Aspect Ratios

[davegee]

I have been spending a little time investigating the effect of differing aspect ratio slide shows being presented with the current (Beta 2) version of PTE5. (Following onfrom Ken's Topic).

I have come to the conclusion that there is no problem as long as the following procedure is adopted.

Let's take, for example, a show which I decide to put together using full screen on my 1.333 ratio (1280x854) monitor. It just so happens that this is the aspect ratio of my camera images so nothing is lost if I want to use these images straight out of the camera. The "Project Options" that I set for Screen would be:

Fit Slide To Screen - 4:3 PC/DVD - 1.3333

I also set Windowed Mode and enter the same aspect ratio figures there i.e. 1280x854

My background would be Solid Black.

Obviously, if I now add an image which is 1280x854 it will immediately cover the black area in Objects and Animations and if I press preview I will get a full screen image. If I had wanted to start with a 120% zoom into the image and then zoom out to 100% or vice versa then I would start with a 1536 pixel wide image (or greater).

To this I would now add a thin white line around the image by inserting a 1280x854 pixel PNG file with a 3-6 pixel white border inside (as an object) on top of my original 1280 or 1536 pixel image making sure that it is not added to the Main Image but as an independent object (otherwise it would zoom with the Main Image). The preview would now show the same image, full screen, but this time within a thin white line border.

I would have to add this same PNG file to every image in the show but this is not a big problem.

My one image show is now ready to be turned into an EXE file and will play full screen on my 1.3333 ratio monitor. But what happens if I send this to someone with a different size or different aspect ratio monitor?

If the recipient has a 1280x1024 (1.25) monitor then the EXE will play full width, all zooms etc contained within a white bounding line with black bands top and bottom. I have not tried it, but I am assuming that anyone with a wide screen (wider than the 1280x854 aspect ratio) would see the black bands on either side of the image rather than top and bottom.

So there it is - one size fits all.

Other things to consider:

The recipient might have a larger monitor (bigger than the 1280 pixel width). If I want to cater for this possibility then I will have to make the minimum size of my images the same as the maximum monitor resolution which is possible in order to avoid PTE having to interpolate upwards. For instance if I want to cater for a 1600x1200 monitor then all of my images will have to be 1600 (plus any zooming percentage) wide.

DaveG

[alrobin]

Dave,

I believe that there has never been a problem with scaling, etc., in windowed mode. However, this mode is not acceptable to some AV producers.

Did you have a look at my two test shows (see separate thread)? There is a spreadsheet included which summarizes the effect of different aspect ratios for various combinations of "fit to screen" and "cover screen".

Ken (Texas) and I have both experienced unexpected cropping when switching to different monitor aspect ratios.

[davegee]

Hi Al,

In a recent e-mail from Ken, he said:

"Hello Dave:

Your aspect ratio method sounds like it might work...if Igor's software is not having a problem with "fit to screen. What about creating a concept demo set of PTE files or shows. Maybe with the two worst case aspect ratios for images. I think 16:9 at 1820x1024 is the widest aspect LCD panel I've seen and 5:4 1280x1024 is the narrowest aspect ratio I've seen.

I'm thinking of a demo that people could "easily" try on various aspect ratio monitors to see what happens. I can get access to quite a few.

Just a suggestion. I would try to do it myself but I might screw up your idea.

Sincerely,

ken"

Never one to duck a challenge I produced a couple of Templates as per Ken's suggestion and they demonstrate both the Windowed Mode and SKELETON TEMPLATE principles. Anyone interested can download both from the following link and please read the readme.txt file in each.

Each is only around 10Kb file size.

Proper viewing will necessitate the addition of Ken's Photo_6x4 file in its original 3072x2048 pixel format. If you don't have this photo any 3072x2048 pixel image will do but the PZR functions might not suit your image.

Just rename the file you are going to use to "Photo_6x4.jpg" and overwrite the same name file in each template.

The result is that either PTE file should work on ANY aspect ratio monitor and all PZR functions will be performed within the border I have applied. The 5x4 PTE should work FULL SCREEN on a 5x4 ratio monitor and similarly the 16x9 ratio show will work full screen on a 16x9 monitor. Any problems - please let me know?

