davegee

Thanks Barry, Quote: "However, it may be simpler to say that, if you intend to pan or zoom an image the picture needs to be bigger that the rest to allow the quality to be retained during the movement or zoom". I merely quantified, to the best of my ability, what you choose to generalise on. DaveG

Hi Igor, I am not sure what you are proposing along with Al and Ken, but please remember that some, myself included are quite happy to proceed with what I proposed when I started this thread i.e. the combination of "Fit To Screen" and "Windowed Mode" which would allow for the playing of ANY aspect ratio on ANY monitor. DaveG

The whole subject of Aspect Ratio / Image resolution / Zoom Degradation has provoked a lot of debate in various threads here over the last week or two. I have given my thoughts on Aspect Ratios and one possible way of approaching them. A question was posed regarding the correct/best Image Resolution and Zoom Ratio to prevent image degradation. The way I see it there is no single definitive answer because it depends on a number of factors: Where you are starting from: Camera resolution? Purpose of show: Your own monitor or everyone’s monitor? For example: A D70 camera produces a 3008x2000 pixel file while a D200 file is 3872x2592 and the Canon 30D is 3504x2336. It is immediately obvious that zooming into a 1280 pixel wide image from any of these involves different percentages of zooming. Also different monitor resolutions mean that the figure you are trying to achieve is different for each case. The “norm” these days is anywhere between 1024 pixels and 1600 pixels wide. I have attempted below, to produce a table which shows these differences. The figure given in each case is the Maximum Zoom possible from each of the camera files and for each monitor pixel size. Definition: Maximum Zoom is the zoom amount beyond which some interpolation is required by PTE to fit the image to the monitor pixel size. It is assumed that some degradation of the image to some degree will take place beyond this maximum zoom figure. Monitor Width: 1024 Pixels 1280 Pixels 1600 Pixels 3008x2000 (D70) 293% 235% 188% 3504x2336 (30D) 342% 273% 219% 3872x2336 (D200) 378% 302% 242% Taking the full-size D70 image on a 1280 pixel wide monitor with a 3 to 2 aspect ratio and providing for the maximum 235% zoom would require a 3008x2000 pixel image which is at least a 1Mb JPEG file at compression 8. (The same figure for the D200 file would be 1.5Mb). For PTE 4 the same full-size D70 image on a 1280 pixel wide monitor with a 3 to 2 aspect ratio would only require a 1280 pixel wide image whose file size at compression 8 would be just 215Kb. (The same figure for the D200 file would be the same – 215Kb). The file size required to perform these extreme zooms is at least 4 times as big!! The above table assumes that the show is being produced for use on the producer’s monitor. If the same show is uploaded to Beechbrook then the producer has to assume that someone, somewhere, is going to want to download and run on a 1600 pixel wide (or bigger) monitor. If this is accepted then the producer has to forget the figures for the 1024 and 1280 pixel wide monitors and work to the figures for the 1600 pixel wide monitor. Let’s turn it around a little bit. If it is known that the zoom ratio required is going to be less than maximum, what effect does this have on pixel sizes and file sizes? The table below shows the pixel size and corresponding file sizes for D70 images which are going to be shown on a 1280 pixel wide monitor and subjected to the zoom percentages shown. Zoom % 120% 150% 200% 235% Pixel width required 1536 1920 2560 3008 File Size 304Kb 456Kb 750Kb 1Mb I think it is clear from this table that if keeping the file size of the final file to a minimum is important then tailoring the image size to suit the amount of zoom to be subjected to it will assist. So what’s the conclusion? The producer will have to prepare his/her own table of Maximum Zoom percentages based on his/her original image size and the purpose to which the final show is going to be put. A spreadsheet or table with all possible combinations would be a job for someone with much more time on his/her hands than I have. DaveG Sorry about the justification of the tables but I think it is still clear what the figures are.

