Barry Beckham

Just some feedback on this competition following the presentation night on Saturday 6th September. The competition was limited to clubs in the Metropolitan area of Brisbane, 19 possible clubs, but members from only about 8 entered. 42 entries were received and 34 were made with PTE, the remaining ones were Mp4 or DVD's, no PSG entries at all. From the calls I had over the months, I guess many of the remaining 8 entries were from Mac users. The fact that only 8 clubs entered from a possible 19 was a little disappointing. There is little doubt that unless a club has at least one or two AV enthusiasts in their midst to drive this sort of thing along, photographers do seem reluctant to have a go. This is despite a category we added called Min10 (10 images only) to encourage entries. I did make a short promo for the competition and a copy was sent to each club, so every effort was made to encourage entries. Having said all this, 42 was far more than last year and I expect next year will be greater still, it is growing year on year. One of the biggest failings was exe file size with one 4.20 sequence coming in at 700MB, another around the same length at 500MB and a number of others far bigger than they needed to be. No great problem in this situation, but next year we would want to use a file drop for entries and then it might cause some issues. It did cause some issues getting all the sequences onto a disk. We needed two disks, when they should have all been easily fitted on one. The winners stood out head and shoulders above the rest, no surprise there really as this gap can be seen quite in AV circles. We still have work to do to promote PTE, but Its the basics that are required. Many amateurs still have the view that dabbling in AV is just a step too far. Other information worth mentioning:- In the 42 sequences shown, no video was used at all and animation was also very limited and where it was used, it seemed to be used wisely. It also seemed clear from the audience reaction that had the results been judged from audience reaction on the night, the results would have been a lot different. Given that we make AV's to be seen by a wider audience, I wonder if that is the way to judge them in future.

Judy Thank you, I always try and some say I am very trying I am back in the UK on the 11th September for a visit, I was hoping members would all be queuing up to buy me a beer

Igor Can you arrange it so that PicturesToExe can make me a nice Espresso coffee while I am making my slide shows please and a digestive biscuit on the side may be nice

Igor Would that mean that the player would be included with the data only files as a part of the publish option? and/or Would the player be a download and install separately?

Our September Newsletter is available HERE

Really ?

You need to scan from the right side of the glass, the side with the emulsion on it, or the thickness of the glass slides may be causing the blur.

hidden surface removal I don't know what this means, can you expand on the details a little please.

That is impressive and if you knew you had to use it, presumably you would not fill the frame quite so much to allow for the cropping

Our August Newsletter has been published HERE

Peter Sometimes life can be too short to search too much for these unexplained errors. They just happen from time to time. I stitch hundreds of videos together, but sometime I get one that looks like an Mp4, acts like and Mp4, but refuses to play. Stitch it together again after a reboot and all is OK. Eric it's just a case of advancing with the times That's just a little rich coming from you mate. Is this the same Eric who called me a twerp for suggesting he try PTE 8

A corrupt image in some way? but I sort of expect your ahead of that idea and have already tried swapping the troublesome image for another already. Being a logical person as you are

I just want to be able to add a few seconds of silence into a ready made sound track, rather than having to use an external sound editor. Doesn't sound that difficult. If Igor can achieve that in a cost effective way, then great, if not, no worries. It's just a suggestion

Argonaut Fair enough, it's all a matter of degrees I guess.

Aginum Please don't mis-understand me. I am not saying that image stabilisation is no good or doesn't work. I use it myself and we can always find times when using a stable base isn't possible. A boat, a plane etc and in those circumstances we do the best we can and if I.S. comes to the rescue then I am all for it. The example of the landscape is impressive and if it can be used to shape up some of the video used by members, then I will eat humble pie. Argonaut I think it has to be seen as it would be in a slide show as you the author would present it. I agree a small example would not show the effects well enough. If you are prepared to create a link for all members I would like to see it, but if it's only me who is interested, perhaps I can PM you with a file drop link. I am far more impressed with something I see another photographer produce and what I see in demo's. Just got to that age, where I will believe it when I see it and use it myself. Been disappointed once too often I guess

Daniel I think Dave knows exactly what I was saying, but your right and I get tired of making a suggestion and then the whole thread gets hi-jacked by a million work around's. I wonder sometimes how Igor finds the time to sort out the good ideas from the crackpot.

Igor The new sound editing capabilities in PTE have been available for a while now and I for one have virtually given up on external sound editors. I find it easy and quick to use in PTE and also very flexible when you want to make a minor change and listen/watch the result immediately. However, there is one task I find myself needing a fair bit and that is to remove a section from within a sound file. Maybe shorten a period of silence by cutting it out completely. Is that something that you would ever consider including in the sound editing capabilities of PTE. NB. No work around suggestions please

Argonaut Lets have a look at a before and after of what you shot then, so you can prove your point and teach us sceptics along the way. I hope stabilization works, I really do, but I have a healthy dose of scepticism. Of course in any debate you can isolate the odd area where hand held was the only possibility, but generally that's not the case. Certainly not in the video I have seen used in PTE slide shows.

Barry, since you seem to favour DSLR cameras over bridge cameras and images over video I doubt if this applies to you? But I view the slide shows that are posted and I can have an opinion on video even if I don't use it as much as some. What I have shot recently has been mostly using a Canon G16 , but mostly with the Gorillapod. For video photographers I think they are worth a serious look. Below is a couple of shots of how effective the Gorillapod ican be Judy If we want people to view and like what we do, we have to put some effort into it and with video, 99% of the time, the big issue is camera movement. I have already said that often all you need is a beanbag, but the Gorillapod is a good example of a cheap alternative to a heavy tripod and will meet most of our needs for our videos and weighs next to nothing

Well, that's that then. Bridge is antiquated and Photoshop is a different creature for a different purpose. Sounds a bit like me really I don't think much is served by comparing LR and PS either, but the fact remains, many people are always searching for the holy grail. They use Photoshop and a LR user tells them they should be using LR and vice versa and they start to worry they are missing something. My article was a response to that, but what is better for one person will not be for another. Who cares what is used and why, it's not going to impact on the persons images they produce, one bit?

Tom and others Please forgive my direct comment, but put your camera on a tripod and get good steady shots that are worth viewing. Trying to stabilise a video afterwards is always going to be third rate. Whats that old saying....rubbish in, rubbish out

Ignoring specialist equipment like fluid heads, you can steady your video camera in much cheaper ways. A bean bag takes some beating and weighs nothing. I also have one of those Gorillapods and they are really good. Wrap the legs around a tree branch, street furniture or just allow them to free stand. No good for heavy SLR's though.

Doesn't video require a solid support, unless there is good reason not to. I am thinking here of hand held cameras in films where they convey action. Some of the video I have seen used here can only be described as awful. I think a video shot that is jumping about when it's one that needs to be still, is best left out of any presentation

Oh Judy please, I thought it was only men who got over protective of the software they use. Bridge is a part of Photoshop Just like the Catalogue is in Lightroom. There are no right and wrong answers or solutions here and I am not trying to drag you away from lightroom. In fact, if you have to ask then your not ready for Photoshop yet. In your case Lightroom is better. Lightroom -v- Photoshop Mary - Your not alone staying with other thumbnail/browsers and most people can understand we have to lower the learning curve for ourselves at times. I certainly do, but if you are a Photoshop user, Bridge is worth a look

I wrote this in response to a number of people who have Bridge installed on their computer, but rarely use it. Many believe it offers little, others are not sure what it can do. Some prefer to sidestep any extra learning by staying with a browser they are familiar with. No problem, but every little bit of information helps as they say. You can go directly to just that Bridge PDF here or You can go to our PDF page and see what else may be of interest.