Lin Evans

A fairly common question I'm asked and I generally answer with a long winded verbal explanation of the myriad features beyond the capabilities of producing incredibly good and clean presentation slideshows. I decided to create a show which demonstrates some of the more esoteric capabilities of PTE beyond the normal slideshow of photographs. This one is too large for SlideshowClub so I'm posting it here. It's finished but I may have to go back and convert a part of it to video for those with less than optimal video cards. It runs perfectly smoothly on my rather powerful i7 Intel with a top-end video card, but the part of the show which displays an icosahedron with 3620 separate active video displays stutters on my old nVidia 8800GT card which only has 500 meg of video RAM. I would appreciate any feedback from those who have the bandwidth to download and try it about smoothness - especially on the icosahedron. Updated now and size will be reduced to about 278 meg - flaw found in copy/paste function causing dropped frames. Data reconstructed for smooth operation on icosahedron and spelling errors corrected in text. It's as smooth as silk on my old PC now. Both Mac and PC versions now online - I won't rework the video right now... http://www.lin-evans.org/pte/whatcanido.zip (about 278 meg optimized zipped Windows exe).. http://www.lin-evans.org/pte/whatcanidomac.zip (about 279 meg optimized native MacIntosh exe) http://www.lin-evans.org/pte/whatcanidozippedavi.zip (aboute 428 meg zipped 1280x720 converted avi) PTE Converted AVI at 1280x720 resolution is now linked as well above. Thanks, Lin

Hi Tom, My Canon SX50 HS has exactly the same feature with the same annoyance. They have blur at the top and bottom of the screen which can't be eliminated so this, in my opinion, excludes them from serious use for time lapse creation via the 10x speed video because it's apparently designed to simulate a toy or model capture. Best regards, Lin

It has a shutter release connection - that's all that's necessary. The intervalometer simply actuates that release as programmed. To be compatible the camera simply has to have the release. You might want to check with Panasonic or check your documentation and see about the type of shutter on your camera. My first impression is that it has both a mechanical and electronic shutter. It has to have an electronic shutter to do video, but whether that shutter can be actuated for stills and if so at what aperture, etc., are relevant questions to avoid undue wear and tear. I "think" you can select the electronic shutter or mechanical shutter. If so, then you will definitely want to use the electronic shutter for time lapse photography. Regards, Lin

My manufacturer, Harbortronics in Fort Collins sent me this: ===================== Hi Lin, Nice to hear from you! Ahhh, the good-ol CP990.... one of my favorite cameras of all time. The FZ150 does appear to have a shutter release connection, and we can make a cable to control it from our DigiSnap controllers. I have to be honest though, for short term time-lapse (i.e. a day), there are some really cheap chinese intervalometers that would work fine, and cost next to nothing. Our niche is now long term time-lapse, where the DigiSnap has some advantages. All the best, Mark ================== With that said - I think you can rest assured that the one Tom points to will work fine with your camera. Best regards, Lin

Hi Tom, There are literally dozens of free jpg to video converters available. Best regards, Lin

Hi Erik, I called and left a message with the company that makes them (Harbortronics) which is only about 20 miles from me. I'll let you know what I find out. Regards, Lin

Hi Eric, If you can tell me the model of your camera, there "may" be one available. I used to do testing for a company in the US which makes intervalometers for just about any camera. I even have one for my old Nikon CP990. Let me know the model number and manufacturer and I'll check for you. Regards, Lin

Hi Erik, A video mode of 1/8 th second gives you eight frames per second, not the same at all as a much slower rate such as even one frame per second. Nice time lapse can be done with a variety of speeds, but one frame per second is actually pretty fast. For example, if you are photographing a flower opening to the sun, you might want to set it up for one frame every minute or so. An intervalometer is an inexpensive accessory. Just buy one for your camera if you want to do time lapse. But keep in mind that the faster you set the intervals, the more wear on your shutter if you choose to use your dSLR. Regards, Lin