Al, Re: Windowed Mode. In my examples, if you change the values in the "Windowed Mode" box your Black Background or Canvas in the O & A window changes to suit. Therefore, by my definition, "Windowed Mode" works. I suppose though, that it is the LINE around the images that defines the "Window" in my examples. While I'm on definitions, can I give you my definition of "Fit To Screen"? Fit to screen means that if I create a 5:4 show it will "Fit To Screen" on my 1280x1024 monitor with no black bands around the image. The same 5:4 show will either fit to the height or width of any other aspect ratio monitor. DaveG

Al, I was away all day yesterday and unable to join in but: Please FORGET about image pixel sizes. How can anyone possibly get a 1820x1024 image to "FIT" a 1280x1024 screen - it is NOT possible. But it is possible to create a show on a 1280x1024 screen which will show on any aspect ratio monitor albeit with some black banding somewhere. However, by putting a line around your show the banding becomes less obtrusive. Re: Windowed Mode not being active? I'll get back to you. DaveG

Al, The reason that I have not downloaded your two Demos is that my Dial-up connection makes this a long-winded and often fruitless task. Which is why I developed the SKELETON TEMPLATE idea. My friends and I exchange our ideas in 20Kb files (as opposed to 20Mb files). Let me know what you think of what I have done and then see if you can apply the skeleton template idea to your demo? If you then post it I can download. Best wishes, DaveG

Hi Lumenlux, I have posted a link in "Aspect Ratios" to some demos of Windowed Mode and Skeleton Templates and would appreciate your thoughts? DaveG

Hi Al, In a recent e-mail from Ken, he said: "Hello Dave: Your aspect ratio method sounds like it might work...if Igor's software is not having a problem with "fit to screen. What about creating a concept demo set of PTE files or shows. Maybe with the two worst case aspect ratios for images. I think 16:9 at 1820x1024 is the widest aspect LCD panel I've seen and 5:4 1280x1024 is the narrowest aspect ratio I've seen. I'm thinking of a demo that people could "easily" try on various aspect ratio monitors to see what happens. I can get access to quite a few. Just a suggestion. I would try to do it myself but I might screw up your idea. Sincerely, ken" Never one to duck a challenge I produced a couple of Templates as per Ken's suggestion and they demonstrate both the Windowed Mode and SKELETON TEMPLATE principles. Anyone interested can download both from the following link and please read the readme.txt file in each. Each is only around 10Kb file size. Proper viewing will necessitate the addition of Ken's Photo_6x4 file in its original 3072x2048 pixel format. If you don't have this photo any 3072x2048 pixel image will do but the PZR functions might not suit your image. Just rename the file you are going to use to "Photo_6x4.jpg" and overwrite the same name file in each template. The result is that either PTE file should work on ANY aspect ratio monitor and all PZR functions will be performed within the border I have applied. The 5x4 PTE should work FULL SCREEN on a 5x4 ratio monitor and similarly the 16x9 ratio show will work full screen on a 16x9 monitor. Any problems - please let me know? The Link: HERE http://www.gould68.freeserve.co.uk/templat...etemplates.html DaveG

