Barry Beckham

If anyone is thinking of putting a line around images, I feel the best way to now do this is to create a png file that contains just the thin line and a transparent centre. Name this file frame.png or line.png and in the objects and animation screen you can overlay that onto your images. Once to click to add the line/frame to the first slide, highlight and copy the file name from the Objects section and you can quickly paste that onto the rest of your images by skipping from image to image in the objects and animation screen The benefits of doing this, is that if you decide the line is too bright, too thick, white when you want it black. All you have to do is adjust the original png in your image editor and save that over the original one in PTE. As the line/frame has already been applied to all the images, your changes will be instant and not set in stone. Easily changeable later if and when you think it appropriate. DaveG is right that is it FAR more preferable to see a smaller, but sharp image by ticking that box. A black border is not such a problem, but those using larger monitors will see the edge of your images. Dark edged images on a dark background don't look good when you can see that edge, hence the suggestion to add a thin line. You can change the background colour to white, but that will depend on the images you are using and then may require a black line. Its all about presentation, which is at the heart of AV

Thank you Henri I am gradually going through my slide shows and demos and bringing them all up to date. Where it is possible to do so I am creating a Mac version of my shows.

I am getting this issue too and assumed it was all part of the beta and will be ironed out later. When I do select my key again it does allow me to proceed and make a Mac version I have quite a few here if anyone wants to test one or two http://www.beckhamdigital.co.uk/freestuffdigslidesw4.htm

Dave This doesn't make sense because I have produced my Mac shows using PTE Beta 11 and you have downloaded a few of them. It doesn't seem to add up that only one will not play, but it playes for other Mac users OK, well at least 2 I have heard from. If there are any Mac users on or visiting the forum, I have a number of Mac slide shows that could do with a test. As far as I am aware they all play fine. http://www.beckhamdigital.co.uk/freestuffdigslidesw4.htm

Has anyone with a Mac computer tried this slide show yet? You can download it from the page below and its called Gateway to Australia http://www.beckhamdigital.co.uk/freestuffdigslidesw4.htm The first person to do so on my own site reports that all he gets is a white screen. It would be helpful to get that confirmed

Supposing I had a value as shown in the attached screen grab, I would like the ability to add that to every slide in the sequence. or If I add a frame over the top of my image, I would like to be able to apply that frame to all images in one go.

Now you have done it !!!

Eric Please don't misunderstand this, but what did your lens struggle to do in the conditions? Do you mean cope with high contrast or the HDR process.

I use the option to skip from one image to another in the objects and Animation screen quite a bit and the buttons at the top right are fine, but slow I would love a key stroke to take me forward and back from image to image while in the Objects and Animation screen I would also like the ability to copy any value in the O&A or even an image (Png etc) and paste it to every image in the sequence.

Dave I am not sure where that font came from, but it's called Eras Light ITC. When I do need a font for a particular job, I usually go to this web site http://www.downloadfreefonts.com/fontfiles/bfonts.htm I probably picked that one up there ages ago, but if you can't find it I can always send it to you, they are free after all. I suppose what we have been doing these past few months is just what you said, exploring and looking around, so I have ended up with a lot of images, but nothing much to do with them. Ron I think your perception of Australia is probably what most people think and in places your mental image is probably right, but we havn't ventured out into those places yet. Queensland is sub-tropical, so from what we have seen so far it is lush and green. The wet season is summertime when the heat makes the weather more volatile and the dry season is winter when the weather is more settled. I guess you have an advantage with a IDs Mark III round your neckbut then I guess you have an advantage with a IDs Mark III round your neck Shame on you, does the photographer get no credit for the images, or is it just the camera. I didn't send the camera out on it's own with a list of pictures to capture ! Not forgetting all that dicking around I do in Photoshop That's cheating really and ought to be banned Moreturn That is the third image that AV enthusiasts search for. When I see a nice one I help it along with.........hang on I need to whisper this .....................Photoshop

