fh1805

I have moved the three posts (urn1912's original, Ken's reply and davegee's reply), to the open topic on AVG problems () Peter

Ken, Xaver, Urn1912, Can we please keep this thread "on topic" and keep the discussions about AVG problems in the appropriate topic elsewhere on this forum.? I would be grateful if Ken would move the relevant posts across. Please! regards, Peter

Xaver, Now I understand what you are talking about. Thank you! Peter

I'm obviously not at my best today as I cannot find this "Speed Options" window. Could somebody please enlighten me as to where I find it in PTE? regards, Peter

Hilary, Have you installed the latest drivers for your soundcard and graphics card? It might be that the remedial action you attempted has taken you back to a state where these drivers are now either out of date or in some other way corrupt. regards, Peter

I created 8 EXE files on 16 Nov ready to show to an audience tomorrow - no problems. Having read this thread I have just launched a sample of them - no problems. My AVG is the free version of AVG 2012 (2012.0.1872) and the database file is 2092/4628. The PTE version used to create the sequences was 7.0.2. I know it doesn't help you with your problem, Anthony, but you asked if anyone else was experiencing problems. Dave isn't and I'm not: and as I understood from one of your earlier posts, you're not on AVG Free - only on the paid-for licence. Do you really need the extra function of the paid-for licence - whatever that might be? regards, Peter

Mary, Just to qualify Dave's post above. We have identified one very specific scenario where there seems to be a very visible difference between the USB route compared to the EXE route. We're investigating that right now but it may take a day or so to get a really good, solid understanding of what we see and why we see it. We will report back in due course. Peter

Dave, No, it isn't solved. I still think it might be a bug in the code - or at least, a weakness in the code's design. We'll leave it until Igor or one of the team replies to it. All I've done is to isolate the setting that causes the problem. With that option set, the fault is there. regards, Peter

Cracked it!! Because I was using a very short piece of music that wasn't long enough to fill the total show time, I set the music to Loop. With this option ticked, the video file is zero bytes. With the Loop option unticked, it generates a real video file (and the music stops part way through the show as I would expect it to). One for Igor and the wizards to resolve. regards, Peter P.S. for Dave - now that I've got past this problem, we can pick up our discussion in the PMs again. I've now got a video of the graduate images.

I'm using v7.0.2 and trying to publish a "HD Video file for PC and Mac". The PTE project file consists of just 11 slides, all of them 1920x1080, each slide having duration 6 seconds, 2 seconds of which is the transition time, the transition effect being Fade In/Out. There is one piece of music (an MP3 file of 30s duration) that has been added via Project Options|Music and set to Loop. The Preview and mini-player both play the sequence correctly. The publish of the HD file (HD 1920x1080, High Quality, Pan and Scan Enabled) progresses apparently normally, ends with the big green Tick, but declares a file size of 0 bytes. I have opened the same project file in v6.5 of PTE. I forced PTE to go past the warning about version mis-match, saved the project to a new name, closed and re-launched PTE and then did a Create of the HD video file. All went as expected and the resultant video file was 5.27MB - and it plays fine in Windows Media Player. It looks to me like I've found some kind of bug in PTE v7. My PC environmant is Windows 7 64-bit Home Premium SP1. regards, Peter

Ken/Dave/Brian, Just to keep things clear for all; Dave's interpretation of my position is absolutely correct - I have no interest in including video clips in PTE sequences! There are two reasons for this: - neither of my cameras has video capability - my preferred AV style is that of documentary on historic subjects To use digitised historic film clips would add yet another layer of complexity to the already complicated issues of copyright clearance. However, what I have found an interest in since I got my new HD TV last Christmas is outputing HD video from PTE (via VideoBuilder). Using the HD High-quality Preset and then copying the MP4 file onto a USB stick, I can play my sequences back on the TV for friends to see. I don't have to go through the process of setting up all the computer/projector/speakers hardware; and I get a final result which, when viewed from across the lounge, looks just as good as the exe does when viewed up close on the PC monitor. regards, Peter

Absolutely! An excellent item, Dave. That is exactly how I work. regards, Peter

Dave, Text below copied and pasted from Wikipedia entry for "Variable bit rate" "Variable bitrate (VBR) is a term used in telecommunications and computing that relates to the bitrate used in sound or video encoding. As opposed to constant bitrate (CBR), VBR files vary the amount of output data per time segment. VBR allows a higher bitrate (and therefore more storage space) to be allocated to the more complex segments of media files while less space is allocated to less complex segments. The average of these rates can be calculated to produce an average bitrate for the file. MP3, WMA, Vorbis, and AAC audio files can optionally be encoded in VBR.[1][2][3] Variable bit rate encoding is also commonly used on MPEG-2 video, MPEG-4 Part 2 video (Xvid, DivX, etc.), MPEG-4 Part 10/H.264 video, Theora, Dirac and other video compression formats." Bearing that in mind, my understanding of the "varibale bit rate" you mentioned is that it is essentially a compression technique that will produce smaller files. regards, Peter

