davegee

Try using "Save As" and make sure that you are specifying the correct path? DG

Yes, it relates to the use of a more suitable resolution for what you are/were trying to acheive, but I'll drop it. DG

I suspect that if the OP had a 1080 high monitor this thread would not exist. The OP would then be working at 1440x1080. I'll do the maths for you. 1440 and 1080 are divisible by BOTH 4 and 3. 100% of desktop computer packages sold in High Street computer shops in the UK come with 1080 high monitors. I belong to a CC with 100 members. I don't know of any digital workers who works at anything below 1080 high. Some of those members lecture with 1024x768 projectors (the FRPS member has a 1920x1080 projectors the same as the club's own). There is absolutely no need for any of them to work with projects smaller than 1440x1080. I have a 1920x1200 monitor and have had for a few years. A search of this forum would probably pinpoint the date I bought it accurately. I made up my mind a couple of years ago that when the time comes to replace it I will opt for 1920x1080 (my TV is 1920x1080 - that's a clue). All of my projects end up on my TV as MPEG4 so I work to the TV's 1080 high. I have been using 1620x1080 (3:2) quite a lot (my camera is 3:2 - that's a clue). However, my 3:2 shows are superimposed on a 1920x1080 background to preserve the 16:9 AR. I suspect that the 1200 high monitor is doomed and that I will not be able to replace like for like anyway. There are plans to up the TV resolutions so that will probably, at some time in the future, bring about another resolution revolution. I'm trying to keep up - it's the only way. DG

It still doesn't support 16 Bit Layers? DG

Peter, This goes back to JPD's original objections to the abolition of Original Mode. DG

Bosque4_001 and 002 are 341x256 as Peter noticed? Presumably these are 4:3 crops from a 1024x768 image? This is impossible on the long side as you would need a decimal part of a pixels - cannot be done. I rebuilt your project at 1200x900 on my 1920x1200 monitor and can make it work albeit that the pan figures have decimal parts of a percentage point - Peter uses Excel for this and would be able to tell you exactly what you require - 66.666% (I think). Using this figure with a 100% view (in O&A) on my monitor there are no lines. There are also no lines in Preview. You have probably noticed that the lines are vertical and that there are no horizontal line problems? DG

Mick, EXCELLENT tip re: Precise positioning of guides. Now all I have to do is remember! I have been dragging guides in whilst in maximum magnification to ensure precise guides. After that the "snap" takes care of things. Thanks, DG

Mick, I went through that a long time ago - it's just not accurate enough. If you want pixel perfection for the OP's purposes you need to make sure that your guides are perfectly placed (Max Magnification). Then you need to make sure that your Crop or Rectangular Marquee is perfectly aligned to the guides. Try it? DG

like venetian blinds?in thar case use 1200*900 and bring the guides down at 100 px intervals? dg

if you want to be really accurate you need a 4:3 resolution which is divisible by three. 1200*900 fits the bill. drag guides in to 400 & 800 and down to 300 & 600. crop to the guides at max magnification for accuracy. re assemble in a 1200*900 frame and use zoom on the frame to fit to 1024*768 in pte. dg

Main > Show Nav Bar > Customise. DG

First thoughts - the images are introduced as objects in Objects and Animation. You must have one or more slides in the slide panel? Click on the first slide - click on the Objects and Animations buttonb - and move the little blue arrow at the bottom to see what happens. You will have objects on the right hand side in the Objects Panel. Click on each of these in turn to see the related Keyframes. It would help if you could post a screen shot showing what you are seeing? DG

BB, I'm not going to spend time on this - it is not fruitful and is off topic. If I can offer a suggestion? Start from where you are NOW and try to make things better. Over and out. DG

Dan, This has been discussed before - how would you tell which images are Main Objects of Slides and which images are included as additional objects? A variation on what you propose would be to mark up the additional images with Italic and Bold Text. When your project is COMPLETED and you make the archival TEMPLATE only the USED images and sounds etc are included in the Template folder so, at that stage, you know that all images are being used in the project and the ones NOT BOLD are added as additional images in O&A. DG

