JEB

Hi, Well, this is where I really expose my ignorance and bad practice. I am NOT in the practice of calibrating my PC or projector frequently enough - unless once every 18 months is enough! (sick joke!) So from that starting point let me add that when I have calibrated in the past I have used a Spider system going through that long process in the dark and not really noticing a great deal of difference at the end of the process to be honest. That said I accept that I should take this procedure more seriously as I am obviously not getting the results that are possible. It being as I have said, some time since I have gone through this process, I can't recall there being a particular reference to gamma, specifically the ability to set it to 2.2 or 1.8 so I will have to look at this again. I assume that setting gamma to both the projector and the PC is also possible and necessary. I have a Canon SX50 and my club has a more recent Canon so presumably if the club's projector and PC are set to 2.2 and my PC laptop or any other PC or Mac laptop are set to 2.2 and the images were prepared on these computers then we are all singing from the same hymn sheet. Or is that too simple? I accept the points made regarding bulb life and surface etc. I appreciate your input. Regards John

Hi Jim, Yachtsman1, Thank you both for your replies. It looks like I should give this issue a little more thought. As I understand your very detailed reply Jim calibration is at the center of this. What has brought this about is that twice recently I have been impressed by projected AV shows from a Macbook, as opposed to shows from a PC. In both cases the same projector was used though the images were different. The projector and PC have not been calibrated recently and as far as I am aware the Macbook used was not specially calibrated in any way. If I am understanding the explanation given correctly then a Mac with no adjustments made is more likely to be accurate than a PC that is due calibration. Given the time factor in calibrating a PC there could be, on the face of it, an advantage in using a Mac? As my principle objective is for producing shows for projection rather than viewing on screen or TV this is an important issue for me. All of this research is being carried out as an insurance against the day that my present trusty laptop decides it has had enough and I have to replace it in short notice. Thanks again to you both for your comments. John

Hi, Given the utter silence since making this post I fear it was as daft a question as I thought. My reason for asking is that when I come to replace my present PC I would like to be confident that I am making the correct decision in NOT going for a Mac. Personally I have ruled out all other perceived benefits of moving to Mac. If I were convinced that I would get a improved projected image then I would think again. So if there are any technocrats out there who can persuade me then - "SPEAK UP OR FOREVER HOLD THY PEACE" Regards John

Xaver, Thanks. What an idiot I am! Obvious when you know how! John

Hi, This is not a feature I have used before but while playing about with PTE to familiarize myself with some of the features used by some of the lesser products I thought I should see how this worked. I notice that in order to get a preview of a show using this option the only way I can achieve this is to create an exe file then run that. This seems a rather long process. Also while in timeline view with the wave form displayed the slides do not get spread equally along the length of the wave form as I would expect. What am I doing wrong? Thanks in anticipation, John

Hi, Leaving aside all other pros and cons of either platform does anybody have any personal experience or views as to whether either platform provides a better PROJECTED image? Assuming the same file and projector is used. I would be very interested in any constructive comments. Regards John

Hi Lin, Thanks very much for your 3D Tutorial. Very clear and to the point. I feel I can now start to play and hopefully learn. Regards John

Hi Dom, I am also very interested in your proposed tutorial. I have for some time been wondering if it would be possible to do something similar to what you have demonstrated. Perhaps you could advise me if what I have in mind is practical. An illustration of what I have in mind is as follows. Last week I completed a walk form Bologna to Florence and intend to make a short AV of the trip. Ideally I would like to zoom in to Northern Italy, pause then zoom into Bologna at an acceptable (?) altitude, pan along the route I walked pausing and zooming into the villages I spent the night at and then zooming back out and continuing in this manner to Florence. That is the basic idea. How and where exactly I would incorporate this into my AV I have not thought through as I'm not certain if what I have in mind is practical. I am assuming the panning will be the simple part in that I guess the way of achieving that is to screen capture the route and merge each image in PS to form a single image. I suspect in order to accommodate the zooming I may have to do this for each leg of the route rather than the complete journey but perhaps you could let me have your opinion. Regards John

Ken, TOUCHE Don't know how to do the acute - don't tell me! I prefer to remain thick!!! I will give this a bit of thought and PM Peter who I'm sure will be delighted! I'll blame you. John

