JPD

Yes, you just have to copy and paste the slide and change in the copy the picture file. Note Hawk explain also a very interesting method to copy and past from one project to another, but I don't remember where it's explained I haven't all understand, but to do a pan with several pictures, you only have to do only one slide, For the others, you just have to copy and paste and change the name of he file. Look at the slides 17 to 27 of the template of the test I put there

Many thanks to everybody. There are 32 slides, the 3 first are the same with a title. What is the most difficult for the size of pictures is the zoom function wich need a big picture if we want to have always at least a 1280 x 960 screen definition. In this test the slides with the zoom at the beginning, used pictures with 1832 x 1374 size wich made 1280 x 960 with a zoom near 70%. It's the maximum limit to run on a 32mb graphic card, it's better if you use a smaller ratio (80%), so that you need only 1600 x 1200 pictures' size. Of course, for a same final zoom (with the same ratio between start and end) you will need more pictures and slides to do it, but the files will be generally smaller than the same zoom with only one file. The memory size seems not to be the only reason for which it can be not smooth. I am not absolutely sure, but as there are many calculations to resize, some PC which have enough memory for a slideshow can read it not smoothly because of the calculations for resizing. I try to see and understand this problem. Here is a link to the template of the test and there to the template of a zoom 22.7/1 which is smoother because using 0.8 zoom ratio per slide Sorry Al for the link, it's good now, thanks.

Thanks Igor, I didn't understood why it was neccessary to modify a post during the night, now I understand it wasn't necessary. Some explanations to Ken, on a french forum, some people say that the tests and tutorials (mine, but also those of TheDom, Lin Evans, Celou and many others) on Wnsoft forum have no interest and my test near ridiculous (I am soft in my translation) and I explained I don't agree at all, what I do, but also what do TheDom, Lin Evans, Celou and many others are usefull, it seems one here doesn't agree and it was what I explained in french ( I am always soft for the translation ) I'll stop my explanations and will continue to test PTE V5 even if some doesn't like my tests, and I hope others will also continue to work to help others people. To day I work on PZR effects with 1440 x 1050 pictures for graphic cards with 32 mb memory, it's a little difficult, but it seems run perfectly for the part I did. Even if it's possible to use bigger pictures with better graphic cards, it also interesting to have the effects for little PC, at least for one or 2 years. If people who make Slideshows have often good PC, it's not necessary the same for those who only see a slideshow and there are many people like that. This possibility show that PTE is a great product... try to do the same with others products !!!!

Impossible, it will be kill

I notice you wait everybody sleeping to kill my posts (2 o'clock in the night in France). Can't you wait other moderator was online ? Really curious as method. You do, and others are obliged to say OK even there are not

Is it possible on this forum to don't agree with the critizes of the moderator Michel without he kill the post ? Yes, Jean-Pierre, it is. I don't like the polemics of this kind, but all members can express their opinions freely here. Comment of Guido Russo "guru" I don't know how you can say yes when looking above, I suppose you want to say now it's possible. That's a good thing, thank you. comment of Jean-Pierre 'JPD"

Note from Michel I just deleted all your new post. The two moderators agree this edition and we will speak about all the problem with the admin1. Thanks for him!

Not sure, I'll try the next time to go in space with PTE, it must be possible :-) Indeed it's really a good product, and will be a very good product with the final version. In one or 2 years, probably the values I give will be obsoletes because of the improvement of the park of PC, but there will be always the same rules to be sure to run correctly on the maximum number of PC. Even with a Ferrari, if you ask it too much it will falls down, it's the same for our Ferrari which can also been drived as a 2 chevaux everywhere. Happy it's run fine on your old PC :-)

Probably, but later, I am working on a new test smoother and think to make a try with a highter definition.

I have made a test using some simples rules in order to run with 32 mb memory on the graphic card: - Never have more than 27 mb for 3 consecutives slides (Let be images of which the size don't overtake on average 1838 x 1378 (total of the images composing a slide). - don't have too quick effects (I used 6s for a zoom 100% to 70% on a 1832 x 1374 size's picture). In this test there are all the mains effects we need in a slide show, and more : - a zoom 100% to 16.6% - a pan 14000 x 1280 with some effets more and a little zoom at the end. - a pan/zoom (50%)/rotate (360°) on the same view always with 1280 pixels for the pictures' size. All the picture are at least 1280 x 960. It's possible to work perfectly with V5, even with these graphic cards. For the pan, it's easy to do as with V4 and cut in 5 or more the panoramic (15 slides in the test), it's the same for zoom, where I used 5 slides between 100% and 16.6%. If I had used only one slide I would have been obliged to have a very big picture (7688 x 5766 =169 mb for graphic card memory) and the size of the jpg file would have been 3.5 times bigger than the 5 files I used. With this method, the result is smoother on all PC, and it's really simple to do. You can download the test here. Note : I hadn't picture enough large to do this test, so I used Google Earth's photos. There are no pictures from me in this test. These rules would be the same for more memory, only the values would change.

