PicturesToExe v5.00 beta #2

[Igor]

Al,

We understood this problem. It's particularity of system of objects with relative coordinates and relative sizes. The only current solution - copy only one parent-objects with child-objects.

I don't know at this moment another solution, sorry.

[alrobin]

Igor,

I found another solution to this problem and since it works, I don't understand why the rectangle solution doesn't work.

If I use another image instead of a rectangle, and set its opacity to 0, then everything works as it should. See screenshot below.

[Lmoreels]

Hallo,

I think Alrobin has it quit right. I even prefer a black border than lose a part of the image, or to lose the aspect ratio of a picture.

[Boogie]

Igor,

RENAME IMAGES in v5

Problem with renaming images.

I do not know if this problem has been raised already, but it is as follows:-

Objects and Animation screen

Open FIRST image and rename in Name panel - no problem.

Open second image (by right click in grey area).

Adjust size of new object (shift + mouse drag)

Properties - Click on default name 'image' to edit

Edit 'image' name to new name 'XXX' -- 'image ' name in OBJECTS panel does NOT change to new 'XXX'

Found way to solve problem, namely:-

Click on 'image ' in Objects panel, then click on 'XXX' in Name panel.

Start to edit 'XXX' in Name panel and 'image' in Objects panel changes from 'image' to edited 'XXX'

[Igor]

Al,

I think it works because new "image-parent" has same proportions as previous "parent".

[alrobin]

Al,

I think it works because new "image-parent" has same proportions as previous "parent".

Igor,

Sorry to keep bothering you on this, but if the new "image-parent" can have the same proportions as the default "parent", why can't the rectangle be designed to have these proportions too?

[thedom]

RENAME IMAGES in v5

Problem with renaming images.

I don't know how much work it would need to do it and even if it's feasible, but in a future version, i would find find interesting that images have by default the name of the file.

Just an idea...

[alrobin]

I don't know how much work it would need to do it and even if it's feasible, but in a future version, i would find find interesting that images have by default the name of the file.

Just an idea...

I, too, would find this helpful. They can always be renamed if the file name is too long.

I bet Michel would find this useful, too!

[Michel]

Yes, what is "to do" is todo .

[alrobin]

Yes, what is "to do" is todo .

Michel,

I have no idea what that means!? Something got lost in the translation. Qu'est-ce que c'est en français?

[thedom]

I have no idea what that means!? Something got lost in the translation. Qu'est-ce que c'est en français?

My guess : what "has to be done" has to be done ?

(don't even know if it makes more sense ).

[Michel]

You know Igor has his TODO list and I hope he kept and don't forgot this wish, but it's a little droplet near his V5 work.

[alrobin]

You know Igor has his TODO list and I hope he kept and don't forgot this wish, but it's a little droplet near his V5 work.

Right on!

[LumenLux]

Al, I admit to only half understanding half of this. But - What you are currently un-able to accomplish with the rectangle - can you accomplish it using the 0-opacity image? If so - Does the differing results with image vs. rectangle actually give ultimately more possibilities which someone might prefer one or the other in a given instance (purpose)?

[alrobin]

Al, I admit to only half understanding half of this. But - What you are currently un-able to accomplish with the rectangle - can you accomplish it using the 0-opacity image? If so - Does the differing results with image vs. rectangle actually give ultimately more possibilities which someone might prefer one or the other in a given instance (purpose)?

Robert,

I don't know if there are other applications that would be affected by this anomoly with the rectangle, or if mine is the only one. It's one of those things you run into when programming where logic is everything, and if this breaks down, then use of this feature is unpredictable. And, it is not possible to test one's show for every aspect ratio and for every image size to determine whether there are any incompatibilities or not.

The rectangle, just like an image object can be used for grouping other objects together. It should be relatively neutral (i.e. invisible, un-moving, and benign) until the maker puts it in motion or gives it a gradient, etc., unless, of course, it is a sub-object of another object which is, itself, changing over time. However, at present, the rectangle behaves differently than a 0-opacity "image" object, which makes one suspicious of its "reliability" in a complex object-grouping.