Dan, Presumably you know how to USE the mask in PTE? .... and you are asking how to MAKE one? If you look at how a mask is created in PTE itself - a simple circle or rectangle you'll see that the important part is the WHITE bit. This lets the image behind the mask show through. Therefore a mask made in PS could be as simple as painting a bit of white onto a black background and saving as a JPEG. Also WHITE on transparent saved as a PNG will do the same thing. A landscape mask to allow a different sky to show through behind a foreground would be white on top and black or transparent below. A white (feathered) rectangle save as PNG will do the same thing because you can make it fit the area of sky in PTE's O&A by adjusting the "grab handles". DG

Most clubs like to encourage new work. We don't have such a rule but every month we see a dusty slide from a patriarch of the club who has no option but to use older material which causes much consternation from one or two who are not aware of the patriarch's past credits and achievements. The club still accepts that "projected images" includes transparencies and we are now down to one per competition. Where such a rule is useful is encouraging photographers to go out and shoot new work for a "themed" competition and not dig out old material which (sometimes barely) "fits the brief". Rules is rules. But the AGM is sometimes a good place to change this if you have the backing of sufficient numbers of members. DG

Argonaut, I see your point about the laptop. The differences are not that great - but if you look carefully they are there. Have a great Xmas! DG

Argonaut, Forgive me, but I don't see the merit in doing it this way? If you have HDMI then you can play the 1920x1080 EXE which (IMHO) gives better quality than the equivalent 1920x1080 H.264 MPEG4 file and takes up a lot less Hard Disc Space. The beauty of the MPEG4 is that it can (on a suitably equipped TV) play via a memory key without the need for wires or other paraphernalia which seems to annoy the ladies. DG

For anyone running NX2 with CEFX 3 for NX2 a decision has to be made before doing anything. Do you want 64 Bit NX2.3 without CEFX3 or 32 Bit NX2.3 with CEFX3? You can't have both! I installed NX2.3 this morning and the speed in 64 Bit is a major step forward. http://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/showthread.php?t=322675 DG

Not at all! If you use the Transparent PNG option the image would float over the background as though it were an image inserted and then SIZE clicked. Try it? DG

Not sure what you mean, Ray? If I change the resolution of the show from 1024x768 to 1920x1080 this is reflected in the AR setting on the MAIN Tab. The reverse is also true. Give us a step by step of what you are seeing and what you expected to see? DG

Davy, I don't think that there is any need for this! George Melly: "If you can't say anything that's nice, then please don't talk at all - that's my advice" DG

Virtual Size of Slide: You can make a slide show the resolution of which is smaller or bigger than your monitor resolution. If you have a 1920x1080 monitor you could make a 1024x768 show for instance. Fixed Size of Slide: If you tick this box the show will present itself at the dimensions set in Virtual Size of Slide and will not "upsize" to fit a larger monitor. It will, however, "downsize" to fit a smaller monitor than the size set in Virtual Size of Slide. DG

Clicking on SIZE in the SIZE/POSITION box sets the object to 100%. However you have to do this individually - you cannot do it globally. P.S. You could possibly write an action in Photoshop which would take all of the smaller images and increase the canvas to 1920x1080 while keeping the image size at its original pixels. The result would be (for instance) your 1400x700 image with a black border making it 1920x1080. You could then drop all of these into your 1920x1080 project without the need for adjustment. The background that you choose could be either Black, White, Mid-Gray, Other Colour or Transparent. If Transparent the SAVE part of the Action would need to be "Save For The Web". Don't forget to include a Convert Colour Profile to sRGB (if appropriate). Is it less work than clicking on SIZE X number of times? Don't know, but you would only have to make the action once. Try this one: Resize Canvas.zip DG

are the connection methods different. ie hdmi dvi vga? dg