Video Cards

[nickles]

Hello Everyone:

I'm probably a bloomin' idiot for starting this thread...but I guess I'll show how dumb I really am. Hopefully if I drum up any responses...maybe I'll learn something.

My main question concerns Video Cards...but first...

I've been creating slideshows for several years. I'm not a professional photographer but enjoy the sport. My customers are my friends and relatives. I've been fortunate and can normally afford to keep up with the computer technology. Most of my customers aren't as fortunate. Walmart has a computer on sale...they rush out and buy it...and probably on credit. It has 512mb of memory, XP Home Edition and a onboard Video Processor with shared memory. In the past, just about any old computer they happened to have managed to play my slideshows. They're only problem was if they got busy clicking buttons they might have the same slideshow playing simultaeously but out of sync.

PTE 5 has so much potenial...how do I make proper decisons on my slideshow designs to feel confident that it will play on my customers computers. I can't call them and ask them "what kind of video card do you have?". They wouldn't have a clue or know how to find out. I would like to be able to use some of PTE 5 capabilities but not sure how to constrain my design such as image size?, number of simultaneously objects?, speed of objects?, transition effects?, etc......Is it best to use only PTE 5 for people I know have powerful hardware?

Hmm...Powerful Hardware...not sure I know what that means...I've got a laptop that runs fast to me...it has a duo-core Intel something or other...2GB of Ram...120GB HD...Radeon Express 128mb that will hyper-thread another 340mb something of ram...is that fast...I guess...or it was last month.

What I think I may be after in this thread is an explaination of video cards...what's fast...what do the buzz words all mean?

There's shared memory, hyper-threaded memory, 32mb, 64mb, 128mb, 256mb, Directx..maybe Directy...Direc3d...OpenGL...Do I need to no more about these to properly design a slideshow? If I do can anybody out there explain video cards to me?

Enough said...I've put out my hook...gonna wit and see what bites it.

ken

[Ken Cox]

well Ken

here is list that you can refer to:)

ken

http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/sfchart/0,t...csBoards,00.asp

[nickles]

There are too many perfectly usable computers that don't have powerful enough video cards for P2E.

For ver. 5 slideshows that will be displayed on older computers I was just planning on creating videos using either movie maker, quicktime, or create a DVD. A 1 hour DVD created at 8,000 Kbps looks almost as good (to me) as the orginal .exe and the playback is very smooth.

tom

You're very right Tom. Besides higher rez PC versions I normally add a version to my DVD collection. If done right they look very good. For my parents, I create a VHS version...which isn't to sharp...but they seem to enjoy them...they haven't mastered the DVD player I installed for them and probably never will. I've made a lot of them in a 16:9 format for my Plasma EDTV. Those really have good resolution. For those I normally create a anamorphic version which improves the image quality quite a bit.

Some where floating around in the video threads I post my technique which has been very successful for me.

thanks for your post,

ken

[Ken Cox]

some theory

http://www.scantips.com/basics11.html

years ago board makers supplied vcd's to demo what their boards would do and there were games that could be downloaded -- they wanted to sell product and what better way than to have freebies

likely for a standard office installation you can get away with the minimum but when you are a gamer you need power -- well games are graphics and p2e is graphics of a different sort -- if i had kmow 3 yrs ago next month how things were going to proceed i would likey have bought the top ATI all in wonder $600 instead of the $300 model i chose -- prices incldes taxes

generally speaking i have no problem playing a store bought dvd movie in my old system with 1:33 ghz processor and 16 mb ati all in wonder card - but it would not play Igor's first v5 demo without constant jerkiness and have no problem playing dvd movies in #1 system

but along comes ver5 and the jerkiness appears in some cases

ken

[nickles]

Hello Ken,

Thank you very much for the reply Ken. I thought this thread was going to die...but I thought as such is why I gave it the description.

I understand what you have said. The next video card I buy will probably have lot's of considerations.

What I was hoping to get some feedback on was "Is it possible to design a PTE 5 slideshow that will run in low power video cards?" I think it might be related to the image size. Can I design a slideshow that only uses 800x600 and zoom&pan without choking a lower speed video card...probably know one knows...except Igor. I was hoping that maybe this thread would generate a few guidelines.