I have noticed that many, if not most, of the demos submitted so far do not use rectangles, and even where they do, they are used as "stand-alone" objects, without any sub-objects "attached". So, the effect which I experienced in my experiment with moving titles would not be involved. The instances where this would occur may be small - but no one knows at this point. It is just one of those things that could trip us up down the road, and end up being a nuisance. The purpose of a "beta" program is to flush out all of these little "anomalies" (Igor doesn't want to call it a "bug"), and this is one which should be fairly easy to correct.

Re your specific questions, I've already described and thoroughly demonstrated what I am unable to accomplish with the rectangle and indicated that for this particular moving title application I have found a work-around. I don't know if it would be a workaround for everyone with a similar application. Having been a forum member for many years, you know all about workarounds - they work, but it would be nicer if a feature had been designed for this when the program was developed.

I don't know for sure, but I doubt that this workaround would be superior to the use of a rectangle in these situations as the rectangle adds minimal if not zero kilobytes to one's show. (and we've already heard from at least one forum member about how important that is. ) There's also the consideration of processor and video card resources, and whether an opaque image might be more processor and video RAM intensive than the rectangle.

Conversely, the results from use of the rectangle in many complex title applications could be unpredictable, depending on whether there are any images as "sub-objects".

[alrobin]

Igor,

Just a picky detail:

In the O/A window, if one right-clicks on an object, there is an option to change it to "cover screen" mode. However, there is no similar option in that menu to select "fit to screen" or "original".

Also some more detail on the other problem I reported: I indicated that I could work around the problem by using an image instead of a rectangle. Well, I have discovered that if that image is square, I get the same result as copying all the objects to the square rectangle. Might it help, therefore, if the default size and aspect ratio for the rectangles were the same size and aspect ratio as that of the whole show?

[thedom]

There is now way to copy a keypoint of an object to an other object, right ?

Thanks.

[alrobin]

There is now way to copy a keypoint of an object to an other object, right ?

Thanks.

Thedom,

You can also "clone" a keypoint within the same object, but I don't think you can copy a keypoint to another object.

However, you can copy the object, along with all it's keypoints, and then just change the file address of it to that of the object you want, and it will retain all the keypoints of the object it was copied from.

[Igor]

Al,

A good idea about default aspect ratio of newely inserted Rectangles. I'll discuss your idea tomorrow with Aleksey.

[alrobin]

A good idea about default aspect ratio of newely inserted Rectangles. I'll discuss your idea tomorrow with Aleksey.

Thanks, Igor. Much appreciated.

[Igor]

Al,

We did as you asked. Newely added Rectangle has size as slide with some proportions.

Also now it will possible to change virtual size of Rectangle. For example, you can type 1024x768

it's not real size on the screen, but only intended to specify necessary proportions of Rectangle.

[JPD]

Igor,

For example, you can type 1024x768

Do you mean that this value we can type will be the size we will find in the PTE file as size. If yes, it's a very good news.

[Igor]

Yes, it's size of object. And it already exists in .pte project file. See "Size" value of an object.

As you know, Images have own size.

For Rectangle you will able to set size in beta #3.

[JPD]

Very nice, Igor, I waited for that.

I have another request which can make the work easier :

Only for the parents, to have 2 transparency parameters :

The first one as to day which work only on the parent and a second one which work one the parent and all the children ( as for Zoom/Pan/Rotate).

[alrobin]

Al,

We did as you asked. Newely added Rectangle has size as slide with some proportions.

Also now it will possible to change virtual size of Rectangle. For example, you can type 1024x768

it's not real size on the screen, but only intended to specify necessary proportions of Rectangle.

Thanks, Igor - I knew you could do it! Thanks for taking the time to add this to your many priorities. It will make programming the objects and moving them around much more consistent.

I also support JP's request for the option to have all the "children" objects be able to inherit all of the characteristics of the parent, including opacity.