Picsel

Except If I missed something but it seems that there is a remaining problem with the display of navigation bar depending on selected options As an example : selecting Air style for navigation bar, in the project options, the mini viewer, playing in full screen mode, displays the video style and not the Air style selected! However the EXE is correct. Best regards Daniel

By default : 16/9 and fit to slide Best regards Daniel

[quote name='nobeefstu' timestamp='1361575540' post='105945' By my observation ... your codec selection appears to be a AC3 Filter decoder (pass-thru for playback) by its displayed values. You may need to verify if your selected codec is actually a AC3 audio encoder.

Hi Igor 1) Creating AVI files,with customized encoding options, if I choose AC3 audio encoding, the data rate information associated with sampling frequency is missing so It is impossible to know how to use it. (I hope I havent miss a step!) 2) What does "0 channel" mean? Best regards Daniel PTE v754 / Laptop i7/Win7

No, it sounds to be useless as by default the first key point is always selected Daniel

Umberto, to be clear, an image has dimensions (definition in pixels x pixels) but cannot have a resolution (pixels/inch)without speaking about the dimensions of the support on which it is displayed. If your slide is 1920x1080 and the image on the slide is 400x400 it will keek this definition whatever the dimensions of the support on which it is displayed except if you are zooming in. So that is the reason why the dimensions are so important. Depending on the "support/display/screen" dimensions, the resolution will change (but the dimensions of the image remain the same) and you have to take care of that only for the distance between the "support/display/screen" and the "spectator" That is also the reason why some photographers would like to keep their work without any uneeded "manipulation" which is not under their control. Daniel

Umberto I understand your point. That is your way of working, i do not want to say it is right or it is wrong if it is convenient for you. But all AV makers who want to keep a control on the quality of their slideshow must know perfectly well the dimensions of their image. I think, that in your post, you are confusing image resolution (which also depends on display dimensions) and image dimensions ( or definition); I am speaking about image dimensions! Just another little comment about your FPS : as an European guy ,I am surprised to see that you are using american standards! Regards Daniel

Xaver, among other people who ask me to report this question there is a mathematician, member of our club and photographer, very funny indeed! As I said in my previous post, the model you are speakink about is perfect for me within the both options - fit to slide - cover slide but you should consider that zoom 100% does not mean the same thing in both cases and so has different "definitions".... let assume that - slide dimensions are W (width in pixels) and H (height in pixels) - image dimensions are w (width in pixels) and h (height in pixels) - z= real zoom value applied by PTE to the image then : in case of "fit to slide" if (w/W)<(h/H) then z= w/W displayed as "100%" if (h/H)<(w/W) then z= h/H displayed as "100%" in case of "cover slide" if (w/W)<(h/H) then z= h/H displayed as "100%" if (h/H)<(w/W) then z= w/W displayed as "100%" So you must admit as a mathematecian there is not only one definition but 4 different definitions for zoom=100% As I also said previously : a lot of people, mainly photographers do not want their photographies to be recalculated by PTE and want to keep the original size of their image. To day, as it is, they have to select size/positions in pixels then specify or click on size, and they have to do that image by image. The zoom value displayed in that case is wrong, it should be 100% for original size (that is just another definition of zoom = 100% for z=1 in such a particular case !) So to be clear enough, I just would like a third option which could ease the way to do that. All the "ingredients" already exist inside PTE. I disagree, the original mode refer to image dimensions, the screen resolution has nothing to see with that but obviously we must assume that image dimensions are compatible with the slide format which has been specified. Regards Daniel

Umberto, I cant follow you, it is very important for an AV maker to know exactly what are the sizes in pixels of their images. Daniel.

Umberto,BBdigital Umberto, ...not exactly but the consequences are the same. The problem was well explained by bbdigital in his last post. Some photographers in our club are complaining that they are enable to put their photography on a slide without PTE recalculation. And as I said and I agree with you if you want to make a slideshow including a lot of photographies that becomes painful with useless work. Obviously it is worst in case of animations. Xaver, perhaps I was not accurate enough! There were 3 modes - fit to slide - cover slide - original size I agree with you, PTE works perfectly well in case of fit and cover modes but that is not a convenient way for everybody! (I disagree with what you said about "definition". When I said PTE gives false zoom values, I was also refering to zoom value given when you use size/position in pixels function. You were speaking about zoom value in case of using only fit and cover modes that is not my point here...although even in fit and cover modes the quality of the slideshow is depending on the zoom ratio which is applied to the images as it changes the image definition! If whatever your original size image the information given by zoom value is 100% you may be lost!) As I try to explain above, some photographers would like to use their photography in original size without PTE recalculation and without loosing their time specifying image by image the dimensions of their original photography that PTE should be able to get via the exif for instance. Regards Daniel PS : IMO???