Anybody else out there have any thoughts on this subject?

Thanks again Ken.

nickles

[Igor]

Ken,

Of course, Pan/Zoom with small images work faster on old video cards. (On modern video no difference)

Try my "Flowers" slide-show which works even on NVIDIA TNT2, or Matrox G550.

Three years ago even Fade effect worked not enough smooth in 1280x1024 displays on modern PCs. Now all PCs shows this effect fine and we additionally optimized Fade effect.

Same thing with Pan/Zoom now.

[alrobin]

While we're on the subject of advanced graphics boards, here's the latest from

ATI. The "Radeon'R' X1900GT ". Looks like it might do the job quite handily!

[nickles]

Ken,

Of course, Pan/Zoom with small images work faster on old video cards. (On modern video no difference)

Try my "Flowers" slide-show which works even on NVIDIA TNT2, or Matrox G550.

Three years ago even Fade effect worked not enough smooth in 1280x1024 displays on modern PCs. Now all PCs shows this effect fine and we additionally optimized Fade effect.

Same thing with Pan/Zoom now.

Hello Igor,

I know you've probably studied video cards extensively during your development. Here's a naive question for you.

I shoot most of my photos with a Digital Rebel that produces a 3072x2048 image. If I convert such an image to a bit map (.bmp) it yields a file size of 18 mbytes. Would this number somehow be related to the memory requirements of the video card? If I panned this image on a 1024x768 screen from left to right, then down and right to left at full image size both horizontally and vertically would this take a fairly powerful video card? Like I panned in the KenBurns show I posted.

I probablly need to digout my old NVIDIA TNT2 and try it. Think it had 64mb of memory. Would run it on a 1.5 mhz P4 machine.

Hmm....maybe someone out there has a slower machine with a shared memory video chip...that could try the KenBurns show and report their result. I just hate to send people shows and they say to themselves,"Oh NO, another one of Ken's jerky slideshows"...you no what I mean?

Thanks for your reply.

sincerely,

nickles

[Ken Cox]

i cant run Igor's first demo on my #2 system and other 2 would run but not satisfactory

Operating System System Model

Windows XP Home Edition Service Pack 2 (build 2600) VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82C694X

Enclosure Type: Desktop

Processor a Main Circuit Board b

1.30 gigahertz Intel Celeron

32 kilobyte primary memory cache

256 kilobyte secondary memory cache Board: 694X-686B

Bus Clock: 100 megahertz

BIOS: Award Software International, Inc. 6.00 PG 03/26/2002

ATI Remote Wonder Controller 16 mb onboard ram

VIA Rev 5 or later USB Universal Host Controller (2x) ATI WDM Bt829 Video (Microsoft)

ATI WDM Specialized MVD Codec (Microsoft)

ATI WDM TV Audio Crossbar (Microsoft)

ATI WDM TV Tuner (Microsoft)

[LumenLux]

My problem with this topic is not lack of thoughts, but too many. Your topic starter Ken, and your related question (from my Spirits in the Sky effort) resulted in my making 7 different versions yesterday to try to focus my questions and experience as 5.0 Beta has been driving me.

In the early stages of digital graphics I was always looking for cards that would speed up screen display of my photos and especially speed up individual PS type editing processes. As (other) Ken, points out, there was plenty of hype and promotion of graphics cards. But, when on occasion, I could get knowledgeable responses, I realized most the power and speed of the expensive cards was aimed at 3D and games, and would do relatively little to speed up adjustments in Photoshop. I think Igor's Version 5 has now changed where that power applys. As best I understand, he has cleverly directed all that 3D power so it is what we can use in the photographic sequence world. I think the single most important thing for us to all remember, and I'm sure you realize, is that no user of PTE is going to lose anything with Version 5.0 and the future! Once Igor has the complete Version, Version 5 will sing "Anything you can do, I can do better" to Version 4.48. Any old graphics card will be able to do what it always did for a PTE show, and probably better.