Bob, Try looking under project Options|More. regards, Peter

I would make the following observation: www.wnsoft.com website is presented in the English language. Therefore it seems to me that a prospective user visiting that website is likely to expect the software to default to English language, and the support to do likewise. They are not going to realise how international the user base is until they visit this forum. By the time they do visit the forum they are likely to have accepted that the web infrastructure that promotes and supports the software is based on the English language. Since joining the forum I must have read several thousands of posts. Only a tiny proportion of those have been written in a language other than English. And whoever has dealt with them has often taken the trouble to use such as Google translator to provide a translation of both the original post and their reply that was made using the poster's national language. Let's keep things in proportion. I do not deny the validity of the point made by Xaver, that PTE might lose some sales because the support infrastructure uses English as its primary language. If I was considering buying software and had a choice of a company whose support site was in English or one whose site was in some other language, I would probably chose the English language one. It is perfectly natural to prefer to use your native language. But another point made early in this topic was that, whether we like it or not, the language of international commerce and of international communication is English. Wnsoft are in an international marketplace offering their product, and its support, to an international community. They have chosen to adopt English as their language of international communication. I believe that we, as product users, should respect that decision and work accordingly. regards, Peter

Gayland, Versions different at the first or second level (e.g. v6 and v7, or v6.0 and v6.5) will install along side each other. Fix level versions that differ only at the third level, e.g. v7.0.1 and v7.0.2, will, by default replace each other. As they are merely fix levels with only very minor functional change, it is usually safe to let them over-write each other. If, however, you really do want to keep them separate, you must select your own folder into which to install them during the installation process. It is also a good practice to keep all the download files. I have the download files for all major versions (first and second levels) from v4.49 onwards. I also have the download files for the highest fix level of each version that I did actually install. regards, Peter

That depends on whether all expenses would be paid! Peter

I usually limit myself to not more than 90 minutes drive each way. However, I am willing to consider longer trips provided that overnight accommodation is included. For example: last month I did a trip involving an overnight, and have another similar one booked for late March next year. regards, Peter P.S. If that was a serious enquiry please contact me off forum.

Dave, As I recall, VGA was a standard developed back in the days when a significant number of PC monitors were still using CRT technology. It is, therefore, I believe, some kind of analogue-digital mish-mash. Both DVI and HDMI are, as I understand, pure digital standards: the difference being that DVI is image only whereas HDMI uses the same cable to carry the digital sound signal too. That additon of the sound signal must involve some kind of "talk" between the graphics card and the sound card; and therefore may, I guess, add a slightly greater "strain" to the graphics card (and the soundcard too, presumably) regards, Peter

Dave, I don't have the required technical knowledge to give a definitive answer but my feeling is as follows... The graphics card has to prepare each pixel and pass that to the device for it to be displayed. Therefore, the "strain" on the graphics card will be the same if the number of pixels is the same. It will be less if there are fewer pixels to be displayed and more if there are more pixels to be displayed. I suspect that physical monitor size (in inches of diagonal) is irrelevant. Only the width x height pixel counts will matter. Now, is there a real expert out there to tell me whether I'm right or wrong? regards, Peter

I get personal satisfaction from tackling the challenges that I set myself with each sequence that I build. Local organisations seem to enjoy the results of my work (they keep asking me back!) regards, Peter

Just to reinforce the point made by Brian (and acknowledged by Lin) that these performance numbers don't give the whole story. Earlier this year I had need to buy a replacement desktop system. The new system has the nVidia GeForce 210 fitted (rated at just 204 in these charts). The old desktop had a GeForce 8600GS (rated at 246). Not a lot of difference in performance there; but the 210 can handle animated video sequences that are more complex than those the 8600GS just couldn't handle. I suspect that one of the secrets of good graphics performance is to give the graphics processor plenty of memory. My 210 has got 1GB. The 8600GS had only 256MB. It is pretty much a "truism" in computing that the first system bottleneck that most machines encounter is a shortage of memory. Most processors these days (main and graphics) have the basic "grunt" to handle whatever you throw at them - provided they have enough memory to do the job. regards, Peter

Gary, I am still unconvinced that the KFSD feature has any real benefit (i.e. allows something to be done that cannot be done any other way). As you and others have discovered, it is serving only to cause confusion where there should not be any confusion. Some of that confusion would be circumvented by moving the tick box for the feature into Project Options. regards, Peter

Gary, Think of KFSD as a Project Option (which is where I think it should be located). You make your decision at the start of the project - and you do not change it for that project. If you try working with it in this manner, you will see a consistent behaviour within each project; but the behaviour will be different for a project with KFSD ticked compared to one with KFSD unticked. regards, Peter

There obviously has to be a difference between a paid-for copy and a free licence; otherwise where's the point in paying? I suspect some of that difference will be in more advanced "heuristic" and "predictive" detection routines; exactly the sort of thing that thinks it has found something that isn't really there! regards, Peter