, as Thedom says, you do deserve more income from this project than you are making!

I have added Ralph's improvement to "fireflies", plus a little brush-up work on it, and added it to my website at this address: ellipse_Al-Ralph.zip .

Robert, As you know, AV's, like all art forms, are very personal creations, so I try to be very careful when critiquing someone's work, and try instead to identify with the artist, and see the work from his or her point of view. This is really what art is all about - it's all about the artist him or herself. However, I guess it was the fact that the flowers appeared at the end of the sunset scene, which usually indicates the end of a show, that threw me. I was startled to see another image, and one so dramatically different from the rest. Maybe if the flowers had "evolved" directly out of the rock formations, themselves, I would have found it more understandable, and caught the intended message. Or, maybe that text you quoted, fading into the picture at the same time, would have made the message clearer to my thick brain. And, it wouldn't have been out of place either. It's something I don't often use, myself, but I have seen other people use text along with images, and it can be very effective. Also, I believe there was only one floral image, so it almost looked (to me) as if it had slipped in there by mistake, as there was no follow-up to further develop and explain it's presence. Just my initial reactions, but then I'm probably too old-fashioned to catch on at first glance. It's an interesting and appealing idea, though. And the photography was great I, too, have noticed while playing with v.5, that I am using much fewer images. A moving image like a pan or zoom seems to require more time, and this longer time seems to be quite acceptable, than is the case with still images. With only still images, it seems to take a few quick transitions - just the opposite of a longer KB effect - to generate interest and add impact. Of course, it depends on the nature of the show, and what mood one is trying to elicit from the audience. A moving image seems to generate it's own suspense, in that one is waiting to see what is going to appear around the corner, or in the foreground or background, so a longer time on screen seems to be more acceptable. I think using fewer images is a good thing, though, as one can then concentrate on using the best ones. In the case of "traditional" slideshows a common statement by AV producers is that it is OK to throw in lesser-quality images to pad out the show. This is really false logic, and basically a crutch, so if adding movement to the show helps to alleviate this problem, then I believe we are all better-served.

Bill, Click on "Objects and Animation", click on one of the colour objects on the right-hand side to highlight it and enable you to view it's dotted outline in the preview window, and then "scrub" the timeline by "grabbing" the cursor and moving it back and forth, and I think you will get the gist of it. The secret in is in the thin transparent rotating ellipse which gives an effect similar to that in the moving map route example.

Thanks, Barb & Robert. It does help to have lots of time to just play around - you never know what's going to happen, with a program like PTE. But, you think this is neat - wait until you see what Hawk (another retired bloke) has come up with, with just a simple variation on this theme! It is really awesome! I hope he posts it.

Just a fun experiment (with no sound). http://www.alrobinson.com/fireflies.zip

That's very good, Thedom! The possibilities are endless!

I agree that this would be helpful, but might not be practical, especially if the previous slide had a lot of different objects, and it might get quite confusing if they could be seen on the slide you are working on. However, I'm sure Igor could figure out a way to do it. In the meantime, would it help to copy the previous object you want to merge with to the new slide temporarily, arrange the desired movement, and then delete the object? You could perhaps do the same with the object on the third slide.

JPalm, How much video RAM? Could be a problem with the graphic controller, especially if it's the type that's integrated with the motherboard - apparently the Intel controllers have problems with some Direct 3D applications, so may not be compatible with PTE either. Looks like you owe yourself a new pc, or at least a new graphics board! Make sure the rest of your system is compatible first, though.

Robert, Interesting landscape, good photography, judicious use of KB effects - overall a very pleasant show. I felt the flowers, although beautiful, were out of place with the rest of the theme, but that is a personal opinion, not a technical criticism. Will have to put this on our list of things to see in the desert next trip! You're right, once started, it's hard to know how much to use the new effects, and they are very addictive. I feel a little like some of the other respondents in that I'm undecided as to whether the effects should be "on" all the time, or only for special dramatic effect now and then. I find it hard to just sit and admire an image as a stand-alone work of art when it is in motion, even though it is very slightly so, but a little motion does seem to add to the overall pleasantness of a show and help to bring it alive.