fh1805

Alan, You may think that PTE v4.43 is long gone - but a copy of it still exists somewhere on your computer. And the file association for the .pte file is with the v4.43 copy of the PTE software rather than the v5.6 copy. You need to change the file associations for the .pte file. regards, Peter

Paul, I'm not aware that PTE currently supports "surround sound". But I did see a post from Igor a couple of weeks ago saying that he was re-writing the sound engine. Perhaps surround sound will be part of that re-write. regards, Peter

Barry, Like you, I don't think the JPEG compression makes any visibly perceived difference. However, just to clarify one point: when you say "... on screen...", do you mean on your computer monitor or when projected onto a screen. If the latter then, typically, how large is the screen onto which you project? regards, Peter

Hi TheDom, That's a magnificent sequence! But I'm a traditionalist and I think I would have preferred to see more (onscreen time) of the original macro image and less of the animation and effects. Having said that, I really enjoyed watching the show and marvelling at your skills as both a photographer and as an AV worker. Congratulations! regards, Peter

Hi Andrew, I've watched your sequence several times and am very impressed. The photography is excellent and the presentation style is sympathetic to the subject matter. I have just one concern with the show. Quite early on you have a slide which you then repeat in an out-of-focus style and then superimpose two other images on it. Later in the show you use the same technique. My concern is with the first occurence. As you fade the main image from the sharp copy to the blurred copy I felt as though my eyesight was failing. You don't need to show the blurred slide on its own. Just go straight from the sharply focussed main image to the "two up on the blurred image" - it will be less trying on the viewers eyes. You got it right when you used it the second time around. Final point on the music: what was it? I know my classical repertoire pretty well but this one is eluding me - even though I know I have heard it before. By a strange coincidence, I'm part way through my own project to build a sequence about Beamish and have had a great deal of inspiration from your show. Thanks for a wonderful sequence! regards, Peter

Larry, I've no disagreement with what you say but... Please read Andrew's original post. He wants advice in respect of projecting his sequence at his local camera club. If I have understood Andrew's post correctly, the club appears to offer either computer/projector playback or DVD-Player/projector playback. I stand by my assertion that the computer/projector playback of an EXE file (with his sequence on a USB memory stick) will present his sequence to best advantage. The DVD-Player/Projector combo is, for Andrew, a route best avoided. I'm simply trying to keep my advice focussed on my perception of Andrew's needs. Some of the above posts have wandered away from that. regards, Peter

Limey, I played it back both ways. It looked better on the computer than on TV. And it was very soft and fuzzy on both compared to the crispness of the exe on the computer. I have no requirement to go down the DVD route and, based on my limited experience, no inclination to do so, either. regards, Peter

Do the maths. The aspect ratio of your images is different from that of your monitor. You will never achieve a perfect "every part of the image visible with no black bands" fit. You are trying to achieve the impossible. 1680/1050 = 1.6; 3072/2304 = 1.333 QED regards, Peter

Ken, I have said, in the past, that I have experimented with burning to DVD using Video-Builder, and I don't like the results. In my opinion, when a sequence that has not been built specifically for DVD is "downsized" to fit the PAL or NTSC resolutions, it is visibly and unacceptably degraded. Of the three options that are open to Andrew for creating a sequence for "projection" at his camera club, the worst quality will come from burning a DVD - fact! The best quality will come from producing an EXE file - fact! And the HD Video file will be somewhere between the two; but probably nearer to the EXE quality than to the DVD-Video quality - fact! I have tried all three create modes and those are my findings using my sequences and my computer. And the experience of others, as related in posts elsewhere on this forum, has reinforced that view in my mind. True, I do not produce DVDs or HD Videos as part of my normal workflow and so am speaking from limited personal experience. But I stand by my opinions. regards, Peter