Hi Dave, excellent time-lapse and great choice of background music. For those considering doing time lapse, my suggestion is to buy yourself a camera which has both a mechanical and electronic shutter such as a little Nikon 1V1, 1V2, 1V3, or 1J series, etc. These models and a few others give you a choice of using your mechanical shutter or using the electronic shutter. Clicking away at one frame per second gives you 60 shutter actuations for each minute of time lapse. So a five minute time lapse will result in 300 shutter activations or 3600 frames per hour. If you are shooting for several hours and condensing the frames to display in a short period this can quickly cut into your shutter life rating. Shutter life on a dSLR is estimated by the manufacturer based on an MTBF (mean time between failure). Consumer quality shutters may be rated as low as 50,000 actuations but generally are rated for about 100,000 actuations. Does this mean that the shutter will "fail" at 100,000 actuations? No - in fact it's more likely that you will get upward of 300,000 because of the safety margins built into MTBF and the tendency of manufacturers to be very conservative on their ratings, but still even if you get 300,000 actuations on your shutter you are looking at a shutter life of about 83 hours (300,000/3600) and who wants to wear out their shutter and pay a couple hundred dollars for a new shutter for a few weeks of time lapse use? So the simple solution is to buy yourself even a used Nikon 1V1, or a new 1J1 (which only has an electronic shutter) for about $250 then you can shoot time lapse until your battery dies and really not suffer any undue wear and tear on your shutter. People have asked why using video on the dSLR's doesn't wear out the shutter. It's for the same reason. The mechanical shutter opens once when you start recording, then the electronic shutter on your dSLR takes over until the record button is again pressed and the mechanical shutter is closed. But to actuate the electronic shutter on your dSLR you generally must be in the video mode and this doesn't allow for slow shutter speeds such as one frame per second. I just checked Amazon and a new Nikon 1J1 can be purchased for around $250 with a lens! These are great little 10 mp cameras which have a rather large battery - very large in fact - and would make a dandy time lapse device. Because you won't be creating any time lapse video with greater than 4K resolution and probably only HD resolution, the resolution is quite sufficient and the cost is minimal. These little Nikons have an internal intervalometer. The highest shot rate possible with these is one frame each five seconds and the maximum number of frames per shooting interval is 999 but you will run out of battery long before your reach the maximum number of frames. It is possible to use an adapter with these cameras to power them externally. For example, in the field one could place a 12 volt auto battery and an inverter to use the external power supply and shoot the full 999 frames easily. It's also possible to use IR and remote to get down to two seconds per interval, but generally five seconds would be quite sufficient. Just a suggestion.. Best regards, Lin

+2 - I've suggested that in emails in the past also.... Lin

Hi Gary, The time will probably come when you find a good reason to use masks. Think of them as a way to confine some activity to a particular place on your image. For example, let's say you wanted to create a fire in a fireplace in a room and you wanted to have the reflections of that fire in some object which sat on the hearth. First you would need to decide how to create your fire and then you would need to find a way to confine it to the exact place where you wanted it such as in a fire place. If you had a room scene with couches, chairs, etc., you wouldn't want the fire in the middle of the couch! So let's say your fire was a video you took of a fireplace with your video camera or your dSLR in video mode. Let's say you ran the video through a video editor and made it fairly small so it would somewhat fit into the fireplace, but the fireplace in your living room scene was a slightly different size and shape than your video. How would you deal with this? Then there is that reflection you want on the object on the hearth. How would you confine the reflection to just the points you want to show it reflected in? The solution is to take your image into your editor such as Photoshop and "paint" the exact dimensions of your fireplace with pure white. Then paint the exact areas of the object where you want the reflection pure white. Next you copy and paste your entire image over a transparency and with the eraser tool erase everything except the white areas. Select an area containing the white and save it as a PNG file. Select the other area containing the white and save it likewise. Now you have two custom masks which you simply use to confine your fire and reflection to the proper areas. You can adjst the opacity of the mask to allow more or less of the "reflection" and use the full white inside of the fireplace to confine your fire to that area. You can use these masks as a "child" of the main image so if you zoom, etc., they stay in proper size relationship. So you play your video inside the mask containers and now you have something you couldn't have accomplished without the mask. There are literally thousands of ways to use masks effectively in your shows. You will become very fond of them once they become second nature to create and implement. Best regards, Lin

