Maximal quality of images for slide-shows

[Igor]

I just performed test to find optimal quality for images for PicturesToExe slide-shows.

I've found that maximally sharp picture with more details can be reached if you use images at least 1280x960

It's a best choice for CRT/LCD displays with 1024x768 or 1280x1024.

In this case:

1) If your display is 1280x1024, image will not be resized (excellent result).

2) If you have 1024x768 15" LCD display, it will be resized to 1024x768 and result (as I found) looks same as we could resize photo in Photoshop using Bicubic resampling!

So PicturesToExe reduces image very well with result in the most cases exactly as Photoshop does (of course, in case of Bicubic, without unsharpen mask).

But PicturesToExe not very well enlarges image. For example 1024x768 image won't look well (blurred) enlarged to 1280x960 on 17" or 19" LCD displays.

Because of this, I highly recommend to use 1280 x 960 size for your images in slide-shows and it will give maximally possible terrific quality of picture on any displays.

[d67]

Yesssss

Since a few months 1280/960 is my proper slide size choice as I found it a good compromise when the screen resolution was lesser.

Thank you for this clarification !

[bharkins]

I have an HPf2304 23 inch flat screen. The 1280/960 resolution distorts the image noticably. I use 1280/768 and it is perfect for the wide angle aspect ratio.

[ronwil]

I take at 1280/960 and work - converging verticals, cloning out unwanted, cropping at 4:3, adjusting levels etc - in Photoshop. I then set in motion an action in Photoshop which resizes the image to 1024/768 and sharpens with an unsharp mask setting, which latter can be fine tuned using Edit>Fade unsharp mask. I then File>Save for the Web and use compression 8 producing an image for use in PTE at an approximate size of 250/500 Kb.

Before I resize, because of cropping, my images are now less than the original 1280/960. Is it suggested that I will have a better image re-sized upwards? My Royale Projection Unit is 1024/768 what would the effect be there?

Ron [uK}

[Michel]

I think we speak about the screen display: by example, my LCD monitor (19" Philips) permit 1280x960, 1280 x1024.

Native is 1280x1024. I use always this screen display 1280x1024.

When I see a photograph from a Canon Ixus, I see this picture (resized in 1280x960) with two small black borders (top and bottom).

When I see a photograph from a Canon 10 D, I see this picture (resized in 1280x853) with two black borders a little larger (top and bottom).

The different size comes only from the camera.

But, it's very important to say: don't switch you screen display from 1280x1024 to 1280x960 to see the pictures. You will lost the original quality of your screen and of your pictures.

[Ronniebootwest]

All this talk of the different screen resolutions is becoming a little confusing. Some folk just have old computers with only 800x600 and will be totally lost with the discussion on this thread.

In my experience (at least here in the UK) the screen resolution now seems to have settled on 1024x768. Am I to understand that the new 'standard' for PTE is to be 1280x960?

It would be very useful if someone could post a resume of what is considered the best 'workflow' for producing slides for PTE, but in real simple terms please.

Ronwil seems to have the right idea with his previous reply to this thread and perhaps you yould care to ellaborate Ron!

[ronwil]

I don't wish to elaborate any further Ron, but hope others more knowledgeable than myself will step in and give answers to the two questions which I have posed.

Ron [uK]

[DaveG]

It's doing my head in as well Ron!

I just checked my monitor and set it to max res - 1280x1024. I assume that this is what is meant by "native resolution"?

I normally produce shows in a 1024x768 window and find that Igor's point about 1280x960 versus 1024x768 does not matter in my scenario i.e. an image at 1280x960 in a 1024x768 window will look exactly like the same image at 1024x768 in the 1024x768 window.

On the other hand I agree with what he says about using 1024x768 images in a 1280x960 window - they will look blurred.

I will stick with the 1024x768 window method for the time being. (I don't know anyone with an 800x600 monitor).

DaveG

[Michel]

My LCD monitor is a 1280x1024. It's logic: I use pictures 1280 for a good view.

I think: if I see my slideshow (1280) with a monitor 1024x768 display, the quality is very good also, because PTE resize easy very well the picture.

Also no problem for me.

But, my ask:

If I see a slideshow (from a friend) made with 1024x768 (black background) on my Philips (1280), it's the picture's quality the same (fit to screen disabled) as I viewed with a 1024x768 ?