I, like you, would like to get a better understanding of all the relationships between image size and quality and processing demands on the graphics card. When you posted your KenBurns 5.0 demo of the school class, I quickly added a large family photo of my own to your project file to try the panning feature. My photo did not seem to even show up in the PTE slide window. Yesterday, in re-visiting, I realized my photo I had inserted is a 44 MB file with dimensions of 12,000x8400! It does show up in the project window, but it takes more than a moment to appear. We all know that for 5.0, graphics card power, more is better. From a mechanics standpoint, that is clear, but not so easy with the psychological aspects. I will try to deal with that relative to your 2nd response to my Spirits in the Sky demo/trial.

When I posted my Spirits sequence, of 109 MB, some members found it very smooth and others could not even run it. I then tried it on five other machines here and found none could handle it except the one I created it on. I had been excited to project the show on the big screen, but could not, as my recent but apparently graphically handicapped laptop won't run it. The jerky movements at least sometimes sync with the beat of the soundtrack.

I hope someone here will help educate us about graphics cards for laptops. I know what is involved in installing a new card in a desktop pc, but what is available and what is involved if I do want to upgrade the capabiltiy in my laptop?

I'm sure Igor has his end under control regarding making DVD's from Version 5, but I am wondering how that will be. If 5.0 will create DVD files that retain the smoothness and clarity of .exe shows, that may solve many of the end users without graphics-powerful pc's. In my Spirits sequence, there is an early slide of Machu Picchu where the PTE zoom value is 300. At the full zoom, the pixels are no longer perfect, but adequate. The zooming however is perfectly smooth. I had used the same photo in a DVD video (outside of PTE, in a Mac) video software of a friend. The zoom in the video gurgled and boiled all the way in. Looked like an unintentionally animated water scene. My conclusion for now is that Igor has unleashed a creative powerhouse and I look forward to learning from everyone but not expecting to be doing everything that everyone finds to do with it. With enough sharing of our experiences and thoughts, we will find what is now intimidating will be comfortable.

[Ken Cox]

Robert

simple enough to do

load your exe's on a cd and visit your dealers and find out what will run them and buy that card

but

the "big but" is making a show that only you can run, is not the answer

so you make the show with 4.48 as well

the question i have - we cannot even enable the avi feature to see what will happen to the jerks etc when we burn to dvd -- maybe they will go away because we have taken part of the program out of the equation

ken

[Igor]

I really apologize that not all video cards can handle slide-shows created in PicturesToExe v5.00, but I very hope that time will improve this moment.

Of course, AVI video produced in PTE will play ideally smooth for any large images (next betas).

In final version 5.00 will be two ways:

- New graphical engine with hardware acceleration - if you create slide-show with Pan/Zoom (for modern video cards).

By the way, modern video card very well intended for 2D graphics. For this task, it works in hundreds times more fast than even modern CPUs.

- CPU based graphical engine - for Fade, Circle and other effects (for ALL PCs)

(Which works so fast as v4.48, but also suggests scalable objects, and other improvements of v5.00)

[JRR]

Nickles:

As Igor says, a few years ago the FADE was not fully effective on all but the latest computers.

Now the same is happening with ver 5, except I suspect to more of a degree.

None of our computers will run any of the samples (except the flowers show) smoothly.

Like you, my "customers" won't have the horsepower to watch a ver 5 smoothly. Which means that I likely won't be using the full advantages of ver 5 for sometime to come.

But then to use ver 5 effectively - "show off your images, not the software" one needs a lot of creativity and that is something I am lacking. Currently during the testing the latter is happening which is natural and accepted.

I suspect once we have a final version of ver5, we will be able to work out what new effects we can use effectively (smaller files etc as you say) and we will all be better for it. (But in the meantime I am feeling "leftout" <grin> . )

[Conflow]

Hi Guys,

I completely agree with your comments, particularily Tom's comment -

"There are literally thousands of perfectly good, working PC's, out there, etc"......

It's also the reason I raised this with Igor many months ago..."Will PTE.5.0 be a Twin-Engined Program" ?

If memory serves me correctly I think he confirmed that for me ~ It's certainly going to be necessary !