I have been spending a little time investigating the effect of differing aspect ratio slide shows being presented with the current (Beta 2) version of PTE5. (Following onfrom Ken's Topic). I have come to the conclusion that there is no problem as long as the following procedure is adopted. Let's take, for example, a show which I decide to put together using full screen on my 1.333 ratio (1280x854) monitor. It just so happens that this is the aspect ratio of my camera images so nothing is lost if I want to use these images straight out of the camera. The "Project Options" that I set for Screen would be: Fit Slide To Screen - 4:3 PC/DVD - 1.3333 I also set Windowed Mode and enter the same aspect ratio figures there i.e. 1280x854 My background would be Solid Black. Obviously, if I now add an image which is 1280x854 it will immediately cover the black area in Objects and Animations and if I press preview I will get a full screen image. If I had wanted to start with a 120% zoom into the image and then zoom out to 100% or vice versa then I would start with a 1536 pixel wide image (or greater). To this I would now add a thin white line around the image by inserting a 1280x854 pixel PNG file with a 3-6 pixel white border inside (as an object) on top of my original 1280 or 1536 pixel image making sure that it is not added to the Main Image but as an independent object (otherwise it would zoom with the Main Image). The preview would now show the same image, full screen, but this time within a thin white line border. I would have to add this same PNG file to every image in the show but this is not a big problem. My one image show is now ready to be turned into an EXE file and will play full screen on my 1.3333 ratio monitor. But what happens if I send this to someone with a different size or different aspect ratio monitor? If the recipient has a 1280x1024 (1.25) monitor then the EXE will play full width, all zooms etc contained within a white bounding line with black bands top and bottom. I have not tried it, but I am assuming that anyone with a wide screen (wider than the 1280x854 aspect ratio) would see the black bands on either side of the image rather than top and bottom. So there it is - one size fits all. Other things to consider: The recipient might have a larger monitor (bigger than the 1280 pixel width). If I want to cater for this possibility then I will have to make the minimum size of my images the same as the maximum monitor resolution which is possible in order to avoid PTE having to interpolate upwards. For instance if I want to cater for a 1600x1200 monitor then all of my images will have to be 1600 (plus any zooming percentage) wide. DaveG

It's been covered Tony: Untick "Hold Time Points" in Main Screen. Igor will make this the default in later Betas. DaveG

Is there a possible conflict there. Lin? Would you then want these "twelve objects" to be grouped so that the same keypoints were applied to all 12 or would they have seperate keypoints. If it could be done easily then why not? But I think I like it the way it is. DaveG

Hi Ken, I have sent you a personal e-mail which hopefully will demonstrate the "white line around shows in PTE5" principle and also how a PTE5 template can be cut down to around 20 Kb so that Forum Members can e-mail very small files between themselves to demonstrate PTE5 Techniques. DaveG

Hi Ken, I have sent you a personal e-mail which hopefully will demonstrate the "white line around shows in PTE5" principle and also how a PTE5 template can be cut down to around 20 Kb so that Forum Members can e-mail very small files between themselves to demonstrate PTE5 Techniques. DaveG

Thanks Ken, Did you get my e-mail? DaveG

Hi Ken, I have tried your Pan & Zoom demo and am sorry to say that none of the options you give work successfully on my 1280x1024 monitor. There are black lines above, below and to the sides of all of the zooms. What doesn't help is that you have chosen to put your white line on the image in Photoshop or similar. This means that the white line is constantly moving during PZR. Like you, at first, I was trying to avoid the black areas but on the other hand do not want to lose the pixel generating power of the 3:2 aspect ratio of my DSLR. I have always tried to compose my images within the camera and very often find that a 1280x1024 crop from a 3000x2000 image is just impossible. Here is the compromise I decided on: I have decided to proceed with the 3:2 aspect ratio images on my 1280x1024 monitor and put the boundary white line on in PTE instead of doing it on the image itself. Igor has given us the opportunity to do this and it works quite well. My zooms, pans and rotates now take place within a fixed white 1280x854 frame superimposed on a 1280x1024 black background and I am learning to live with the black areas above and below the image because they are separated by this FIXED white line boundary. My screen settings are: Fit to screen (for the time being), Custom and 1.5. I have also had some thoughts about the pixel sizes of the various images I am using. As I said above my monitor resolution is 1280x1024 and if I am only performing a small amount of zoom why use a 3000x2000 image? It makes more sense to me to tailor the pixel size of my image to the way I intend to use it. PTE must use up processing power in interpolating the 3000x2000 image to fit the screen whether it is interpolating up or down and Igor stated some time ago that PTE does the interpolating DOWN better than it does the interpolating UP. So let's say that I have an image that I will want to zoom into at 120%. All I have to do is multiply the 1280 width by 1.2 and I have the pixel width size of the image necessary to perform the zoom. Try it - it works. Instead of needing a 750KB file I only need a 350Kb file (for the same compression ratio). The result is the same quality in a smaller file size and less processing power is needed for interpolating the image leaving more to handle the PZR functions. I also noticed, early on, some unwanted effects taking place when OVER-ZOOMING and came up with the following figures for MAXIMUM amounts of zooming possible with various different image sizes. Bear in mind that these figures are for a 1280 pixel wide monitor and avoid UPWARD interpolation by PTE. The figures would change for a different size monitor. 3000 pixels wide image - 229% Max Zoom 2500 pixels wide image - 195% Max Zoom 2000 pixels wide image - 156% Max Zoom 1500 pixels wide image - 117% Max Zoom DaveG