[Ken Cox]

these are my comments I wrote to Igor off list

Hi Igor

you "resolution setting" thread is a real can of worms

"Maximal quality of images for slide-shows

Results of testing"

i did a search and here are 3 of what i figure the best

http://www.sketchpad.net/basics8.htm

http://www.microscope-microscope.org/imagi...-resolution.htm

http://erms.samsungusa.com/customer/sea/js...D=28&PROD_ID=-1

but

with my 19" crt type i still prefer 800/600 until i get to where i have to put text in or work in the object editor

have just added these three to a couple sections in my p2e problem file:)

one of the reasons i dont use my roxio ver 7 -- it demands 1024/768 to do any work other than copy a disk

later

ken

after i wrote my feelings to Igor, i forgot to add this one

http://www.normankoren.com/makingfineprints1A.html

one of my best buys was to get the 19" monitor a few years back and i still run 800/600 -- am trying to build my slush fund to buy a new 19" lcd -- when testing them at the stores i first set them to 800/600 before i go any further and ramp back the contrast and brightness to 1/2 way, then i look at familiar folders/scenes

my feelings are that the higher resolution settings are for laptops, not the desktops -- very seldom do i have to do horizontal scrolling when i go to MS or like sites

guess people have forgot their beginnings --14" monitors and 640/480 res

and the statement saying "best viewed at ----" resolution is the author's opinion -- next thing we will be seeing " and you must be in a darkened room a minimum 6 ft back from the screen"

"different strokes for different folks"

ken

[Michel]

Dear Ken,

I readed your post and your links: these links speak about "printing", if I understood.

my feelings are that the higher resolution settings are for laptops, not the desktops

My wife use also a laptop HP 1600x1200. But my 19"LCD monitor is very good as the laptop.

And we must see the future also: the HDTV vill com one day...the AVI must be follow...the video-projector exist in 1280 or permit that (with resizing - I have a Optoma H56 and the results from a slideshow in 1280 are really excellents).

I will not work too small and for the eye and for the pleasure .

But these resolutions don't accept bad photographs...one see all better (also the mistakes :bad lights, bad compositions...- I speak for me also !).

[Igor]

I highly recommend to use 1280 x 960 images with file size 300 - 500 KB.

Such image size will allow to reach terrific quality of photographies with many details.

If you have 800 x 600 or 1024 x 768 screen resolution on your display, such large images (1280 x 960) will look very well, exactly when you used earlier 1024 x 768 images.

But there are many 17", 18" and 19" LCD displays today with 1280 x 1024 screen resolution, also 19" CRT displays, and notebooks with high resolution displays. Users who have such displays will see wonderful quality of your photos if you use 1280 x 960 images.

I think it's an optimal choice today.

[Michel]

Digital cameras

With a sensor of certain camera as Canon Ixus, the picture resized for a LCD 1280x1024 is 1280x960.

With a sensor of the Canon 10D, the picture resized for the LCD 1280x1024 is 1280x853.

With the different sensors, with a LCD monitor 1280x1024, we must use so large pictures 1280 horizontal, is it right ?

[Michel]

For Norway, I used 1280x853 pictures: min 150ko - max 270ko (<300ko because, with water and sky we have less informations in the picture).

Igor, your are right, we have so photographies with many details (certain are taked at 400 ISO).

Dear friends, please try these 1280 resolutions for the slideshows also...

[jevans]

Before reading this thread, I made a post covering the same topic on the thread dealing with different screen sizes. However I think the post is relevant here also so I will repeat it below.

Just some further comments regarding screen sizes for this discussion thread.

My camera when set to 5 MP, gives an image size of 2560 x 1920 (aspect ratio = 1.33). When preparing images for a PTE show, I resize them to 1024 x 768. However my monitor (a 19 inch one) has a screen size of 1280 x 1024 (aspect ratio = 1.25). I therefore have 3 options as follows :

1. leave the image size at 1024 x 768 and view as a window on my monitor.

2. set the image to use the full screen in PTE (using Project Options – screen – fit to screen so that the image fills the monitor screen.

3. crop the images to 1280 x 1024 so that they fit the monitor exactly as a full screen image.

I have decided, as a general rule, to use the first option. This is the recommended size for PTE and particularly for slide shows using a digital projector. I accept that viewing the show on my monitor does not use the whole screen. If I use the “ fit to screen” command, the images will fit the whole screen but at a slightly reduced quality.

I also sometimes burn a PTE show to a DVD to view on a wide screen TV. Interestingly tests have shown that the “Safe TV Zone” rectangle in the object editor is exactly correct for a 1280 x 1024 image when burned to a DVD. However for a 1024 x 768 image, the “Safe TV Zone” appears to be 60 pixels too wide.

I note the comments about using 1280 x 960 as the standard sixe for PTE. I will try this as it has the advantage of being the same aspect ratio (1.33) as the original phot and hence easy to resize in Photoshop.

jevans

[Michel]

For the safe zone, strange...

The safe zone can be different with certain TV: near 5 to 15%. PTE permit to see "visual" line: it's an indication.

I think the actual safe zone is perfect for a TV 4/3.

And whe have also a problem "safe zone" with 16/9 TV...

Difficult, very difficult...Igor ?

