Pan and Zoom

[ecps]

I am sure that there will be a flurry of posts asking for advice when P2E 5 public beta becomes available, so I hope that I may forgiven for getting in first.

My question concerns image size when using Pan and Zoom. At the moment I reduce the size of photos to 1152 x 864 pixels (my screen resolution) as this seems to provide high quality without synchronization problems. Am I right in thinking that with Pan and Zoom a much larger image is ideal? I wonder whether those who have experience of this feature might give some advice on the best image size for Pan and Zoom - presumably there must be some relation between the amount of zoom required and the number of pixels.

In anticipation - thank you.

Eddie.

[Ed Overstreet]

Excellent question. I, too, am very interested in the answer.

[Igor]

I'll publish in details all my findings with optimal image size when beta #1 will be released.

In fact Pan/Zoom effects require more large images which load more longer. However often slide with Pan/Zoom exists more time on the screen and we have time for loading a next slide. So it is compensated.

[Barry Beckham]

When Pan and Zoom becomes available perhaps we should look again at our workflow. It is unlikely that we will want all the images in a slide show zooming or panning.

I have been thinking about this and perhaps the answer is to put all the selected image in a holding file at the highest resolution we can get from our camera.

Then size images from there into a working folder at the resolution of our monitor.

As the show starts to come together and we want the odd image larger for pan and zoom we can go back to our high resolution folder and adjust the size that one image a little bigger than the others to allow for the effect.

Or wait till Igor has polished the program and lets it loose on us with his recommedations

Barry

[Igor]

As I tested today with latest optimizations, in v5.00 slide with a huge image 3500x2300 (JPEG 5 MB) loads only 2-3 seconds on Athlon XP 1.6 GHz with.

More "smaller" 2000x1500 load within 1 or 2 seconds.

[ContaxMan]

have been thinking about this and perhaps the answer is to put all the selected image in a holding file at the highest resolution we can get from our camera.

Then size images from there into a working folder at the resolution of our monitor.

As the show starts to come together and we want the odd image larger for pan and zoom we can go back to our high resolution folder and adjust the size that one image a little bigger than the others to allow for the effect.

I'm suprised that you don't do that already...

[ronwil]

My method is to save all my original *.tif images from camera in an annual folder. These images I convert to *.jpg using Irfanview in blocks as they occur and view them in PTE using a Manual Show template. I save them in another annual folder. (Manual Show can be found by doing a search on this forum}.

Ron [uK]

[Barry Beckham]

Contaxman

No, it never occurred to me as I suppose I didn't look forward enough to the day when we could leave 1024*768 behind.

I always have the originals of course

BB

[jgayman]

Contaxman

No, it never occurred to me as I suppose I didn't look forward enough to the day when we could leave 1024*768 behind.

BB

That's not the worst of it. Most have probably settled on a 1024x768 laptop feeding a 1024x768 projector. With most of the computer industry (including laptops) transitioning to to wide-screen 16:9 formats we are going to have to rethink our setups. As before, having a projector that matches your laptop screen resolution makes life very easy.

Every now and again I will supply the A/V equipment and someone else will bring the laptop containing the show. More often then not they show up with the latest wide-screen WUXGA+ gizmo and then we have fits trying to get it to look decent on the big screen.

I for one am not necessarily looking forward to "going wide". :-)

[Mike Reed]

That's not the worst of it. Most have probably settled on a 1024x768 laptop feeding a 1024x768 projector. With most of the computer industry (including laptops) transitioning to to wide-screen 16:9 formats we are going to have to rethink our setups. As before, having a projector that matches your laptop screen resolution makes life very easy.

Every now and again I will supply the A/V equipment and someone else will bring the laptop containing the show. More often then not they show up with the latest wide-screen WUXGA+ gizmo and then we have fits trying to get it to look decent on the big screen.

I for one am not necessarily looking forward to "going wide". :-)

This is an interesting point. I have just switched to a wide screen lap top and found it necessary to resize the lap top screen resolution to 1024 x 768. Even then I have a problem with a sideways pan using the push effect. Whereas on my old square lap top the pan worked without any visible seam now I get a big black bar between the two frames. Hey ho latest is not always the best.

[daveharris]

This is an interesting point. I have just switched to a wide screen lap top and found it necessary to resize the lap top screen resolution to 1024 x 768. Even then I have a problem with a sideways pan using the push effect. Whereas on my old square lap top the pan worked without any visible seam now I get a big black bar between the two frames. Hey ho latest is not always the best.

I found the way to get rid of that black bar is in project options - instead of a Full screen select a window, make the size 1024 by 768 and remove the border.

Not very pretty but useful for seeing if an effect works without changing resolution.

Dave