Hi Andrew, I share Yachtsman1's concern about your club's approach to using the hardware. If possible, get your club to accept your sequence as an EXE file on a USB memory stick. That way, your images will be seen at their best. Next best quality comes from creating as a "HD Video for PC or Mac". The worst quality comes from creating as a "DVD-Video disc". Get confirmation of the native resolution of your club's projector (it sounds as though it may well be 1400x1050). And then build your sequence to that size. You are quite right when you surmise that use of backgrounds, frames etc. is a personal choice. It is! Yachtsman1 and I know each other quite well and we have learned to agree to disagree on this point. I think that careful use of appropriate backgrounds and frames can add to the visual appeal of a sequence. Whatever you do: make it your sequence, done your way, sized to the projector's resolution and run as an EXE. Good luck with your endeavours. regards, Peter

Hi Andrew, I agree with DaveG about the book effect. I think you need to use "Curling of Page - Rolling up from right" to get the proper effect. I would also start with a black slide and a couple of seconds of silence. This gives time for the audience to settle down before the first image appears. You certainly have some good images of Beamish. If all 200 are of a similar quality I can understand your concerns about getting carried away. Whatever length of sequence you end up with, I foresee one potential problem. All the transitions are going to be the same type in order to give the picture-book feel that you want to achieve. So I think that you will need to experiment with different durations of transitions and with different durations of the images as well, in order to inject some variation into the pace of the sequence. Any sequence that uses the same transition type at the same duration throughout the show runs a very real risk of coming across as boring in its predictability. One final thought on the music: I'm not sure that a piece with the feel of American country music is the best choice for this subject matter. Having said all of that, I have to agree with DaveG: you seem to be heading in the right general direction! Keep up the good work! regards, Peter

Nothing could be further from the truth! Since January 2007 I have fulfilled 42 bookings. The break-down is as follows: 8 sessions of Judging at camera clubs, 9 "lectures" at camera clubs (of which 4 were demonstration nights and not AV viewing nights) and 25 to non-camera-club bodies. My sequences are built for a general audience - but, I hope, of a quality that will satisfy a Camera Club or AV Group. I'm pleased you have such vivid memories and that your experience that night has had such a beneficial outcome. The programme that night was "Heritage of the North" which was a converted Slide-tape sequence that ran for around 45 minutes. But in reality it was simply twelve short sequences that ran one after the other. So the average duration of the sequences was 3m 45s. Indeed, it would! But this thread was started by Andrew (Trailertrash), who has openly admitted elsewhere on the forum that he is inexperienced in digital AV. I felt it was necessary to make it clear that such long sequences as yours should not be seen as the "norm". In fact they are undesirably long for a beginner. Andrew needs to develop his skills by building short duration sequences. That way he will learn to "tell his story" in a crisp, punchy manner. When he has mastered the techniques of digital AV on the shorter sequences, he will then be in a position to tackle something longer. regards, Peter

Eric, My personal reaction to those details is that all your sequences seem to me to be on the long side. For comparison: I have 30 sequences that I currently offer (in various combinations) to local audiences - 15 of these are under 5 minutes duration, 12 are in the range 5-10 minutes duration and 3 are in the range 10-16 minutes. In my opinion, based upon experience gained from attending many AV days, festivals and competitions in northern England over the last three-four years, the longer the AV sequence duration, the harder it is to maintain audience interest. regards, Peter

That's what we're here for, Andrew! regards, Peter

John, That's a very wise attitude. However, if you want to explore your way into the uninstall - with no committment to actually do any - then proceed along these lines: - Start - All programs - Windows Update (this is the Vista route into the software; for XP it might be under Accessories...System Tools) This will give you the Windows Update window. You can then View update history and at the top of that window it tells you to go to Installed Updates to uninstall an update. If you want to commit to doing an uninstall just study the instructions - and make sure that you have a full image backup before proceeding. regards, Peter

John, I suspect your best bet will be to wait and hope that Brian Kelly (Conflow) spots this thread and can offer some of his words of wisdom. Just one thought from me, have you tried uninstalling that particular update and then letting it back on next time around? It is just possible that something is screwed up in the Registry and the uninstall might just clear whatever it is that is screwed. And a final thought: you have checked the install history and confirmed that the update really has been applied successfully in the past, haven't you? regards, Peter P.S. If the only problem is the aggravation of the repeated download and install it might be prudent to follow the traditional advice: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" Trying to solve your problem could make matters worse. Tread carefully!