The Link: HERE

http://www.gould68.freeserve.co.uk/templat...etemplates.html

DaveG

[alrobin]

Dave,

I'll give it a try.

By the way, did you have a chance to try out my two demos? They too were prepared so that shows created under different aspect ratios, etc., could be tried out on different monitor configurations. I'm not too concerned about windowed mode, although it should certainly be tested too.

[davegee]

Al,

The reason that I have not downloaded your two Demos is that my Dial-up connection makes this a long-winded and often fruitless task.

Which is why I developed the SKELETON TEMPLATE idea. My friends and I exchange our ideas in 20Kb files (as opposed to 20Mb files).

Let me know what you think of what I have done and then see if you can apply the skeleton template idea to your demo? If you then post it I can download.

Best wishes,

DaveG

[nickles]

The reason that I have not downloaded your two Demos is that my Dial-up connection makes this a long-winded and often fruitless task.

Which is why I developed the SKELETON TEMPLATE idea. My friends and I exchange our ideas in 20Kb files (as opposed to 20Mb files).

DaveG

Ahhhh.....Dave:

Now I appreciate your SKELETON TEMPLATE even more. I've gotten so used to using a high speed connection that I forgot that there are still many, many people that are using dial up. I'm glad I read your post.

nickles

[alrobin]

Al,

The reason that I have not downloaded your two Demos is that my Dial-up connection makes this a long-winded and often fruitless task.

Which is why I developed the SKELETON TEMPLATE idea. My friends and I exchange our ideas in 20Kb files (as opposed to 20Mb files).

Let me know what you think of what I have done and then see if you can apply the skeleton template idea to your demo? If you then post it I can download.

Best wishes,

DaveG

Dave,

I set my monitor resolution to 1280x1024, opened your demo, resized an image of my own to 3072x2048, renamed it "Photo_6x4.jpg", and set the screen aspect ratio to 5:4, in "windowed mode" as you suggested. (by the way, "windowed mode" is not yet activated in v.5).

The following screen shot is the result, with severe cropping on each end of the photo as indicated by the arrow. "Normally" in PTE, the image would be shown with black bars top and bottom so as to avoid truncating. You can see the way it should look by putting the 6x4 image into PTE 4.x and selecting "fit to screen" in "PO/Screen".

[nickles]

Hello Dave & Al,

Al, I haven't had time to study your results...as I'm taking a brief break from my yard work but I thought I would quickly state what I've seen so far.

Early this morning, I played around with your templates, Dave and think you might have discovered something. For purposes of testing, I did some simple revisons and uploaded your revised templates here:

http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/sknickles@sb...case.yahoo.com/

It's the file called DaveG Revised. Dave it's only 94kb big...so shouldn't present a problem with your dialup...just remeber you may have to hit your browser refresh several times to access it. The contents of the file appears as follows:

I've not tried "image insert" before but hopefully you see something. I basically combined your two folders into one, Dave. I also changed the names of the two images to correspond to the two image aspect ratios. I also placed two solid color images into each. Very simple colored graphic with text..to minimize download. I also took the privelege of changing the color of your 5x4line.png from red to white. I also changed the zooms and timing of your two .pte files.

Dave please correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm going to explain to Al what you are attempting to do. Two things...demonstrate the use of a border placed around the slide image to improve over the bleakness of a strictly black border and make the image "fit the screen" regardless of the screens aspect ratio. I had suggested to Dave that we try a 16:9 and 5:4 screen aspect ratio. Dave nomally works with a 1280x1024 flat panel display and desires to design his shows for that screen aspect ratio....but Dave desires the 5:4 image to "fit the screen" on anybody elses monitor.

What I think Dave has did different than us, Al, besides the very attractive border, is to set the Project Option under screen to Windowed Mode. He has set the window dimensions to the aspect ratio of interest. For 16:9 he chose 1820x1024 and for 5:4 he chose 1280x1024. These are typically the maximum pixel resolution one might expect to find monitors set at today.