[Ed Overstreet]

Just to stick my oar into this discussion:

I normally run my 19" monitor at 1600x1200 resolution, especially when editing photos in Photoshop (I generally reset the res to 1024x768 when viewing my PTE shows, since that's the size of images I normally use in PTE). By the same rationale as given above, should I not be sizing all my PTE-destined JPGs to fit within 1600x1200? Or would that be pushing the software or system capabilities too much?

Many digital projectors (like our photo club's current one) only go up to 1024x768. Will they handle the larger images in PTE OK? Is PTE's ability to "downsize on the fly" going to work as well with a digital projector as with a monitor, either at 1280 or 1600 (or even larger) resolutions? Where does one draw the line? Why at 1280 and not at 1600?

To date I've been doing all my PTE shows with images at 1024x768 because that's all our club's digital projector can handle, and that's pretty much the only place I run my shows outside of my home. But I'd love to be able to view my shows at home with the images set for 1600x1200 if I could feel confident (without having to test it the hard way in front of a large audience) that the digital projector could run the same show at 1024x768. I'm not at all interested in making separate versions for both venues, too much extra fuss and bother. So my question "why not 1600" isn't an idle one, for me.

[Igor]

1280x960 aproximately in 1,5 times larger than 1024x768

1600x1200 aproximately in 2,5 times larger than 1024x768

So I consider that 1280x960 is more reliable variant than 1600x1200. Also 1280x1024 screen resolution becomes more and more popular now. But 1600x1200 is not wide used at this moment (except of professionals mainly).

If you use LCD/DLP projector (1024x768), PTE will reduce 1280x960 to 1024x768 (reducing in PTE is a very fast operation, you can ignore it at all) and will show all effects for 1024x768.

[DaveG]

A few points:

For those of us who project shows at camera clubs etc. the likelihood is that we will be using a 1024x768 projector. These are affordable to most enthusiastic photographers these days whereas the higher resolution projectors are less so.

The file size of a 1024x681 image at quality 10 is 271Kb while the same image at 1280x851 at quality 10 is 402Kb. This is clearly a significant jump in file size to maintain the same level of compression and quality. (If however the file size is kept the same then the quality obviously has to suffer in the 1280x851 image).

So, if ultimately the photographer is going to project his/her shows via a computer and LCD/DLP projector at 1024x768, what is the point in using 1280x851 images? Igor has already stated (I think) that the end result of using 1280x851 images in a 1024x681 show (in a 1024x768 window) is that the images look no different. PTE is capable of compressing images in high quality but is not capable of enlarging images in high quality.

The only advantage that I can see in using 1280x851 images in PTE shows is that dual exe files can be created to suit a variety of end users i.e. an exe file in a 1280x1024 window for one friend/customer etc and another exe file in a 1024x768 window for another friend/customer etc. I don’t see a “one size fits all” scenario here anywhere.

So, for those like me, who are trying to formulate a “STANDARD” I think that it has to be a 1024x768 window. Using “Fit to Screen” is an extremely dangerous option because the worst case scenario is that your 1024x681 images could end up being enlarged to 1600 by whatever on a friend/customer’s monitor/LCD Projector and Igor has most definitely ruled this out as being not recommended.

For those who like to go down the DVD route my opinion is that the end result is so dreadful compared to the exe file on a computer monitor (at this point in time) that the advantages of 1280x851 over 1024x681 are negated anyway! Does anyone agree/disagree?

Long live PTE!!

DaveG

[ContaxMan]

Yes - I do! While my shows are going to be projected via a digital projector that has a native resolution of 1024 x 768, I can see no point whatsoever in making my (rather aged) laptop work harder with bigger images.

[Ed Overstreet]

I'm also inclined to agree, especially if the best I can hope for with a 1280 by whatever image is that it will match (but not exceed) on a 1024x768 display what I'd have from a 1024x whatever image anyway.

I also second the sentiments about DVD at present, which at the moment holds no interest for me because of the significant loss of image quality (in my experience on my equipment, anyway).

[JEB]

A few points:

For those of us who project shows at camera clubs etc. the likelihood is that we will be using a 1024x768 projector. These are affordable to most enthusiastic photographers these days whereas the higher resolution projectors are less so.

The file size of a 1024x681 image at quality 10 is 271Kb while the same image at 1280x851 at quality 10 is 402Kb. This is clearly a significant jump in file size to maintain the same level of compression and quality. (If however the file size is kept the same then the quality obviously has to suffer in the 1280x851 image).

So, if ultimately the photographer is going to project his/her shows via a computer and LCD/DLP projector at 1024x768, what is the point in using 1280x851 images? Igor has already stated (I think) that the end result of using 1280x851 images in a 1024x681 show (in a 1024x768 window) is that the images look no different. PTE is capable of compressing images in high quality but is not capable of enlarging images in high quality.