Original size mode is needed by photographers who want to keep the original image size. Several years ago there was a debat about original size mode. If I remember well, JP Dollangere was a very strong supporter of this option. He was right! Most of photographers, who make AV shows, want to keep their original image size and do not want to see their work be modified by software. As it is today, even in v750, PTE does not offer this possibility. If you want to keep original image size, image by image, you have to 1) select a mode (fit to slide or cover slide) 2) set the right size and position in size/ position in pixels. Doing that, the zoom values displayed by PTE are false and require specific calculation. That is taking too long time and is a source of errors in case of animations! It would be very interesting to have a third mode "original size" which will allow to keep the original size of their image at zoom= 100%. This option will also ease a lot the work for those who want to make accurate 3D animations. First example. Screen = 1920x1080 Image original size = 400x400 0&A Common / Mode 1) Fit to size => image size becomes 1080x1080 / O&A > PTE zoom value =100% (that is false, it should be 270= 1080/400) see att 1 : 2) Cover slide => image size becomes 1920x1920 cropped at 1920x1080 / O&A > PTE zoom value = 100% (that is false, it should be 480= 1920/400) see att 4 : The fact that zoom value displayed by PTE is false may introduce errors in the choice of image resolution by the AV maker Then, if I want to recover the original size of my image I have two choices : 1) select Fit to slide - then size/ position in pixels - set size 400x400 but in this case PTE Zoom value is no longer 100% but 37,037 although the real image ratio is 1/1 see attachment 2,3 att. 2 : att. 3 : 2) select Cover slide - then size/ position in pixels - set size 400x400 but in this case PTE Zoom value is no longer 100% although the real image ratio is still 1/1 see attachment 5,6 att 5 = att 6 = If you want to make accurate animation using original image size, then you have to modify all zoom value given by PTE depending on the selected mode. That is not logical at all and too much time consuming. Second example If you choose "fit to slide" mode for all images whose height > width, then whatever the image definition in pixels, PTE will give them the same number of pixels in height (slide height) and the same zoom value =100% which is totaly wrong and not logical at all. That is very confusing for those who wants to work keeping original image size. Daniel

I support this concept too! ....+ I would appreciate if it was possible to see the audio waveforms associated with the keypoints in order to be able to adjust the synchronization with precision. As it is today it is quite impossible to fine tune the synchronization between animation and audio although the audio informations are given with 1/1000s! Considering audio files associated to a slide as specific objects in the O&A window, by selecting one audio object, the waveform could be displayed (in place of the solid line) with keypoints for amplitude adjustments. Daniel

as a complementary information to ptwnc posts In Sony's cameras 1440x1080 HD video is a 16/9 video format, also known as HDV format which uses anamorphic rectangular pixels 1,33/1 (as explained by ptwnc) and uses interlaced frames 1920x1080 HD video is obviously a 16/9 video format which is based on AVCHD, uses squarred pixels 1/1 and can be either interlaced or progressive depending on available options. Now that Igor bought a Sony Camera I hope that, very soon, PTE will be able to support AVCHD video clips without reencoding it! AVCHD is used by Sony, Panasonic ,...and others, that is a common standard for video HD based on H264 standard (equivalent to mpeg4 part 10) Daniel

Hi Ray Thanks for the advice but I can guess that inside PTE software code there is a command line which starts either x264vfw.dll in c/program files (x86) either in c/programs(x64), if I am right, that is not very difficult For PTE developers to give the right answer. I know, I can install both, x264, 32 and 64bits versions and play with that but it is not very logical. As an example, Avery Lee recommend to use Virtualdub 32bits even if the 64bits is available in order to avoid a compatibility problem with third parties plugins or codecs which remained in 32bits so I would like to know If such a recommendation can be given for using x264 with PTE. Best regards Daniel

Hi Dave creating an AVI video file you can choose your encoder with the "custom video and audio codecs" option. With another PC on which my softwares were in 32 bits including x264 encoder, that gaves me very good results. This is a new and very interesting feature provided by Igor with v75x, which is very easy to use and can gives better results than the "by default" ASP encoder (which is even not so bad). So before installing new softwares on my Win7 Laptop I would like to know what is the better choice to do in order to avoid compatibility problems between softwares working on 32 or 64bits; The fact that PTE is working on 32 bits could lead to use a 32 bits version for x264 encoder. I want to be sure. If there were no limitations, I would prefer to use a 64bits version which should encode faster than the 32bits one. Daniel

OK Xaver, I got your point but that sounds to be a specific use. As I said in my post if the music runs independently from the slides it becomes very difficult to know where you are (as you said, it is unpredictable). I know, by experience in our club, there were a lot of mistakes which have been made using by error the "not synchronized mode" so we have to take care of that. Unfortunately, you are right I could not understand your discussion. Here, in the south of France, I have several good friends who are germans but they learn to speak french, that eases me a lot! Best regards Daniel

With Windows 7 or 8 which are 64bits systems and PTE which remains today in 32 bits architecture I would like to know if it is better to use x264vfw encoder in 32 or 64bits versions for creating h264 videos. Is there some limitations given by PTE or not?