I've only ran on a 4:3 monitor and it ran great "fitting the screen" for both the 16:9 and 5:4. The two images I uploaded are 1820x1024 pixels and 1280x1024 pixels. I also found that I can change the pixel size of the images to anything as long as I maintain the same aspect ratio and it still works. Sometime today I plan to try it out on a 1280x800 Laptop and a 1280x1024 desktop and post my results. My son also has a high resolution laptop that has something like a 1820x1024 native resolution I also hope to run it on.

Forgive my spelling and grammar as I typed this very hurriedly and haven't even proofed. I addressed this specifically to you two as we are the only ones that seem concerned with the aspect ratio and "fit the screen" discrepancies that Al and I uncovered. Anyone else is more than welcome to "jump in" as far as I'm concerned.

My lawnmowers calling...only one acre left before the weedeater.

Sincerely,

ken

[alrobin]

Dave please correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm going to explain to Al what you are attempting to do. Two things...demonstrate the use of a border placed around the slide image to improve over the bleakness of a strictly black border and make the image "fit the screen" regardless of the screens aspect ratio. I had suggested to Dave that we try a 16:9 and 5:4 screen aspect ratio. Dave nomally works with a 1280x1024 flat panel display and desires to design his shows for that screen aspect ratio....but Dave desires the 5:4 image to "fit the screen" on anybody elses monitor..

Well, on my system, the image doesn't "fit the screen" - it is cropped on both sides. It "fills" the screen, but is not "fitted to screen". That is the purpose of "cover screen". (See the "definition" of "fit to screen" under v.4.)

What I think Dave has did different than us, Al, besides the very attractive border, is to set the Project Option under screen to Windowed Mode. He has set the window dimensions to the aspect ratio of interest. For 16:9 he chose 1820x1024 and for 5:4 he chose 1280x1024. These are typically the maximum pixel resolution one might expect to find monitors set at today.

But "windowed mode" is not active yet in v.5.

[nickles]

Hello Al and Dave:

Excellent results. I ran both the 5x4template.pte and 16x9template.pte PTE 5 shows on four different computer systems.

HP Desktop with a 4:3 CRT monitor set at 1280x960 screen resolution.

Dell Laptop with a 8:5 Flatpanel with a native resolution of 1680x1050.

Acer Laptop with a 8:5 Flatpanel with a native resolution of 1280x800.

Acer Desktop with a 5:4 Flatpanel with a native resolution of 1280x1024.

A precise "fit to screen" on all four systems. The 16x9 template resulted in the white border being at the precise left and right edges of all screens with black borders top and bottom. The 5x4 template resulted in the white border being at the precise the top and bottom edges of all screens....of course this image exactly fitted all edges on the 1280x1024 screen.

Don't understand why your results differed Al.

More to add later but out to the....weadeater.

sincerely,

ken

[nickles]

Hello Al & Dave:

I repeated tests on all four systems. On one series the only Project Option I changed was I checked Fullscreen Mode instead of Windowed mode...keeping "fit to screen". Identical results. All fours systems yielded proper "fit the screen" on both the 16x9 image amd 5x4 image. I changed the Project Option mode to "cover screen" while still in Fullscreen Mode. All four systems provide the prober "cover screen" for both images.

I think I've figured it out. The original slide image must have the same aspect ratio as the screen aspect setting to achieve consistancy in "fit the screen" and "cover screen mode". To me this is not good. PTE should always cause an image to "fit the screen" and "cover screen" regardless of the differences is aspect ratios of the screen or image. Otherwise, it will be impossible to run mixed aspect images properly regardless of the screens aspect ratio. I commonly do this in my PTE 4 slideshows and always get consistancy in "fit to screen" mode with all kinds of variations in individual slide aspect ratios an all monitor aspect ratios.

sincerely,

ken

[alrobin]

Ken,

I'm not sure I understand you 100%, but I think in your last post that you're saying what I've been pointing out all along - i.e. that the treatment of different images is not consistent over different aspect ratios. I'll try to make some screen-captures to demonstrate the different effects I'm getting. But, on second thought, maybe that won't help, because everyone will be looking at them under different aspect-ratio conditions!

