fh1805

Eric, No, it's a different product from the same stable. regards, Peter

John, There's no way I would spend nearly £1000 for Photoshop CS when I have all the features that I need in Photoshop Elements at less than a tenth of that price. My desktop PC is running adequately fast enough for me. There is sufficient memory (2GB) for the file sizes that I process using Elements (6MB JPEG images from my Nikon D70). And, as I know well from previous experience, if I want to give the PC a "go faster" stripe , the cheapest and most effective way is to add more memory. So, as I said, I can see no need for 64-bit architecture in what I do or envisage doing. I'll face up to the future when I have to. A thing I learned many, many years ago is that, in the world of computers, there is no such thing as "future-proofing". Anything bought before you need it will turn out to be not what you need when you do get to the point of actually needing it. And that just equals "wasted spend". regards, Peter

Eric, 32-bit operating systems use 32 bits (binary digits - zeros or ones) to address the RAM and so can address 232-1 bytes of RAM. 64-bit operating systems use 64 bits to do that job and so can access 264-1 bytes of RAM. Obviously this latter is a massively bigger number. As I understand it, the entire hardware needs to be built differently, using different components, in order fully to exploit the benefits of the 64-bit operating system. Which also leads me to wonder whether some of the problems encountered by early users of Windows7 64-bit might be happening because their hardware is not fully 64-bit capable. You asked for layman terms: a 64-bit machine is wanted when the application needs to hold a vast amount of data in memory and process it all (e.g. weather forecasting, seismological analysis for oil and mineral exploration). Speaking purely personally I cannot envisage any application I might want to run ever needing 64-bit architecture. I'll be interested to hear the thoughts of some of our real technical gurus (e.g. Conflow, nobeefstu, etc) on this subject. regards, Peter

When it comes to automating fade of music against voice-over I think Eric has hit the nail on the head. Automation, if imposed rather than offered as an option, would rob us of an opportunity to apply our own creative stamp to our work. I have no objection to it being offered as a user-selectable option; just as I have no objection to the existing user-selectable option of random transitions between slides. Some PTE users will want to be able to create a sequence that looks and sounds reasonably professional with a minimum of effort. That's fine by me! But I would prefer to have full manual control of all the features of PTE so that I can exactly express my own personal attitude towards what constitutes artistic creativity. regards, Peter

You've got too much data to fit it all on one DVD. You will either have to reduce the amount of data or split it and create two DVDs. All removeable storage devices are of a finite size: and you cannot get more on to them than they are capable of carrying. Fact of digital life, I'm afraid! regards, Peter

Eric, Yes, I still have it but it is virtually pensioned off now. I only dig it out when I have something specific that I really do want to check on XP. As I do all my PTE builds on Vista and all my delivery to an audience using Vista, there's no incentive for me to check this out on XP. I think you are thinking about menus here. Icon images have to be specially created to be a particular size (usually 64 x 64 pixels or 96 x 96 pixels) regards, Peter

Stu, Your comment about noticing the problem on first event after an anti-virus update is interesting. I'll have to check if my system is behaving that way. Thanks for the pointer. regards, Peter

Anthony, On the actual form of the icon we will have to differ. I like the new icon. regards, Peter

Jim, Interesting analysis! But don't overlook the role played by the operating system. Windows XP and Windows Vista behave very differently when playing menu sequences. I cannot speak for Windows7 but would expect it to behave similar to Vista since it shares a common heritage. regards, Peter

Sometimes (and I haven't been able to identify under precisely what circumstances) after creating a new exe file using PTE v6 it can take my system several seconds (30-45) to assign the new icon to the file. When this slowness happens, if I call up the folder under Windows Explorer, I can see the exe file in the folder at the expected file size but with an icon that is not the new "Silver Arrow-head". If I sit and watch, the icon eventually changes. I've tried to investigate using Windows Task Manager but I've never caught anything unusual in the Processes list. I have witnessed the same behaviour when copying a PTE v6 exe file to another folder, so I think it is probably a Windows issue rather than a PTE issue. Nothing has stopped working. No errors are occuring. It's just strange behaviour. My system is Windows Vista Home Premium SP2. When the hiccups occur there are no background tasks scheduled via the Task Scheduler and none of Windows Update, Norton LiveUpdate or Adobe Updater are running - i.e. no obvious background activity consuming significant resource. Anyone else seeing this? Anyone got any ideas what it might be? regards, Puzzled of Yorkshire (aka Peter)