The only advantage that I can see in using 1280x851 images in PTE shows is that dual exe files can be created to suit a variety of end users i.e. an exe file in a 1280x1024 window for one friend/customer etc and another exe file in a 1024x768 window for another friend/customer etc. I don’t see a “one size fits all” scenario here anywhere.

So, for those like me, who are trying to formulate a “STANDARD” I think that it has to be a 1024x768 window. Using “Fit to Screen” is an extremely dangerous option because the worst case scenario is that your 1024x681 images could end up being enlarged to 1600 by whatever on a friend/customer’s monitor/LCD Projector and Igor has most definitely ruled this out as being not recommended.

For those who like to go down the DVD route my opinion is that the end result is so dreadful compared to the exe file on a computer monitor (at this point in time) that the advantages of 1280x851 over 1024x681 are negated anyway! Does anyone agree/disagree?

Long live PTE!!

DaveG

Dave

I am new to this game so forgive me if I sound naive. I am beginning to think of purchasing a new digital projector to replace my existing Epson SVGA (800 x 600) in order to achieve the best possible results. The most obvious economic choice appears to be XGA (1024 x 768), however is this a short-term solution in that SXGA (1280 x 1024) looks like it could become more viable (if Canon are to be believed!) in the near future. Both my desktop and laptop can be set to SXGA.

I am also interested in your comments regarding DVD as I currently see that as the way I would like to go given that my preferred methods of presenting my shows are by projection and TV. I have a small portable DVD player for both options but would the laptop be better?

John

[DaveG]

Quality wise, I think that anyone on this forum who has tried both methods (exe on computer vs DVD) would AT PRESENT choose the computer option. The DVD option is possibly more convenient.

Which is more important to you?

DaveG

[jevans]

A few points:

For those of us who project shows at camera clubs etc. the likelihood is that we will be using a 1024x768 projector. These are affordable to most enthusiastic photographers these days whereas the higher resolution projectors are less so.

The file size of a 1024x681 image at quality 10 is 271Kb while the same image at 1280x851 at quality 10 is 402Kb. This is clearly a significant jump in file size to maintain the same level of compression and quality. (If however the file size is kept the same then the quality obviously has to suffer in the 1280x851 image).

So, if ultimately the photographer is going to project his/her shows via a computer and LCD/DLP projector at 1024x768, what is the point in using 1280x851 images? Igor has already stated (I think) that the end result of using 1280x851 images in a 1024x681 show (in a 1024x768 window) is that the images look no different. PTE is capable of compressing images in high quality but is not capable of enlarging images in high quality.

The only advantage that I can see in using 1280x851 images in PTE shows is that dual exe files can be created to suit a variety of end users i.e. an exe file in a 1280x1024 window for one friend/customer etc and another exe file in a 1024x768 window for another friend/customer etc. I don’t see a “one size fits all” scenario here anywhere.

So, for those like me, who are trying to formulate a “STANDARD” I think that it has to be a 1024x768 window. Using “Fit to Screen” is an extremely dangerous option because the worst case scenario is that your 1024x681 images could end up being enlarged to 1600 by whatever on a friend/customer’s monitor/LCD Projector and Igor has most definitely ruled this out as being not recommended.

For those who like to go down the DVD route my opinion is that the end result is so dreadful compared to the exe file on a computer monitor (at this point in time) that the advantages of 1280x851 over 1024x681 are negated anyway! Does anyone agree/disagree?

Long live PTE!!

DaveG

Hi DaveG,

"For those who like to go down the DVD route my opinion is that the end result is so dreadful compared to the exe file on a computer monitor (at this point in time) that the advantages of 1280x851 over 1024x681 are negated anyway! Does anyone agree/disagree?"

I agree with this comment. Before using PTE I used to do all my shows as DVDs to show on a wide screen TV (16:9 aspect ratio). I have done a number of tests to establish :

a) Does it make any difference what the original image resolution is. Answer no because the DVD writing engine converts everything to720 x 576 (PAL standard)

What is the actual dimensions of the required safe viewing zone on the original image to ensure that it can all be seen on the TV. Answer - too complex to state here but a 1280 x 1024 image in PTE can all be seen if it is within the boundaries of the Safe TV rectangle in the PTE object editor if viewed on a wide screen TV in wide screen mode.

I think the correct answer is to use 1024 x 768 and accept that if the show is viewed on a monitor with a larger resolution ( my 19 inc LCD Ilyama has a resolution of 1280 x 1024) then it will not fill the whole screen.

jevans

[globalimages]

All my slideshows are made to be projected through my Mitsubishi XD450 which has a 1024x768 resolution. I have made tens of thousands images standardized at that size with an 8 compression setting. For some time I have been thinking about the future and better projectors coming on the stream. This thread therfore really got me interested so from now on I will probably the images the 1280 size. Any comments on the 8 used for compression. Curt