Fixed size of slide. Discussion

[jt49]

(I extracted this post from the topic "Grouping of options intended for EXE files"

The post is a reply to the post here

Igor Kokarev)

_______________________

... "Fixed size of screen" is removed from future version ...

I would regard this as a loss! In most cases I prepare my shows for a precise screen size, e.g. 1920x1080 or 1920x1200. In some cases they might be run at 2560 x 1440. Then, "Fixed size of slide" will prevent upscaling.

Regards,

jt

[davegee]

I am also concerned about prevention of Upscaling beyond the Virtual Size of a Slide.

[jt49]

I also see the aspect of compatibility. It has always be an advantage of PTE being upwards compatible. I often open older projects with new versions of PTE in order to use new features. If we will seen uncontrolled upscaling, compatibility will be lost.

Regards,

jt

[Igor]

Dave,

jt,

Please try to understand, the fixed size of a slide in a fullscreen mode is really bad option. Earlier or late, it would lead to wrong results. Ultra HD displays (4K) are coming and visual size of a slide would be very small on such displays.

If you want to avoid upscaling on your particular display, prepare images according screen resolution of your display. 1920x1080 images for a display 1920x1080.

Think about people who will run your EXE file on displays with different screen resolutions.

I think it's better to add high quality images (at least 1920x1080). Down-sampling works enough good in PicturesToExe. You can even enable "Unsharp mask" for your project. I compared result with Photoshop - and PicturesToExe gives very good picture.

In possible future player of PicturesToExe's slideshows we can add various options how to display a slide (fullscreen, windowed, fixed size), but fixed size is dangerous for EXE output where users can't change it.

[davegee]

Igor,

I always use 1920x1080 (or 1200).

Fixed Size at that resolution will play on any monitor UP TO 1920x1080. But it will not upscale any further.

I don't want my images upsized to 2560x1440 on one of the newer, larger monitors which are already available.

DG

[Guest Yachtsman1]

If you want to avoid upscaling on your particular display, prepare images according screen resolution of your display. 1920x1080 images for a display 1920x1080.

Igor

I always use 1920x1080 slide size, however if I then want a deep zoom of a particular slide, the image quality will deteriorate, In that instance I use a larger size of slide, so what will happen if I use my usual method.

Eric

Yachtsman1.

[Igor]

I'm in a difficult situation. Users ask me make PTE more simple and intuitive in use. On other hand, I can't remove some old and strange options which may confuse users. How I can improve PTE in this situation?

[jt49]

... but fixed size is dangerous for EXE output where users can't change it.

Here I do not see any danger at all, as there is no need to change an exe file. Exe files are temporary outputs of AV projects and not made for eternity. I normally develop my projects with images at full size, and of course I keep these original projects. In oder to export exe presentations perhaps at various resolutions, I create copies of my original projects just including images at reduced sizes. Thus, my exe presentations are optimized with respect to performance and file size, and they should never be upscaled. Maybe, at a later point of time, I may want to have a version of higher resolution. Then I can create it from my original project. It will run at the desired higher resolution, but again, it should not be upscaled either.

If PTE will loose the said feature for exe presentations, there will be the danger that a show that has been optimized for a particular environment will loose its quality if it is used in some other place. And again: PTE will loose compatibility.

Best regards

jt

[Lin Evans]

We need to keep in mind that a number of newer displays being sold are rapidly increasing in resolution. Already there are displays such as the Dell UP2414Q which is only a 24" display, but at 3840x2160 pixel resolution. Dell also just previewed the UltraSharp 27 Ultra HD 5K display (14 mp) with a resolution of 5120 x 2880 which is expected to release in Q4 this year. The 4K+ revolution is coming quicker than expected. Just how long it will take to filter to sufficient number or PTE users is unknown, but PTE must be ready to respond quickly which will further solidify its position at the head of the pack!

My suggestion would be to make the "defaults" for PTE simple and easy for the unsophisticated user, but under the hood (bonnet for our UK folks) keep the complexity we have available as option choices for those who understand how to use them?

Best regards,

Lin

[Igor]

Please look on this illustration.

It illustrates the problem of displaying shows with "Fixed size of slide" option on UltraHD (4K) displays:

[jt49]

I'm in a difficult situation. Users ask me make PTE more simple and intuitive in use. On other hand, I can't remove some old and strange options which may confuse users. How I can improve PTE in this situation?

In my opinion, we should not call it a strange option. Virtual size of slide in combination with the size/position tool, this may be regarded as complicated stuff, and it causes problems to me if I try to explain it to new users. So I normally present a rough idea, and then recommend to forget about it for the first period of time.

But having an option to limit the output size seems to me a quite natural one. Think of 4K (although it will take time until Photo/AV clubs will a able to afford appropriate projectors). People will have lots of images which will be a little bit too small to cover 4K (e.g. most of my images shot with my Canon 400D). So it would be fine to have the option for limiting the output size.

OK. "Fixed size of slide" sounds odd. That's true, but not worse than "Virtual size of slide". You may give this feature another name (e.g. "Maximum display size", or "Don't display at larger size ...", or ...). Making the use of PTE more intuitive should not result in killing useful functionality.

Best regards,

jt

[Igor]

Probably other users will ask to keep this option. Let's wait for the beta-testing.

[Lin Evans]

Hi Igor,

This display makes the problem quite evident. What we are faced with is trying to decide how to proceed essentially with defaults. If it would not be too terribly difficult, perhaps you could use the new method as a default but preserve the existing ability to prevent upscaling beyond the show's creator as an option? That way users like David or JT could have the option to prevent their shows from being upscaled and thus loose quality on higher resolution displays while those who prepare their shows with sufficient image sizes to take advantage of the newer high resolution displays would be assured of the full resolution being available to those who watch on high resolution devices?