Thedom, There are on this link about 60 Mb of files I download from your page. Tell me when you have download it.

Ce qui t'arrives est écoeurant, il est regrettable que les voyous du net ne soient pas sévèrement réprimandés. J'ai moi-même été victime d'une agression semblable, mais sur mon PC ou tout les fichiers concernant Nana Mouskouri (à propos de qui j'ai fait un site) ont été détruits, et là ce n'était sûrement pas par hasard (10 Go nettoyés). Tu peux reprendre les liens sur ma page. Bon courage.

I saw on another forum (Diaporamaforum) that the problem seems be solved after have clean the registry with ccleaner

May be a little, but not sure. If I had to redo to day "Versailles" exactly the same quality and effects it will run smoother than now, because between the day I did it and to day, I have learned many things. It was exactly what happen with Lin Evans's Puzzle, he didn't modify the result but did it with another way. Note, Jaguar are nice and so british :-)

Bonjour Philippe, Les rotations sont bien prises en compte, le problème, c'est qu'au départ tu n'as pas 1 mais 2 keypoints, et c'est ça qui fait que ça ne prend pas en compte les nouveaux paramètres (Rotate, mais aussi Pan et Zoom). Il suffit donc de détruire un des 2 Keypoints. Par précaution tu mets la position du 1er keypoint à 1000, ainsi tu vérifies qu'il y en a bien 2 Pour le reste il serait plus sage de mettre tous les objets de 19_T11 à 1_crane comme enfant direct de 20_T12 car cette cascade d'enfant-parent n'est pas justifiée et augmente considérablement l'imprécision de l'ensemble dans la mesure ou le calcul de la position du crane dépend de 7 rotations en cascade alors qu'une seule suffirait et de 16 zooms toujours en cascade alors qu'un seul aurait suffit. Par ailleurs si tu utilisais l'option "original" pour tous les objets (hors niveau 1) cela te faciliterais grandement le travail, avec une précision bien supérieure. PS il existe un forum français ou il est plus facile de traiter ce genre de problème : Diapositif, ça fait moins de travail, car l'anglais, c'est pas mon fort. There are two keypoints at time=0, so it's the reason of the problem. In this slideshow, there also have to much level parent-child (21) which complicate the calculations, but it's not the reason of the problem and seem to work fine even there are too much calculations to do.

Difficult to answer to your question without the PTE file. I always succeed to open a PTE file make with a precedent version with a new one version. Send us via yousendit your template, it will be probably possible to answer.

Patrick, It was near the same with V4, some people used too big pictures or doesn't put enough time between two transitions and there were also problems to read there Sliseshows. It would be the same with any tools, if you ask to a PC to do more than it can do, there will be problems. People, with the time found the good rules to work with V4 (I remember my slideshow Alsace, when I didn't know the rules), it's necessary to do the same with V5. It's just a little more difficult because of the graphic card, but there with something I agree with you, we have to think when design a slideshow to those who have less powerfull PC and have a 4 chevaux (bigger than a 2 chevaux). Vive les voitures françaises

My PC isn't a 2 chevaux (neither a Ferrari), and I was disapointed to be enable to see your two shows about Spain. I know that at least 2 of my shows (Versailles" and "Chantilly" don't run on all PC, it's the reason for which I did AVI. It's also the reason for which I am searching simples rules to do a slideshow with PZR effects which can run on a maximum of PC. The Lin Evans experience's with his Puzzle show us that a same Slideshow which doesn't work fine on many PC can work if using another method to do it. Even with a very strong PC it's possible to do a slideshow you couldn't see, it's why it's very important to find these rules. I just begin to have some ideas, and the experience I did with version 2 and 3 of "Fantaisies florales" show me it was always possible to make a slideshow smoother. Even with all explanations I read, I don't always understand why so many people download AVI, it's bigger and not so fine as EXE.

Thanks, Granot for your comment. This was only a test, since I have made my first real slideshow with V5 which use cubes, triangles, hexagons and so on. It's here

You can use this tool to translate the tutorials

It's a 960 x 540 format, I haven't try to do 1920 x 1080 and am not sure to have the good codec for that.

That's right

Lin, I think there is probably a difference between States and Europ, here many people have cheap or old PC. To day here many of the cheap PC which are sale haven't graphic memory, the graphic card use the memory of the computer, and of course it's very bad as result. Of course the storekeepers forget to explain this point. Many people doesn't know they must have a special memory with graphic card to have a good computer. But, even with what I just explain I am always surprised by the number of AVI's download, that's right it's not at all the same quality, today, than the exe.

Of course I said "the PTE file of the V2 is inside the exe"

Versailles use 1920 x 1080 size for pictures in order to test it was possible to have on all views a rectangle of 1920 x 1080 as parent with "Fit to screen" option and all the others child objects having the "original" option. This demonstrate it's possible to do with this method a slideshow at the future TVHD definition. As the pictures inside Versailles are very big (1920 x 1080), it's probably the reason for which there are some problems with this slideshow.