Colin, I am not an advocate of sound file editing in PTE. What I do support is sound file management: the ability to treat sound files as objects: assigning them to a specific place on the time line, assigning a transition effect (i.e. fade in/fade out) and allowing control over their opacity (i.e. control over their volume). PTE is marketed as Audio-Visual software. I have stated more than once before that it is great on the V but lacking in the A. I think the addition of sound handling (not editing) features would improve its usability. I envisage being able to drop in pieces of music and other sounds and place them precisely, in order to test whether they really do match the mood and length that I'm after. To do these "quick and dirty" audio builds inside PTE would mean that I would not have to build so many interim soundtracks. And when I did have all the pieces of sound placed where I wanted them, I would still have the option of using that knowledge to build the final soundtrack in Audacity. For me: Image editing = Photoshop Elements Sound editing = Audacity Audio-Visual sequence build = PTE v6.5 (bring it on, Igor!) regards, Peter

Eric, Duxford is an exe show so doesn't require any other software. Thus demonstrating the value of having that rule in place for future shows. In the context of these problems launching sequences, it doesn't really matter what software has created the sequence - just so long as it IS an exe file. I don't know whether you can do anything about WMP not coming to the front when you launch "Infinity". Perhaps nobeefstu or Conflow might be able to offer some advice if they read this post in this topic. regards, Peter

Eric, This suggests to me that the file extension .wmv is not associated with Windows Media Player. Does this file launch into WMP if you use Windows Explorer to navigate to the file and then double click on the file name? If it does, then all I can suggest is that you double-check the spelling of the path and file name in the button. If it doesn't but, instead, asks you which program to use, then I am correct in my analysis. I suspect you've done all that you can with this one. Slightly off-topic comment: If, after your experiences this year, you feel that you want to continue with an A-V competition at WCC can I suggest that you get the committee to agree to the following rule: - all sequences entered into this competition must be provided as self-contained, stand-alone executable files that do not require the presence of any specific software on the PC in order to run them. And then gently (or even forcibly!) steer the members towards PTE. regards, Peter

Gnim, PTE does not allow you to open a project made in a later version into an older version. The format of the project files is not "backwards compatible" - only "forwards compatible". regards, Peter

Dan, Sorry but you've gone beyond my knowledge there. regards, Peter

Dan, With the possibilities for 2D and 3D animation in PTE versions 5 and 6, having only 128MB (you did mean MB and not KB didn't you?) dedicated memory on the graphics card is a little "light". The minimum recommended is 256MB. regards, Peter

Eric, He's trying to use a 5-month expired licence with v6. PTE v6 came out in December, so the licence would already be 3-4 months expired. The licence key will not work with v6. If he still has the version of PTE that he bought when he got the licence, it will work with that version of PTE. regards, Peter

Eric, The VideoBuilder licence arrangement is indeed difficult to understand (it is, perhaps, the most complicated licence arrangement I've ever come across). The Video-Builder licence has a life of two years. If, after it has expired, you install a new version of PTE then VideoBuilder will operate in "trial mode" (= scrolling banner) with that new version of PTE. However, all your previously installed versions of PTE will continue to work with VideoBuilder with full function and no banner. For those versions of PTE that were installed prior to, or during, the two-year Video-Builder licence period, the Video-Builder licence operates as a life-time licence. The message to all users of Video-Builder is "Hang on to your old versions of PTE. With these old versions you have a life-time licence on both PTE Base and Video-Builder". regards, Peter

Gnimble, I'm afraid Yachtsman1 has unintentionally mis-lead you. You stated that your VideoBuilder key expired about five months ago. This means that it will work with any PTE release that you installed prior to its expiry. It will not work with any release that you have installed since it expired. If you still have your previous version of PTE installed on your PC, use that rather than PTE v6. regards, Peter

Dan, Given that everything did work and now it doesn't, you are right to suspect that something has "corrupted" your system somehow/somewhere. That something could be very nasty! I would suggest that you should, perhaps, seek professional help to verify that your system is free from infection by malicious code. regards, Peter

Dan, Should have said this earlier in the dialogue: If two versions of PTE give the same result it is unlikely to be a fault in the PTE code. regards, Peter

Dan, How large are your image files (expressed as pixels by pixels)? What graphics card do you have? How much on-board memory is there on the graphics card? regards, Peter

Dan, Trying to diagnose this kind of problem when we cannot see what you see is a real challenge. Please have patience as I ask some questions: What operating system are you using? Are your video card and sound card drivers up-to-date? Is the problem confined to just the one sequence? Do you have other sequences that work without these problems? Is the slide motion jerky if you remove all of the sound files from the sequence? regards, Peter

I edited Colin's post to correct the link. regards, Peter

Andrew, You're learning quickly. Well done! regards, Peter