Did you look at the thumbnail? It explains in more detail. I like and use the program myself. Want to move a few keyframes in concert? Can you do that now? You can with OAK Did you not download PhotoShop and learn it? Did you know all about what it could do for you before you worked with it, or did you take the word of others who had worked with it that it was something you might find useful? You bought it at great expense too, didn't you? You probably don't need OAK because you probably don't have the inclination to do the things it can help you with. It's a free program - download it and try it or not. Really it makes no difference to anyone but you. Best regards, Lin

Hi Barry, Not to answer for Jean-Claude - but the purpose of OAK of which Jean-Claude is the author is seen in the opening of the PDF instructions here: OAKObjects, Animation, keyframesWhat is the purpose of OAK?Globally visualize, manipulate, modify overall temporal dataof all objects in a slide issued from PTE and synchronizeobjects to the soundtrack with the help of Audacity. Oak is furnished and documented in both English and French. You can download it here: http://diapositif.net/forum/download/file.php?id=41166 When it is installed a PDF will be found in the installation folder which is by default found in C:\Program Files\OAK1.0.2c The PDF instructions will show you how to use it. It is a fantastic tool which uses the clipboard to transfer information between itself and the yourfilename.pte file. It's a very thorough piece of work and consists of over 24,000 lines of code/text. Having some of the features incorporated into PTE would be a wonderful thing or having PTE contain the option of using it like a plugin would be a very nice addition. I'm certain Jean-Claude can explain it's complete function in much more detail than I have, but it is an invaluable time saver for those who wish to do complex animations and synchronizations. See attached thumbnail below for more information... Best regards, Lin

Does 512 have to have anything to do with anything? Don't overthink it... In the immortal words of Bill Murray: "It just doesn't matter." Best regards, Lin

Maybe we should segregate the answer between the "mask rectangle" (in this case) and the "Mask Container." The container (I know. rhetorical) defines that area of display which "could" be affected by the mask. The mask itself is variously called a rectangle, circle or simply "mask" defines that actual area of display affected by the masking. The container can be precisely adjusted to fit the display, but precision is not really important at all here. It's only important that the container be as large or larger than the area masked. There is no relevant penalty for it being larger than the display area just as there is no advantage. The mask itself is rarely equal to the entire display area but rather defines that region of masking. So making the mask container precisely the same aspect ratio and size as the display is just not really an important thing in my opinion. Best regards, Lin

Hi Gary, Part of the answer is probably that no matter how many separate choices were offered, someone would always want another. Another reason is that rarely does someone mask the entire screen - it's just not the usual purpose for a mask. It's so simple to drag it to the dimensions you choose and to distort it to your own purposes that having a bunch of rarely used aspect ratios would probably be superfluous from a programming perspective. Best regards, Lin

Hi Denis, I agree that your keyframed version is much more realistic than the perspective zoom in terms of keeping the perception of linearity constant. The question I have is how you arrived at the proper ascending increments which appear to offset the normal linear motion nearly perfectly? Regardless of how I adjust the "slope" of the linear curve, I can't seem to duplicate what you have done, You have done a very nice job of providing a realistic constant zoom. Best regards, Lin

Hi Denis, What is it that you do not agree with? When you say it "didn't work" do you mean it did nothing or that it did not do what you expected? here is a quick sample to see the difference in what a linear zoom and perspective zoom does - how one interprets it is another issue entirely and may depend on individual perceptions. http://www.lin-evans.org/demo/comparezooms.zip Remember, zoom in PTE is designed to work within a slide and not between slides. To accomplish smooth zooms between slides requires work-arounds as you have demonstrated in your tutorial. Many years ago I demonstrated what I called an "infinite" zoom where multiple images were matched so that the ending zoom in on slide one matched the field of view and focal length of the starting zoom for slide two and so on. The zoom was from a wide angle photo of a tiny object to a full macro view of the same object. This appears to be what you have done in your sample tutorial, but not being fluent in French I'm not absolutely certain of this. Best regards, Lin

Hi Peter, Zooms are a tool which are designed to work within a slide, not between slides. There may be a way to do what you are trying to accomplish, but to help you design your show, it's necessary to see the project. If you will click on "File" "Create Backup in Zip" and post the resulting zip file then I will look at your project and help you design it to get the smooth result you are looking for. You have said a "magic" word in your description of a "single slide" with linear motion. "Seems to." The issue is that the linear slide is absolutely linear, but the human brain doesn't interpret it that way. As the image gets smaller, we perceive it as zooming quicker when it indeed is zooming at a very constant speed. To correct for your own "perspective" there is a checkbox on the Common Tab in Objects and Animation called "Perspective Correction for Zoom." Click this and observe a simple zoom out and zoom in and you will perceive that it is linear when ideed it compensates for you perception by actually slowing down the zoom out and speeding the zoom in accordingly. Best regards, Lin