Andrew, There is no right or wrong way to build a sequence; nor is there a good or bad way to do it. Each of us has our own way of working. I work in many different ways: sometimes it's images first, sometimes music first and sometimes voice-over first - whichever seems most natural for that particular idea. For a beginner such as yourself, I would suggest there are two basic methods: - shoot the images then find the music - be inspired by some music and go and shoot the images I would also suggest that you spend plenty of time just "playing around" with the order of the images in PTE without doing any work on them in Photoshop. Try and get a really good feel for the flow of the images that you want to achieve. Then find some suitable music and re-work the order and flow of the images to integrate better with the flow of the music. Then, when you feel that really do have this particular slide show "nailed", turn to Photoshop and do your image enhancement. If you turn to Photoshop too soon in the workflow you will end up doing unnecessary work on images which you subsequently reject. Hope this helps - and good luck with your project. regards, Peter

I've just downloaded and read your document. Much of its content is already covered by a couple of FAQs in the Tutorials and Articles section of the forum. Did you look at the FAQs when you were struggling to get things to happen? regards, Peter

Eric, I'm not aware of any easy way to do it. Are the animations restricted to pans, zooms and rotates of the main images - or do you have independent objects participating in the animations (for example PNG files)? If all your animations are on main images (with no independent objects) then you could try doing a direct edit of the pte project file in Notepad - if you feel confident enough to tackle that. If you do decide to give this a try, for goodness sake take a copy of the .pte file and work on that copy. Don't mess around with the original and destroy everything. Open the copy pte file in Notepad and spend some time familiarising yourself with the lines of code associated with a static image and the lines of code associated with an animated image until you feel sure that you understand the differences. Then carefully set about "unanimating" an image - just one to begin with. Save this modified file and check your success by opening the modified pte file in PTE. If things are looking good, do a few more changes; saving frequently under a new name and checking in PTE after each save. Good luck! regards, Peter

Try Project Options...Main...Wait for a keypress or mouse click to show next slide regards, Peter

Xaver, Thanks for that snippet of info. I didn't know that! (Proof once more, that we can learn something new every day) So you see, Ed, there's no need to feel silly. You're not alone in being thick as two short planks - in fact you're in very select company!!! regards, Peter

Sorry Dave, I've no idea. I don't use Video-Builder myself. I'm sure someone else will contribute, though. regards, Peter

Just to add to DaveG's reply: yes, you can also cut, copy and paste using Ctrl+X, +C and +V just as in any Windows application. But the "digital light-box" is by far the best way of shuffling the images around. regards, Peter

As Gérard has stated above, I am a member of the Diapositif forum. This is quite a challenge for me as I am far from being fluent in the French language. The contrast in style and content of the two forums (PTE and Diapositif) is very marked. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the PTE forum seems to concentrate on the technicalities of the product - and especially the real or perceived bugs in the product. It is seen by its members as a channel back to Igor and the WnSoft team. Diapositif seems to concentrate far more on the end product - the AV sequences produced by the members. Both forums have their core of regular contributors who, in both cases, are a very friendly and helpful bunch. When I first joined Diapositif, even though I was struggling to understand the French language, I found it easy to decide which section to post into because the forum was well-structured. After following the above discussion, I am now of the opinion that the PTE Forum would benefit from a greater number of sections; each one specifically targetted to a particular aspect of the membership's interest. regards, Peter P.S. For Gérard: The only reason I have not joined your DiaporamaForum is that I just could not manage to participate in two French language forums (fora?) at the same time. Participating in one is, for the moment, enough of a challenge to my linguistic inabilities!

Ed, It is my understanding that your current crop of "unsaved" edits in the O&A window do not get "committed" to your project file until you do a Close in the O&A window and then save the project file. It will not be as simple as adding "Save As" as an option within the O&A window. Nonetheless, it would be a nice extra option for those of us who sometimes do heavy edits in O&A. regards, Peter