Best regards,

Lin

[davegee]

Igor,

Upscaling just to fill the screen at the possible expense of quality is NOT desirable.

Not so long ago people were making 1024x768 shows which were only filling part of a 1920x1080 screen. The advice to them was never to make upscaling possible - the advice was to use bigger images.

If this change is put in place then we all need to consider making our standard (EXE) resolution 3840x2160 or bigger.

DG

[tom95521]

It seems some users would rather have a black border on their slideshows than their slideshows upscaled to the device resolution. Maybe it has to do with aspect ratio or loss of sharpness when upscaled. I select the aspect ratio and PTE resizes to fit the screen.

Thanks,

Tom

[Guest Yachtsman1]

IMO this is not a suggestion to immediately increase sales, the majority of people aren't going to be rushing out to buy 4K equipment. The average life of a modern TV set or monitor is at least 7 years, I've had my TV 5 years & my monitor 3 years, so I wouldn't be jumping in just because they are there, & I class myself as Mr Average. If you look back at the technical innovations in PTE, they are quite dramatic, but from the research I've done, the hits on the WNsoft site are on a downward spiral & the lowest they have been for some time.

User friendliness is the way to go.

Yachtsman1.

[Igor]

Well, I'll return this option.

[Barry Beckham]

Igor

You're on a hiding to nothing here. Meaning, your never going to please all of the people all of the time. Just go with what you feel is right and in the words of a famous film.

We may need Bigger images No problem with that, our PC's and PTE can handle them.

It's progress.

[jt49]

.... We may need Bigger images No problem with that, our PC's and PTE can handle them. It's progress.

Sorry Barry, but you did not hit the point. Each exe presentations has its limitations, and the author should be in the position to decide at which maximum size it should run. I have just downloaded your sequences "Enigma" and "Another Age", quite old ones, but still very worth to watch. They look rather small on my monitor (1920x1200, see screen shot), and seem to use the fixed size feature. Would you really like to see them running upscaled?

Regards,

jt

AnotherAge.zip

[Barry Beckham]

Yes I did hit the point and I understand the point. This forum does have a habit of stating the obvious.

No, I would rather an old slide show is not upscaled, but things have to move on. The speed with which the digital world moves, I can see Igor's dilemma and if he tries to meet all the desires of this forum, the software would still be back at V4.

If we have to forgo that feature, but get others in return, then what has to be has to be. We can't always have what we want and it is only Igor who knows what he can and can't achieve.

Perhaps we are getting a wake up call here, start making your slide shows in readiness

[davegee]

I might have read his post wrongly but I do not think that Igor said that the inclusion of this feature was holding anything up or preventing further development?

If that were the case then I would, as always, back him 100%.

But if it can be maintained then I think that it should remain as an option.

Whilst using higher resolution images in a higher resolution project is the obvious answer it will, for some - in theory, curtail the amount of zoom which can be applied to some images from older cameras.

If it can be maintained then I think that it should remain as an option.

DG

[Barry Beckham]

Whilst using higher resolution images in a higher resolution project is the obvious answer it will, for some - in theory, curtail the amount of zoom which can be applied to some images from older cameras.

Well, there is a result for a start Some animation needs serious curtailing especially deep zooms. Not seen one example where the image has had the interest or the quality to hold my attention. A mediocre picture on screen far too long and zoomed into extremes just because they could. Not a great basis for creative AV or interesting viewing.

[davegee]

Now you are being silly and deliberately provocative.

Let's say for argument that we decide that tomorrow's new "standard" is something like 3840 wide.

That means that an owner of a D300s (or equivalent) or someone who wants to include a D300s (or equivalent) image can neither zoom nor crop (simile).

We don't all have 1DS mk IIII cameras.

Bend a little?

DG

[nobeefstu]

In possible future player of PicturesToExe's slideshows we can add various options how to display a slide (fullscreen, windowed, fixed size), but fixed size is dangerous for EXE output where users can't change it.

I believe this to be the best overall playback solution to bridge the past to the future. Slideshow makers and also slideshow users would both have a say/preference in its playback view. The EXE need only a internal reference "tag" to notify of the makers desired optimal viewing ... and the users/viewers can be their own judge of how they wish to view and enjoy the presentation.

* I would therfore proceed sooner to the development of the "possible future player"

[Barry Beckham]

Now you are being silly and deliberately provocative.

Not. Really, all our previous shows will have had the fixed slide ticked, so nothing will change with those. It will only be future shows and we would have to be aware of that the same as we are aware of fixed slide now.

Let's say for argument that we decide that tomorrow's new "standard" is something like 3840 wide.

That means that an owner of a D300s (or equivalent) or someone who wants to include a D300s (or equivalent) image can neither zoom nor crop (simile).

Well, that's progress isn't it?

We don't all have 1DS mk IIII cameras.

Well, I am not sure what that has to do with anything, it's no different in size to the 5D and that is a common camera among enthusiasts.

Bend a little?

To what? its only an opinion and Igor will go with what he thinks is right at the end of the day

I think we have reached a point where Igor is right and doing away with fixed slide may be the way to go, but not having a crystal ball I can only guess. When you think of how fixed size of slide has confused people over the past few years. Turn it on for one thing and turn it off for another.

You can't make software as good as this idiot proof. Users have to learn a little to get the best results. The same as they have with their image editors and other related software. They will soon learn what they need to do to make a slide show, the same as before and work without that fixed size.

DG