Hi Barry, What I think the underlying issue is, is how to attract new users to the product. We old photographers who create audio visual shows of our still photos and sometimes even our video's are a dying breed. If you examine the age group of audio visual competitions and shows you find a pattern of older folks, many of whom are retired or nearing retirement. Igor began this product as a very young man and with a young man's vision of the future. Fortunately for the product, he is only fifteen years older than when he began, yet still a young man. Many of us who have used his product since its inception are in the twilight years of our lives and the product is just now coming into its own and gaining world-wide popularity. The future market is clearly for the youth who have a totally different interest than most of us in terms of image/video display and manipulation. What is the most common "toy" among children and even young people of high school age? For a few it's sports toys such as the football, basketball, baseball and associated things, but for the vast majority it's what? Video games! Video games come and go but the tools to allow the inquisitive young minds to create these type things persist through time. There exists a natural variation in tools to allow creative young minds to explore the possibilities. Some of these tools are produced by 3D animation companies (Maya Blender, etc.) and some are produced by graphical manipulation companies (Adobe AfterEffects, Eyeon Fusion, etc.) and then there is PTE which has a huge head-start on a niche of its own. Though PTE exists firmly in the realm of presentation slideshow creation software, it's truly much, much more. It represents possibilities not equaled in other products which are extremely attractive to the younger buyer. In the not too distant future, we old codgers who make presentations with still slides and throw in a few video clips now and then will be history. The future is elsewhere and the tools which have a significant start with PTE need to be preserved and improved. This not to the detriment of its primary purpose at present, but should not be left by the wayside because these very things which you see little use for are precisely the things which attract the younger buyer to this product. I use many of these other tools but frankly, I can do things with PTE which would take me fifty times as long to do with my other expensive 3D and graphical manipulation software. There are some things I can do with PTE which there is apparently not another tool available which can replace it. My feeling is that for the preservation and growth of Wnsoft, this niche needs to be exploited. Perhaps sometime in the not too distant future PTE will divide into two major areas of interest. The conventional slideshow and the animation show. Of the two, one has a limited future life-cycle. The other is looming large on the horizon in my crystal ball.... Best regards, Lin

Hi Barry, Sometimes there are simply too many variables to enter manually for seriously complex animations which some users create. I'm reminded of JPD's Penser Avec son Pinceau which was recently posted to the Demo section of Slideshow Club. Have you watched it? It's difficult to even conceive of creating such without the help of a spread-sheet or at least a tool such as OAK to aid in the calculation and distribution of the data. Obviously, the vast majority of users will never create nor even want to create such an incredible masterpiece, but the need remains for those who do to have a means of doing so. Another example is the creation of bezier curve motions. It sometimes requires thousands of keyframes to accomplish the desired results. The "points" at which certain motions coincide with the background music might be set manually with some facility, but the intermediate keyframe values are often far too complex to calculate for manual creation and entry. The idea for future advancement of PTE would be to have a tool which allows both the novice as well as the experienced presentation engineer and also the experienced animator to more easily build their desired artistic creations, I think. Best regards, Lin

Excellent idea Igor - Social media is a wonderful way to spread the word about PicturesToExe! One suggestion: Put a "Try It" link on the FB page to get the visitors to the Wnsoft Site !!! Even though there is a "Contact" link, I believe the words "Try It" should appear because many will not realize that a free trial is available unless they first click the "Contact Us" link. Best regards, Lin

Excellent suggestion Denis! Best regards, Lin

Audio doesn't copy with slides so you must either make the entire creation as a single show or copy and paste the slides and add the audio to the newly created portion as you go along. Best regards, Lin

Yes, but from his former message I got the feeling that he wasn't familiar with the fact that the mask can be made to virtually any rectangular size or oval shape. Once created it can be duplicated by observing the numeric values. Best regards, Lin