Another issue has also come to the fore with the new "Twin-Processor PC's" ~ Many of these will be "Slim-Line Types" with New Mini-Plasma Displays, indeed it's fast heading to the situation where the PC will be incorporated into the Display Unit with Inbuilt Graphics Card offering no options to install a 'Hi-Performance Card' ~ indeed these Cards will be rationalised to International Standard's keeping in line with 'Digital Television Technology Standards' ? (Look at the new Mac Cube ~ and keep an eye on Samsung and Hyundai)

The latter two retired from the PC.Markets some years ago ~ but they (and others) are on the way back with brand new Technology ~ Intergrated PC.Plasma Display Computers with MS.Vista 'Dual-Core' Operating Systems, with Intergrated Graphics & Sound and a whole host of Communications Utilities.

Very soon current AVI Video Technology (Interlaced 25.Fps) will be replaced with Hi-Resolution 'Digitised ImageTechnology' ~ This is available now with Digital Cam-Corders and who else is keeping quite about these New Products ?

This is all going hand-in-hand within the Communications Industry which is fast merging with the PC.Industry...all this within 3 years.

It's already starting in the U.K and Ireland and other E.U.Countries are well on their way.

So where do we go from here....well I for one am not going to invest in current 'Life-Expired PC.Technology' I intend to wait a few years and invest in the New Systems.

It's also the reason that I hope PTE.5.0 will have 'dual-engine' Utilities ?

Brian.Conflow.

[LumenLux]

so you make the show with 4.48 as well

ken

I don't really think that will be necessary. My understanding is - If I don't use the new features of 5.0, I can still make it with 5.0 for all viewers. I don't expect there will be any reason to need to use 4.48 - not even to dumb it down for an older graphics card. Do we understand that the same way?

[Ken Cox]

I think Igor answered that Bob

course, AVI video produced in PTE will play ideally smooth for any large images (next betas).

In final version 5.00 will be two ways:

- New graphical engine with hardware acceleration - if you create slide-show with Pan/Zoom (for modern video cards).

By the way, modern video card very well intended for 2D graphics. For this task, it works in hundreds times more fast than even modern CPUs.

but if you have doubts and you go out to do show CYA and take a 4.48 ver with you

[Igor]

Yes, v5.00 will be dual-engine. You choose for every project necessary engine. Because of this I'm sure that v5.00 will replace v4.48 in all purposes.

As I wrote earlier, new Windows Vista requires powerful video card.

So Intel, SiS, VIA are already working with Microsoft on increasing in several times speed of their future integrated video solutions.

If PC, laptop or media center with integrated video card designed for Windows Vista, they will play fine slide-shows created in PicturesToExe v5.00

Please look here. It's official Microsoft web site with screenshots of Windows Vista:

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/events/pdc/gallery.mspx

This new graphical interface of Windows rendered in video card with hardware acceleration.

It's another question - real need of such step which did Microsoft. Personally I don't like many changes I've seen in first public beta (maybe sometimes you think same about new beta of PTE ) of Windows Vista. But it seems to be reality of next day.

[nickles]

Aha! Some discussion....

First Igor,

The original post and hopefully all other posts are in NO WAY critical of your wonderful development. I plan very much to use PTE 5.0... it's absolutely the way of the future. I 100% believe your development is the way PTE should be headed....so continue to go for it! I'm personally willing to pay XTRA money for your eventual upgrade....please do not hesitate your efforts based on any of these disccusions. A couple of years from now these discussions will have no meaning as the technology changes and the older computers disappear.

Now for others,

I just made another simple panning/zooming slide show that I posted in my Yahoo Briefcase for test purposes. It can be downloaded hear:

http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/sknickles@sb...ic+Data&.view=l

You may have to refresh your browser button several times in order to get to it? It's named PanTest Beta5.

It is composed of one photo from my Rebel 3072x2048, one short 128kbit-1.4mbyte mp3, and one two line .png title. It basically pans the entire photo with the screen set under project options to 4:3 PC/DVD. The Title also zooms and pans at the start and end. The show is set to run for 92.5 seconds. The mp3 was cropped to 92.5 seconds.

If anyone wishes to down load and run in what they consider to be a slow computer give it a try and report if you get jerkiness. I've got four computers available including my son's and wifes...but all have a 128mb or greater video card. It runs smooth on all of them. I will run it on several much slower systems at the office tomorrow and report my results.

