Barry Beckham

Done. All fine

Seems to be better, 3s from first open then less than 2

Is this what you're looking for Example Backup in Zip

It took about 4 seconds to open first time, quicker after that

I just did the seconds count and it seemed to be 4 seconds for SSC and 3 for the forum. I don't want to make it out as a serious problem, it isn't, just something I noticed

It’s not just today I am talking about, I make allowance for the odd times when internet gremlins get in, but I have noticed it for a week or more. Perhaps it’s the data that has to travel further to Australia, then find me in such a huge place

In the past I was always a bit envious of how fast the Wnsoft forum was compared to mine. (which is the same software) Lately I can click and wait a few seconds for the main wnsoft forum page to show and mine is much quicker. That doesn't seem right seeing as mine is a budget webspace. Is it it just me or has anyone else noticed a slow down.

Pdf HERE

Eric For your egg project. Have you tried auto Align in Photoshop? That is brilliant for aligning two or more images and sounds like it may help you. Create all the images you want to align into a layered stack. Select them all and choose Edit > Auto Align Layers and then OK. Then you crop the images to remove transparent areas caused by the align command. Then go to File > Export > Layers to Files and your done

I have to admit here that I am not a fan of the grid in PTE and never use it. Like Eric Davies I would much prefer guides like Photoshop. I think asking for Photoshop's Smart Guides (different to normal guides) is probably an ask too far, but they would be superb also.

When I first was introduced to YouTube I created a few channels, but now I realise that wasn't such a good idea and I would rather stay with just one. So, I have spent the past few days amalgamating my channels together. It means that some videos, demos, tutorials and slide shows may be new to you. The address for my current YouTube Channel and the one I will use into the future is https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSRlEl6raTzjc6ju4VvucJA/videos Why not put the address in your favourites so you can always find it easy and/or subscribe so that you will receive notification when I upload new content

It's a very subtle difference and I am not sure I would have seen it with a 2s dissolve if I wasn't specifically looking for it. It seems a little more noticeable at 0.5s

It comes out much the same and confirms what I said above. There is no real advantage to reduce image size when making a slide show.....IF........ your publish option is an Mp4 only

Your welcome, it’s not such a hard technique when you come to do it.

Piscal - I used the same settings for all 3 tests Igor - I sort of expected the same file size between images of the same pixel value 6000*4000 saved at different compression, because of the reasons you said above. That the encoders use the source images. What I have trouble with is smaller images coming out larger. I did another test just now with 16 high resolution images into PTE, where the images are all up in the 6000px on the long side. Together the 16 images add up to about 190MB. I left a standard 2s fade 7s duration and output them as HD videos, This time I selected 1920*1080 as per screen grab. File size as Mp4 46.655MB I then dragged 16 lower resolution images into PTE, where the images were 2560*1706. Together they add up to about 8MB. I left a standard 2s fade 7s duration and output them as HD videos the same as the other. The file size as Mp4 45.898MB I think I can see the problem with my logic after reading your reply and looking at my second test. I think that I have been conditioned over the years with regard to file sizes with executable files and I expected to see the same with a video, but of course if the video is being converted to 1920*1080. It doesn't matter what size the images started off at. In all my examples the starting images were always greater than 1920*1080 and that was the deciding factor. They will always come out pretty close . This all came about after I started thinking about the future and Mp4 videos. If the publish option from PTE is to be solely an MP4, there really is no need to resize images for the creation process as long as your own PC can cope what your creating

I used the default settings in the Publish HD video just changing to 60p

I was thinking today that in the future, if Mp4 videos take over as the norm for AV and presentations, which they may well do. What is the implications between images of different sizes. So, I did a quick and dirty test. 6 * 3:2AR images 6000*4000pxs saved as Jpg Level 12 and made into a 60p Mp4 = 18.177MB 6 * 3:2AR images 6000*4000pxs saved as Jpg Level 6 and made into a 60p Mp4 = 18.177MB 6 * 3:2AR images 2560*1706pxs saved as Jpg Level 6 and made into a 60p Mp4 = 19.552MB i Came back to this test on a bright new morning and got the same results. I can see how a HD video of various Jpg compressions (image sizes the same) will be evened out during the video creation process, but why are those 6 images, which are physically smaller than the others end up 1.4MB larger when made into a video, that makes no sense to me. I took those 6 images at 2560*1706 and reduced them still further to 1920*1280 and the 60p HD video then came out at 17.748MB  Is anyone able to help me out with the thinking on this?

Newsletter Here with Audio Visual Video

To be honest I am not sure what I want. I was doing a talk last night at the camera club and had some notes on my ipad so I had a memory jogger when the lights went out. I thought of the issue and posted it while it was in my mind.

Is it feasible and/or reasonable to request the ability to to control A PTE presentation from a smart phone or mobile device?

Lin Sorry to hear that, but never say never. You have from now to PTE 10 launch to fight back. best wishes

Igor thank you, but It’s what most of your customers are doing KIS

Well. Thank you for those kind words and all I can think of saying in response is that Photography is and Art and those who can't see that is missing an awful lot. Here we are on an enthusiasts forum on ways to present that art, so perhaps that is accepted more here then elsewhere. There is no better way than Audio Visual and PicturesToExe to present modern digital images in my view

Fair enough

https://www.slideshowclub.com/files/file/518-the-directors-cut/