Thanks Igor. I can't wait!! (But will have to). DaveG

You can rename the image in the "Properties" section (Top Right). Other options for each image are available by right clicking on each image. DaveG

Thanks for you iput Jeff - no one seems to be working this way or didn't care to join in. I agree about "hold Timed Poits" defaulting to "unticked" and that seems to be the solution for me. DaveG

Be sure to install to a new fplder and NOT overwrite your 4.43 version. V5 is not a fully functioning version - yet. DaveG

If you have the original reg.txt file all you have to do is copy that into the PTE folder and when the prog asks you for it just tell it WHERE it is - it will find it. You do not have to type the number in anywhere. DaveG

Hi Igor, I have sent a text file to Support@wnsoft with more instructions. I cannot download the Microsoft program for a few reasons: 1. No internet connection on my laptop and 2. The download has to install and cannot be transfered to another machine 3. Dial up connection on my internet machine - no broadband! If it is still a problem I can send some screen grabs? "Auto adding of new transition points for new slide" ("Customize Synchronization" window, menu via "View" button) is TICKED.

Hi Igor, Please try this: Set up new project with three slides with default slide time at 8 seconds. Slide 1: Change time to 30 seconds and add keypoints at zero 1.5 seconds and 30 seconds. Slides 2 & 3: Keep slide time of 8 seconds and add keypoints at 1.5 and 8 seconds. Go to main window and drag new slide on top of slide 1 with "Hold Timed Points" ticked. Check Keypoints in OandA and you will find that the New slide 1 has a Keypoint at zero and a slide time of 30 seconds (not the default 8 seconds). The original slide 1 now has a slide time of 8 seconds and has lost its 30 second keypoint in the OandA timeline. All of the original Keypoints in the original 3 slides now seem to overlap. If the "Hold Timed Points" is unticked when the new slide is dragged on top of slide 1 the above does not happen.The new slide will be 8 seconds and the original slide 1 (now slide 2) will still be 30 seconds with keypoints at zero, 1.5 and 30 seconds. I think that this is "correct" for the setting of "Hold Timed Points" ticked but could cause a lot of confusion if slides are added in the main window by dragging into place. DaveG

Peter, You need to read Igor's initial notes when he introduced this BETA (and perhaps the other 100 or so replies in this thread). Many original functions do not yet work, including the Synchronised Music track. That will come in Beta#3. This Beta is purely for evaluation of the PZR facilities. DaveG

Igor, This is what I was doing: In the main view I was dragging a slide from the FILE PANEL to the SLIDE LIST and trying to create a new First Slide. With the Hold Timed Points ticked the new first slide would take the time of the original slide and the New Second slide would take on the time of the original 3rd slide. All keypoints after the first new first slide would then be out. With the Hold Timed Points unticked this does not happen. When adding a slide in the TIMELINE between two original slides with the Hold Timed points ticked only the previous slide's Keypoints are affected. When adding a slide in the TIMELINE with the Hold Timed Points unticked no previous or following Keypoints are affected. It is difficult to explain and it could cause confusion. DaveG

Jeff, Try this: If your first slide is 60 secs, the second 20 secs and the third 10 secs, try adding a slide with the "hold time points" ticked and then unticked. DaveG