Hi Xaver, I do not understand your point when you said "This is not good enough for shows with manual control" As it is today in v751 if you start a comment on a slide and make a pause, the slideshow and the sound stop simultaneously and if you decide to run a step forward, both audio and slideshow will start simultaneously too,etc...sounds and slides remain perfectly synchronized at any time, which is exactly what I want with a manual control of my AV show. As far as I know, in the previous "asynchronous mode" with the option "Synchronize soundtrack and slides" unticked then if you made a pause, the slideshow stopped but the audio went on and you lost the control of your slideshow that was very annoying and disturbing for a lot of av makers. Happily that is no longer the case. Daniel

Da Campos, On my side (PC/Win7 v751) when I click on "edit file" on the object selected either in the slide list either on the Timeline, it opens Photoshop for the pictures and Premiere for the videos without any problem. The video does not open directly inside Premiere, but this is the normal way of working for Premiere. Opening Premiere you must, at first, specified the options of your video project and then Premiere opens its main window and then, you must select your video inside its media browser, I always work like that with Premiere since years, am I wrong?. For audio file there is no "edit file" command on the right click with objects on the Timeline but it works fine with objects in the slide list. Could be improved but there is no real inconveniences. Best regards Daniel

v750-v751 There is a big difference between the "Size of EXE file" indication in the status bar and the real value In the example here attached : Indication of Size of EXE file is : 272Mo Real size of created EXE file is 54,4 Mo? I have noticed such a big difference on others projects too.

Thank you for taking into account my suggestions and for your proposal, as you know, up to now, I was also very active member in the PTE section of 1colibri.com forum, another french forum whose aim is to help AV show makers, specially beginners, and give them not only multilanguages videos tutos, but also tools and guidelines for building up and hosting their own Internet sites dedicated to AV and photography. Sorry but it is difficult for me to share my time between several fora. In any case, I consider and let him know that Charlie (Aginum) 's book is of outstanding quality, and if I can help him, in any way, that will be with pleasure. Daniel

Since the new v750bx, there are some little inconsistencies with the french language 1) Timeline Timeline is translated as "Synchronisation" on the button of the right bottom toolbar and as "Ligne de temps" inside Parameters/Preferences. It would be better to keep "Ligne de temps" everywhere. However, in order to be coherent with other AV makers wordings, "Timeline" should have been translated as "Table de montage" (even if it is not exactly the case today, as it is not yet possible to drag and drop objects on the "Timeline") But in this case "Slide list" should have been translated as "Liste des vues" 2) Publish Publish is translated as "Publier" on the toolbars buttons except in the main menu where it remains "Créer" It would be better to keep "Publier" everywhere. Daniel

I full agree with Andreas, I am used to buid such wide panoramics (not so wide the Andreas' one!). From my point of view, PTE has three big advantages over some competitors : -It is very easy to build them up, it requires only few seconds ! -You can buid panoramics with very big images without any problem while some professional creative suite are even not able to open them! -Very smooth playing. Daniel

Sorry Peter that is not a complaint but a technical fact ! I personnally use PTE mainly for photos/slideshow I have never asked for videos clips before Igor offers this possibility with v7.0. Neither I asked for Youtube and Vimeo support ! But knowing PTE for its high quality in photos processing I was very surprised that HD video clips were not supported. That is a problem of commercial target and priority for Igor. But you cannot say PTE is supporting H264 without mentionning the technical restrictions. Having say that I recognises that a lot of improvement have already been achieved by Igor team. Wait and see... Daniel

Peter, nobeefstu please read the posts of Fred, make the expereince with his H264 video file and you will understand the reasons! There are several video profiles and levels which are specified by H264(MPEG4-AVC)standard, PTE supports some of them but not all of them in particular it does not support High Profile Level 4,0/4,1 commonly produced nowadays (and since 4 or 5 years) by most of digital cameras and camcorders, some 3rd generation of wireless phones and most of european HDTV broadcasters. I would be very happy if I could say that PTE is supporting H264 but unfortunately it is not yet the case. Daniel