Here is a chance for a you to get your own back The sequence I have posted at the link below is really an excuse to show a few images of the place I now live. There really isn't much of a theme, it's just the local area that is so different from what I have been used to in the UK for almost 59 years. The sequence has been made at 1920*1200, but I hope it plays well on other monitor resolutions too. It's not a huge file, about 17mb http://www.beckhamdigital.co.uk/slideshow/Gateway_to_Australia.zip By the way, this is a first draft, I finished the show this afternoon and I usually play a new show a number of times before I show anyone. I feel that if you can watch your show every day for a week without wanting to make a change, you probably have it about right, but what the hell, here it is.

with all the "background noise" in these type of shows, it would be very difficult to "dick around" each picture with adobe whereas with a landscape scene you experts have a field day so IMHO Eric's shots are "true" I never said they weren'tt true pictures and I never even hinted that you should dick around with Photoshop. It was just a thought I have had for years that it would be NICE if the organisers of these events were tipped off to a few simple things that could make the event better for all. Is it the way I type or something or is it just me who thinks that every word I say seems to be misunderstood. Is my English really that bad?

Dve Now that looked to be an interesting holiday, the ice flows have lots of impact and here is a spooky thing. Sitting in my WMP is Conquest of Paradise by Vangellis, I was playing it the same day you posted your slide show. I have always loved that piece of music, but never had any images to go with it, you got there first. You ought to remind the PTE forum about your Purton Hulks AV. I bet there are a few who would appreciate seeing that

Eric I wasn't being critical of you or your technique, but it is a problem we all have to deal with and its a shame because these shows offer a great potential for images. I would certainly go to more of them if the same thing didn't occure at nearly every event. However, I can almost hear what the judge would say about the MG, I think most of us would say the same thing if we were judging. People naturally become the dominant part of any image even when they are out of focus. Caravans, people and H&S make a photographers life almost impossible. The best way around some events is to get there when the doors open and sometimes you get an hour or two before the crowds flock in, but with other events of course, the interesting stuff doesn't start when the doors open.

Nice pictures of the show, but your up against one of my pet hates here. Background clutter, nothing you can do about that of course. You know what always annoys me at these events is that as photographers we can almost never isolate our subjects. I know they have to perform for the public in a ring, but I often wonder how hard it would be at outdoor events to have a small space set aside against a nice backdrop. Certainly one minus cars, caravans, advertising hordings and those annoying people in their H&S vests. Civil war battles are a good example as they rather loose their appeal when a huge caravan site can be seen on the background. Car shows and events like this are the same. There is a terrirc car show in Enfield London each year in an enormous park with plenty of opportunity to have a photographers corner, but they never do. At air shows they almost always park the aircraft tail towards the public. Now, what is the point of that? Perhaps its me age and I am just a grump now I have reached 60 Traction engine rally's are the same, all those lovely old engines parked between caravans and tents. When you think that practically everyone coming through the gate at these events has a camera, you would think someone somewhere would think a little more about how and where the exibits are displayed.

The show I just watched wasn't a long one, perhaps you changed it, but I thought it was just about right. Punchy, in time with the music and all went well togther.

I have made a very small test to illustrate what I was trying to say, two images, one with the box ticked and one not ticked. One will be displayed as I created it, (quite small), the other will be allowed to enlarge and the quality issue is then obvious. The test is only about 800k. I have kept the images small so those running a 1024*768 monitor will see the quality change that those running a higher resolution will see. http://www.beckhamdi....co.uk/test.zip

Eric Sorry, I must have not explained myself correctly. I wasn't suggesting you increase the size of your slide show images at all and I fully understand the recourse thing. What I was trying to say was that without ticking that box, even you are not going to see your slide show right when you view it on your PC. The images will be enlarged beyond the size you created them. If your happy with that and all your work is for DVD, then I agree it wouldn't make much difference to the final output. But you posted your show for others to view and I thought you would be interested to know how it is seen by others. Your last comment seems to suggest you havn't taken my post in the spirit it was meant. I appologise if my choice of words has given you the wrong impression.

