JEB

Hi, For what it's worth I'm with Peter, The Dom and Pierre. John

Hi Peter, et al, I sympathise with much of what you say. I do however have a video facility on my camera but have never got round to trying it out (I've only had it for six months!). I remember a few years ago somebody on the forum, it may have been Dom, demonstrated the use of a “stretched” image being used as a background to the actual image which was set as a frame over the “stretched” image. The “stretched” image was reduced in opacity and set to pan in the background. This was initially very attractive to me and I used it in a sequence. It got slated. Thinking back, my critics were right. I thought I had done it fairly discreetly but I was deluding myself. I had simply got carried away like a novice frequently does with transition effects. I suspect we are likely to be inundated with inappropriate use of video for the foreseeable future. I too prefer working in the documentary style but, and this is where I think I disagree with you, I suspect there may be many opportunities to use video (discreetly). I would like to think that there may even be an occasion when it could be acceptable to have it running in the background – only covering myself because of a known lingering weakness! Best regards John

Barry, For what it's worth I agree 100% with you on this one. I would go further and say that there are a number of aspects of PTE that need tidying up or finishing off that seem to have got pushed aside in favour of new features. Regards John

Thank you all very much. I've cracked it, or rather you lot have. Regards John

Anthony, Argonaut, Peter, Wideangle, Thank you all. I hope to have a go later tonight. John

Jose, Thanks, I may well have a look at that. Xaver, Thanks. That sounds like the way I did it before. I don't have time to play for the moment but will do hopefully tonight and if not it wont be for a day or so due to other things on the horizon. But I will respond again. Thanks to you both for such a swift response. Regards John

Hi Folks, Can anybody remind me of the best (or any way) of adding slides to the beat of music? I have a particularly jaunty piece of music I would like slides to appear (no transition) on the up beat. The wave form is not particularly helpful on this occasion. I remember there was a way which I think Barry Beckham advocated. I did use is some years back but as the years pass my memory fades even faster. I think it involved clicking the mouse and a slide appeared on the timeline but I can't get it to work. Hopefully John

Jean-Cyprrien Regarding consideration of the novice, I will accept your point with regard to this issue. However, my comment was more of a general nature rather than specific to this topic as i suggested in my opening paragraph. Regards John P.S. It's nice to see that some of us are reading this even if it appears not to being read by WnSoft!!

Hi, I'm not going to support The Dom on this occasion primarily because I do not consider myself competent to make a decision. I have been using PTE for quite a few years now and have no reason to regret that fact. However, in trying to encourage others to use PTE or indeed even get involved with AV I constantly meet major resistance due to its complexity. I would say therefor that anything that makes it simpler to use should be encouraged. I suspect that every contributor to this thread is at the higher end of experience and I suspect not truly considering the novice. I think the fact that there have been 640 views and only 19 replies goes some way to support that fact. I do however think that Peter's suggestion of an option controlled from Project Options makes total sense and can't see any reason not to go down that route. I can't think now what the occasion or feature was but I'm sure similar occasions for adopting this policy have been rejected or not considered by Igor in the past. This concerns me as it suggests to me that those who are technically highly competent are too far removed from the reality of the average user. There are to my mind a number of innovations that have not been well introduced and that could be improved by some adaption. I think PTE are in danger of loosing market share by concentrating too much on new innovation and not simplifying the basics. John

Hi, I think I should clarify my position. I never expected any PTE audio facility to replace the likes of Audacity and I don't think that was ever suggested by Igor. I would be very happy to continue to use Audacity for major audio editing just as I use Photoshop for major image editing. My disappointment is in the presentation of the new facilities. I should point out that these facilities are even more than I for one thought would be provided when this was first announced. As I have said it is the way that they are used that is too complicated. I have taken some time to try to get to grips with the process because I wish to use PTE against any other product. However, I find it impossible to convince new comers to PTE that its audio facility has much merit. I sometimes wonder whether some of our group are so technically minded that they do not appreciate that many others are not and require the aid of a graphical interface to assist them, I certainly do. Regards John

Igor, Thank you for directing me to the other post, which I had clearly missed. I have to say that I am personally very disappointed but realize that you have to prioritise. As the saying goes you can't please all of the people all of the time. I would say, however, that I have spent a lot of time trying to get to grips with the audio interface and find that it is a vast improvement on what preceded it. But is very difficult to master. In my efforts trying to interest people to use PTE they find the audio handling far too complicated as it stands. I am sure you are aware that there is a second group of people that are disappointed in not getting what they allowed themselves to expect. I refer to MAC users who were hoping for a fully MAC based version of PTE. In identified this group I must declare an interest having just purchased a MAC myself. I should acknowledge however, that by using “Parallels”, one can get round this issue quite satisfactory, if the cost of purchasing a copy of both Windows and Parallels is ignored. I should state quite clearly that video is, at this point in time, well down in my personal list of priorities. However I do wonder whether there would not have been more merit in completing the Audio issue and perhaps even the MAC issue (though I'm aware that there are major problems with this) before moving onto video. But as I said before you have to prioritise as you think best. Finally, thank you for all the hard work you and your team do in giving us such a wonderful product and more particularly in allowing us to participate in its development. Even if we don't all get exactly what we want when we want it! Kind regards John