Lumenlux,

What caused me to post this was your show...it is the only one of the many beta 5 shows I tested that stalled out. It ran perfectly in 3 out of 4 of the computers I tested it in.

I need to read the recent posts here...but wanted to quickly post while my thoughts were clear.

sincerely.

ken

[JPD]

Which works so fast as v4.48

I don't understand anything, to day, when I use exactly the same 500 jpg files with the same transitions (fade=20ms), it works in synchronized mode with 4.48 with only 300 ms between each view, I am obliged to put with the V5 a duration of more of one second in order it run correctly.

May be it's because my graphic card which is an old one, but I think I am not alone to have an old card (3 years old).

I wait before to continue these tests to have the 2 motor's version and hope I'll find similar results with the 2 products, but it's seem very strange.

[Igor]

Jean-Pierre,

The second future CPU based graphical "engine" will work with same speed as v4.48 and same fast loading of images.

I'll explain why images load more long in v5.00 with hardware accelerated graphical engine:

- If load images with maximal load of CPU and priority - we'll see noticeable jerks on Pan/Zoom effects.

- The second reason - we need to additionally copy images from main memory to memory in video card. This copying is slow process, unfortunately.

I still don't understand how we got it to work. Many times we thought it's impossible to solve next technical limitation.

[JRR]

If anyone wishes to down load and run in what they consider to be a slow computer give it a try and report if you get jerkiness.

ken

Nickles:

All effects were jerky on my computer. It is a relatively new computer but (to make a long story short) with a NVidia GeFroce 2GTS card (I haven't been able to figure out how much memory it has, but obviously not enough )

[Ronniebootwest]

I have been following all the numerous posts about version 5 since it was released. Initially the demo's all worked reasonably well with only slight 'jerkiness' I concluded that my graphics card was not up to running the new effects - my old card was an NVIDEA GEFORCE 5200. So I purchased a new card which was recommended as suitable, i.e. NVIDEA GEFORCE 6600GT. With this new card I expected perfection with the pan and zooms but nothing has changed, in fact, I get an even more pronounced 'jerkiness' now that I had before.

Someone suggested that this is because I might have too much running in the background. Is this so and if it it, how can I stop thinga from running in the background in order to check again?

Another thing that I have noticed since the new card has been installed, is that the mouse cursor now moves erratically across the screen whereas before it was perfectly smooth.

Seems that I might be waiting for Version 5 to get better before I try to use it.

Ron

[Ken Cox]

Ken

jerkiness started +- 18 secs in and approx every 8 secs thereafter

ken

[LumenLux]

I heard the music and thought I was going to be part of Disneyland's old Electric Light Parade. Do they still use that music? Or is this another clever nostalgia trick Ken?

The show on my "best" pc runs very smooth. Two tiny "gulps" as if the panning engine needed a breath. Will try on other machines later.

[Conflow]

Yes, v5.00 will be dual-engine. You choose for every project necessary engine. Because of this I'm sure that v5.00 will replace v4.48 in all purposes.

As I wrote earlier, new Windows Vista requires powerful video card.

So Intel, SiS, VIA are already working with Microsoft on increasing in several times speed of their future integrated video solutions.

If PC, laptop or media center with integrated video card designed for Windows Vista, they will play fine slide-shows created in PicturesToExe v5.00

Please look here. It's official Microsoft web site with screenshots of Windows Vista:

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/events/pdc/gallery.mspx

This new graphical interface of Windows rendered in video card with hardware acceleration.

It's another question - real need of such step which did Microsoft. Personally I don't like many changes I've seen in first public beta (maybe sometimes you think same about new beta of PTE ) of Windows Vista. But it seems to be reality of next day.

Many Thanks Igor,

I am very pleased you confirmed about 'Dual-Engine' ~ Both you and I are aware about the 'Next Generation' of Graphic/Video Cards and the need to get these to an 'International Performance Standard' not only for 'MS.Vista Operating System' but also to achieve compatibility with new 'Digital Television Standards'

I also appreciate that you are stopping PTE.Beta.5 -AVI Development- at the Standard PAL/NTSC stage and letting someone else provide an 'AVI/Digitiser Program' for Digital Television ~ a wise choice indeed.

Again many thanks for that confirmation....

Brian.Conflow.