Eric Sorry about the YACHTSMAN spelling and forgetting to add the screen grab, but I see you found it anyway. We were just going out and I was rushing to complete the post and the wife was already in the car, well that's my excuse. The upshot is that I can now see your slide show at the size you created it and it looks a 100 times better, but your earlier post makes me want to ask another question. Why make a slide show at 1024*768 and then show it on a 1280*1024 laptop screen so that the images are enlarged as I described earlier. You should be seeing that black border around your slide show when you play it on a larger screen res and if you are not, how come you didn't spot the loss of quality when your images are stretched? . It wouldn''t be quite as much loss going from 1024 to 1280, but I can spot it straight away in my earlier shows

Yaughtsman I was only kidding about the lens, but the effect on your images for those using a higher resolution monitors is just the same, in fact a lot worse. I am not suggesting you change your resolution or do anything fundemental to your slide show. I was just tipping you off that if you tick one box in PTE you can avoid this issue. I and many others running a higher resolution than 1024*768 will then see your images just as you intended and I am sure you would want that. See the attached screen grab By ticking that box it will have no effect on your slide show at all at your end, but your images will then not be enlarged way past the resolution you created them. This is an issue that many will not know about unless they happen to run their slide show on a higher resolution monitor, then the poor quality of the images would surprise you. Easy to fix and I am just trying to give you a heads up. We sweat blood to produce our shows, so most of us would be devastated if our show looked awful on another monitor all for the sake of one tick.

Yaughtman Nice idea, but have you fallen into the Fixed Size of Slide (in Pixels) trap. I played your show on my Dell 27in screen running 1920*1200 and if those pictures are from a new lens, then take it back quick Don't panic, that was just my idea of fun. I don't think you have any problems with your lens, but I suspect that your show was made at 1024*768 or 1280*1024 and on my screen without that Fixed Size of Slide (in Pixels) box ticked the picture qualitiy isn't good. Your original images are stretched to fit larger screens and the quality of the images then become poor, which is a shame. If you tick that box, in the Project Options > Screen Tab those of us with larger screens see your show exactly as you created it and we can then appreciate the correct image quality.

I know this is not a terribly helpful post, but this isn't an issue that we see reported about PicturesToExe, so it is more likely to be some issue on your own computer. Is there any way you can try a different piece of music as has been suggested, perhaps something from your own CD collection just to illiminate that sound file. Then, if you have the ability to try your sequence in another PC, that would tell you quite a lot if it worked OK there, then you know the issue is on your PC. Or, if you can save your show as a backup in zip and you can send us a link for it we can take a look for you and see what we find. You can use mediafire or www.yousendit.com to send the link

Yaughtman This is the same thing I have experienced many times with video tutorials, one small change to the software and as Lin says, a re-write or re-record is far quicker than trying to squeeze things in. I don't think there is an answer to this, because of you wait for sound editing then some other addition will be on the horizon then.

Yaughtman A manual can indicate what button to press to do something, but no manuals help with flair and creativity. Most modern software can be used in many different ways. How an individual uses the software is difficult to put in any manual. Look at Photoshop, there books by the million and videos galore, but people still struggle badly. Then just as the manual you have decided to create, which has taken taken enormous time and preparation, the software moves on and you have to start all over again. Good luck with your request, but I will be amazed if you ever see what your looking for.

Dom Barry, I totally agree with you. And in this case, in my opinion, most of the time, the linear speed option will be the more appropriate. But we have to keep in mind that doing an animation during slide transition might be jerky on "old" computers. Well, that may be the case, but how on earth is the author supposed to know that unless he has another old computer or two to try his slide show on. This reminds me of the "fixed size of slide box" Unless you have other computers to test your show on, you won't know about potential problems. In my experience with the slide shows I have made, which I accept is quite different to what you like to do, tells me that most animation that is applied to slide shows is way over the top. If you ask your computer to apply too much animation or expect it to run too quickly it will be jerky. (even a modern one) My experience and personal opinion is that animation needs to be measured and delicate. The impact on the slide show is generally better, the computers it will be played on can cope better and it's easier on the eye and the slide show benefits. Reading further posts from Mike, it seems to indicate that I was off beam anyway and my comments may not be relavent to what he is trying to do. Animation is great and I have used it a few times, but authors may like to ask themselves two questions before they get involved in complex animations in their slide show. 1. What is this animation going to add to the appeal of my show? 2. Is the image(s) I am about to animate strong enough to be on screen for the length of time I need? Generally in my view, the answer to No1 is probably very little or nothing and the answer to No 2 is probably not. Of course there are always exceptions, but from where I sit getting these two questions right is like finding Hen's teeth. Movement is no substitute for interest and appeal.