davegee

In the case where music is NOT synch'ed I would prefer to see an OPTION that pausing the show pauses the music. There are cases where pausing the show WITHOUT pausing the music are also valid!! DaveG

It might be a good idea to run a security check on your computer? You should NEVER click on a link like that! I hope that you did not contract anything serious from the encounter. DaveG

I have recieved a PM this morning from a New Memeber (zero posts) which contained only a LINK saying PLEASE HELP. It could possibly be genuine or a scam OR it could be MALICIOUS! I did not click on the link to find out and would advise against anyone else recieving similar doing so. Anyone else recieve one? DaveG

When changing computer etc use the Create Template OR the Create Backup in ZIP feature. All lnks and Paths will then be maintained. To do it the hard way go to O&A / Properties / Picture and you can change the path there. DaveG

I liked the sepia toning and the subtle colour popping. Beautiful crisp images - nice portrait of the banjo player. Excellent choice of closing shot. I felt that the tempo of the images could be raised a little - either more images or shorter music track. I also felt that the "frame" was a little fussy - the titles, by the way run out of the frame when viewing on my 1920x1200 monitor. I would have liked to have been told what the ideal viewing resolution was? Excellent. DaveG

If there's silence at the end of the first track and silence at the beginning of the second then that might account for it. Once again - a case for JOINING your WAV files in Audacity/Audition and eliminating silences before saving as MP3. DaveG

Jeff, 2 Gb of RAM on a VISTA machine COULD be considered as BARE MINIMUM! DaveG

MPEG2 / MPEG4 will work. The "Create Video for PC and MAC" option produces an mp4 file - beware of having it too big - 4mins at 1024x768 at high quality is around 18Mb. So, drop the size to 800x600 and vary the quality until you are happy and it MIGHT work. I just tried it for you and similar to Ron's experience elsewhere got an error message when trying to open by double-clicking. By opening MPC and then pointing it at the mp4 it worked fine. DaveG

...... and they probably will not allow exe files for the same reason as, by and large, you cannot send an exe as an e-mail attachment. It's an application and potentially harmful - they will not differentiate between harmful exe files and benign PTE exe files. Brian will probably explain it better. DaveG

Ron, To get things going, I assume that you are double-clicking on the file in the hope that it will open up in something or other. Have you tried opening up something or other and pointing it towards your AVI? Try the prog that Igor recommends - Media Player Classic Homecinema. DaveG

Try it and see? I'm not a big fan of doing something like this without a trial run though. I'm not used to having to deal with HUM and NOISE problems - I use a LOW IMPEDANCE instrument and cable length is not a problem. The way I see it - in this case the whole thing will depend on the cable supplied from the Sound Booth to the Laptop anyway - no choice? DaveG

My D300 is definitely 3:2 only. You are possibly thinking of the D3x which can be set to (I think) 5:4. Pure gimmickry (like video) and not for me! If 5:4 were available at the same pixel count (24Mb) I could see the point. It's like the DX lenses being compatible with the D700 (at reduced pixel count) - what's the point? DaveG

Nice demo Xaver! The possibilities are endless. As Peter found out, it is REMEMBERING to use it is the problem! DaveG

Looks like the best solution so far Davy! Also available here in the UK: http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_ss_w_h_?u...amp;x=0&y=0 DaveG

Thanks Xaver - that's how I did it - eventually. And I also realised that using an intermediate keyframe in the frame's path allows for a change in zoom settings. DaveG

One caveat with regard to the Frames - Parent/Child approach to this problem: You cannot alter any of the pan/zoom parameters in the intermediate position of the PNG file Wierd things start to happen. Brian made it clear that he did not want to do this anyway but, ever the tinkerer, I decided to try it. I suspect that the position of the intermediate keyframe is also fixed and that moving it would also cause unexpected results ( I haven't tried it though). DaveG

Hi Xaver, Well done!! EDITED: If the child stays in the same place relative to the parent frame then no acceleration is seen. But if the frame is moved out of black area and the child brought back in to its end position and an intermediate keyframe added, by making the first part of the child's speed option linear and the second part accelerated a diiference in speed can be seen. DaveG

Hi Peter, Within the present setup in 5.6 you can only have two speed options between two points - slow start - level off - slow finish; or variations on that theme. The diagram shows what I think would work if a way could be found to define the point at which two different versions of the same image would converge if one one was Linear motion and the other Accelerated. Earlier I suggested moving the START point of the Accelerated version. On rethinking you might have to move the END point of the Linear version AND the START point of the Accelerated version to get the point of convergence where you want it. Good luck!! DaveG

Hi Xaver, Have you tried that? DaveG

Peter, My initial reaction was that this COULD be possible by having two images - the real one and another SHADOWING the real one in zero opacity. The REAL image would be in LINEAR or whatever and the SHADOW would be in ACCELERATE. At the point C where you want the change over you could drag the end keypoint to 1 unit away and change the REAL image from 100% opacity to 0% and, in a similar way the SHADOW image from 0% to 100%. The FLAW is that, because of the different modes the real and shadow images are in two different places at the instant that you want the change to take place. If you can make their paths coincide with their pan and zoom settings as you want them it would work. To do this you would need to bring the start point (keyframe) of the SHADOW closer to the point at which it is going to take over. I'm close, but not exactly there at the moment. It might be a case of "bring out the spreadsheet"? DaveG PLEASE Igor - is a speed option like this possible?

It sounds as though you have more than one problem here. Take the music out of the show and see how much of the problems disappear. The fading of colour COULD be down to the wrong colour space? RGB JPEGs do not look as good as sRGB JPEGs in a PTE show. Does that ring any bells? What do you mean by full resolution? Full resolution out of the camera? That's a recipe for disaster. Re-size to the resolution of the images in the show. If your images are going to be seen at 1920x1080 resolution in a PTE EXE then they need be only 1920x1080 to begin with. Anything higher is going to cause problems. You also have to consider the specifications of the two computers - RAM, Graphics RAM etc on each computer. DaveG

If you go to a local music shop or market stall specializing in electronics you MIGHT be able to get a small, inexpensive mixer with volume controls to insert between the laptop and the incoming lead with mini jack. Also get a mini jack to 1/4 inch adaptor if the mixer has 1/4 inch inputs as well as a suitable lead/adaptor to go from the mixer to the laptop. You can then control to signal without having any sign of it on screen. It should not be too expensive and will come in handy for the next time. Hum COULD be a problem but it's worth a try - mine's a Roland/Boss 6 channel stereo mixer but it is overkill for the job. DaveG

Xaver, What you have said above is basically what others have said elsewhere. I am trying to look at this from a different perspective and get some insight into WHY there is a need to keep 4.49 and why a newcomer to PTE could not do the same things with the BASIC features in 5.6 as with 4.49? Would you like to take a fresh look? DaveG

Arising out of another thread, this is an invitation to discuss: Do you feel that using BASIC Version 5.6xxx is easier/harder than using Version 4.49? WHY? By BASIC V 5.6xxx, I mean WITHOUT the Pan, Zoom and Rotate features. Is it, in BASIC use (WITHOUT PZR) any more/less memory intensive than V4.49? Is it more/less intuitive to get a slide show on screen straight out of the box without help? WHY? Do you consider it necessary to keep V4.49 as well as V5.6xxx? WHY? It might help you if you have the ability to get both versions in view at the same time if you have, for instance, desktop and laptop PCs available. DaveG

This is as good as it gets !!!!!!! DaveG