Igor, We have all been tempted by the new video facilities being worked on for vs.7. Any chance of a glimpse of the new Timeline which I understand is being introduced with v.7? Hopefully John

Crossfade, No, I don't have a copy. I did, a few years ago, have the opportunity of playing with it and thought it a possible alternative to CS3 or rather I think it was CS2 at that time. Since then I have been using Elements and have recently purchased E9 (this is the "investment" I am referring to). Lightroom would have to have some considerable additional benefits to justify its purchase now. I have to admit that I have really forgotten most of what I knew of the product and why it impressed me at that time. I will have a dig. Regards John

Hi all, Still in the midst of transferring everything over to the mac, having an issue with the backing up to the Time Capsule so not undertaking many new things till that is resolved. My thinking presently is that I should go with Organiser. I like much of what Picasa has to offer but feel that it might be more seamless using Organiser. My use of PS is limited and now that I have PSE9 it caters for most of my needs. I did use PS3 at one time but found it more than I needed. Crossfade. - I did in the past wonder if Lightroom would have been an all in one solution but that now would be I suspect a duplication of my investment for presumably few additional benefits - unless you can convince me to the contrary! Thanks all for your input. I'm always interested in other peoples experiences. Regards John

I agree with above but just to clarify one point. I'm sure Barry didn't intend to suggest that the final price is ONLY indicted at check out but should be referred to before getting to that point. Sites where that happens are most annoying and can cause people to go off the idea. Specially if your a tight fisted Scot like me! It suggests a degree of underhand behaviour which probably isn't intended. So make it clear at the outset. John

Hi Mac Users, I have just taken the plunge and purchased a Mac with Parallels and Windows 7 (for PTE). I am about to start transferring files (images and music) over to the Mac but am uncertain what file management system I should use. I have played with Adobe Bridge when I used CS and more recently Organizer now that I use PSE9. I find the W7 “Libraries” set up just as confusing so as often as not return to simple Windows Explorer. I suspect that I am guilty of not persevering with Organizer and may well adopt that method. However I know nothing about Mac options so thought I should ask if anybody has any experiences or opinions they would like to pass on. Regards John

Padarok, As you know this is not a feature that is presently available. If there is sufficient demand for such a facility then I would be surprised if Wnsoft would not consider providing it at some time in the future. Peter, Xaver and I are simply keen users of the product and have all seen many changes brought about as a result of discussions emanating from posts such as yours so be patient – it could happen! If I am understanding you correctly there may be a work around that could help in the meantime. You may well have thought of this or some other method but if not this may help. I suggest you create one slide containing an image from your proposed show and apply the animation you wish to be applied to all your slides. Then substitute that image by using the "Change Image File" key at the top of the main PTE window, for a low resolution “blank” image of the dimensions you have set as your slide size. This “blank” image should either be of the same colour as your background if you use a .jpg or it could be a .png file. Then copy and past that slide as many times as you require to make up your show (10 times, then copy that first 10 as a group 9 times to get your 100). This “blank” image effectively acts as a “parent” for your "child" images. You would then require, while in O&A, to select your 100 images individually (use the arrow key at the top right hand side to move forward through you list of 100 slides) as “children” of the “parent” blank image. All slides would then have identical keypoints and animation. If this is something you do regularly you may wish to investigate the “Template” facility. Good luck, John

Hi again, Just tried it and it certainly enables the addition of a frame as Barry mentioned. However EVERY slide in the show would have to have this superimposed. Could be ok in some circumstances I suppose. John

Hi Keith, Have you not answered your own question? Perhaps I've got hod of the wrong end of the stick (quite a common occurance) but if you use the copyright facility to load your PNG would that not do what you're after? John

Ken, Yes that's true when I posted, but it's behaving very erratically now so am about to follow Brian's suggestions. John

Ken, Yes that's true when I posted, but it's behaving very erratically now so am about to follow Brian's suggestions. John

Ken, Yes that's true when I posted, but it's behaving very erratically now so am about to follow Brian's suggestions. John

Brian, Just this moment seen your post. Later today I will follow your instructions but just wanted to thank you for your time in explaining the situation, it is very much appreciated. Thank you again. John