Thanks Yachtsman1 and Ken for your instructions. Ken, yes I do get your mail re your Mediafire post and appreciate your kindness in doing that. I hope you are not offended when I say that something along the lines of what I have been suggesting, with a good robust index would be much more user friendly and available to all. Regards John

Ken, Delighted to hear, that by implication, there are plans to do something about this. I would however direct you to a post I made on 13th September 2006 titled Questions & Answers (an idea). I would have provided the link but can't find out how to do that!! Regards John

Ken, In my view you have just proved the point I obviously failed to make clearly enough. Your suggested url took me to a list of about six other urls which in turn took me to a variety of disjointed topics and discussions. Incidentally, two of the urls could not be found. well Jeb this section http://www.picturest...?showtopic=4567 has been in existence for +- 3 years if people have tutorials to offer why dont they post them there? I'm afraid that I must say that any newcomer would look on that as a mess. I also do but have learned to live with it. I'm not complaining about the situation only trying to point out where improvements may be made. We can't survive with our heads in the sand, we have to look about and see what is going on about us and if we like it, go for it! Regards John

Hi, While typing my last post "The Dom" has just come on line with a post that I trhink proves my point. There are dozens of demos etc out there but they are understandably scattered all over the place. A central index would make life much simpler, particularly for those new to PTE. John

Hi, Firstly, thanks for this discussion. Secondly, it's great to hear that the "Evans Boys" are going to do their stuff again. Thirdly, I am certain that the afore mentioned gentlemen are taking the best line. Fourthly, in order to meet the "how to" need, would it make sense if some kind person who fully understands the issues (that lets me out), were to create an index of links pointing to where specific illustrations and demonstrations (free or otherwise) can be found? I have in mind something along the lines of the excellent FAQ's that Peter is currently producing. If this were managed properly authors (professional or amateur), one would think, would be keen to submit their work for inclusion. Regards John

Hi, Just tried it on my low spec Compaq nx6125, ATI Radion 128 MB, 1536 RAM, 1024x768 and worked perfectly, even the zoom on the self portrait was perfect!! Regards John

Peter, I have recently been using Chrome as I had some problems recently which I thought were Firefox related. I have spent the past hour talking to Sky as I now suspect these past problems are related to the router rather than any browser as they re-appeared yesterday and again today with Chrome. I have reverted back to Firefox a few minutes ago and will monitor the situation over the next few days. Perhaps the Forum issues are related though I doubt it. I received an error message from the forum a few minutes ago while trying to move back to the first page from Lin's last message in order to get to your message, so I think there is a bit of settling down on this new message board still to be dopne. Cheers John ps hopt this works - Oh Ye of Little Faith

Hi Ken, Used REPLY which gives the option to add an attachment john

Ken, Fast Reply appears after the last post John I have taken a screen print of this page up to my name above but can't find a way of attaching it from this location. will try again.

How about that it worked but I can assure you it doesn't every time john

Peter, I know - but it doesn't always work at rthe moment! No doubt it will this time! John

Hi, I hope this post will work! I have tried to use "add fast reply" but it failed! This is in addition to other similar experiences in recent days. I can offer no technical input to this topic. However I would like to add my concern that the problems being experienced at the moment WILL have an adverse effect on new users. I personally when singing the praises of PTE put particular emphasis on the value of The Forum. Hopefully this can be sorted quickly. Regards and thanks to you technical folks for taking up this issue. John THIS IS MY THIRD ATTEMPT TO POST THIS (Resorted to using Copy/Paste)!!!

Lin, Can you point me in the right direction to find out more about Boxig's utility please. I think it may be of help to me in the near future so would like to find out more. Thanks John PS This is my fourth attempt to add this message. I'm obviously hitting the wrong keys!!!!

Hi, The link doesn't appear to be working. John

Hi, Thanks for bringing to my attention the fact that we have the ability to specify the rate of PZR. I have regularly opted for "smooth" but never before noticed the option to vary the rate. Has this always been available or has it just crept in recently? Regards John

Hi Maureen, Thanks for letting us see another superb show. The images are wonderfully clean and sharp. I always feel I know when I have seen a good show when I feel the need to see it a second time. Absolutely no argument with the music on this occasion - very fitting and pleasing to my ear. Regards, John