For now I just want to point out my understanding of the definition of the different treatments being considered:

1. Windowed mode: doesn't enter into the equation right now as it is not activated in v.5.

2. Cover screen: the monitor's screen should always be filled, even if this means cropping the image.

3. Fit to screen: the size of the image being shown should always be fitted exactly to the size of the monitor in either the horizontal or vertical dimension, (not necessarily both) but without cropping any of it.

4. Original mode: the images should appear as they do now in v.4, without the "fit to screen" option being selected.

Of course, in all cases, if the image needs to be resized to be compatible with a certain aspect ratio, it should be done proportionally so that it does not appear distorted.

Igor, maybe you can confirm whether or not this is consistent with what you are trying to achieve?

Happy weeding! In the meantime, maybe we should just sit back and see what Igor comes up with in beta 3.

[LumenLux]

I apologize in advance as I don't think I have devoted enough time to this topic to fully understand the many "aspects" of "aspect ratios." Do one or all of you say that certain settings in PTE 5, will result in a skinny person looking fat (or the opposite) when viewed on a particular monitor/screen aspect? Or, DaveG does your testing suggest or prove that problem can be avoided entirely by making the right choices at the sequence creation stage? I think also, Al, it might help to have some input from Igor, but this stuff is already tough without adding a language factor.

[nickles]

For now I just want to point out my understanding of the definition of the different treatments being considered:

1. Windowed mode: doesn't enter into the equation right now as it is not activated in v.5.

2. Cover screen: the monitor's screen should always be filled, even if this means cropping the image.

3. Fit to screen: the size of the image being shown should always be fitted exactly to the size of the monitor in either the horizontal or vertical dimension, (not necessarily both) but without cropping any of it.

4. Original mode: the images should appear as they do now in v.4, without the "fit to screen" option being selected.

I 100% concur with your 4 points. That's exactly how I see it. I got consistancy on a wide variety of aspect ratio screens in these recent tests. But in all of these cases the aspect ratio of the images were identical to the Project Options screen aspect ratio setting. I can't recall if this was the case in the inconsistancies both you and I saw in our earlier tests. The main point I was making is, that in my opinion regardless of the image aspect ratio or screen aspect ratio, of the machine the show is run on,....a properly functioning PTE 5 should eventually fit all 100% views of all images at "fit to screen" or "cover screen", as you defined in points 2 an 3, on all screens. That is how PTE 4 operates. Based on PTE 5's unique ability to zoom, I see no reason why "original' mode should ever be needed.

I'm curious why you didn't get consistancy when you ran these shows? What monitor aspect and screen resolution were you running?

It's now to hot here in Texas to finish weed eating and trimming...later this evening.

sincerely,

ken

[alrobin]

I'm curious why you didn't get consistancy when you ran these shows? What monitor aspect and screen resolution were you running?

Ken,

Glad we're in basic agreement on the definitions. That's a good starting point!

I used a monitor setting of 1280x1024 to run Dave's test, without adjusting anything in PO or O/A, other than to substitute my own image, size 3072x2048, a ratio of 6x4) . It clipped the image on both sides, as shown in my previously-attached illustration.

The border area fitted the screen perfectly, but the image inside it was cropped.

The main point I was making is, that in my opinion regardless of the image aspect ratio or screen aspect ratio, of the machine the show is run on,....a properly functioning PTE 5 should eventually fit all 100% views of all images at "fit to screen" or "cover screen", as you defined in points 2 an 3, on all screens. That is how PTE 4 operates.

I'm not sure I agree with you here - in PTE 4, unless one selects "fit to screen", images are shown at their original size, and might neither fit the screen nor cover the screen. This is the way PTE 4 was designed to operate, with the option to select "fit to screen", only if desired. Igor is giving us this mode of operation now as an option in v.5 (called "Original mode"), which is fine, as long as the latter is still available for images which don't look good when they are "blown up".

I suspect I will continue to use "original mode" myself, except where PZR effects are required.

[alrobin]

I apologize in advance as I don't think I have devoted enough time to this topic to fully understand the many "aspects" of "aspect ratios." Do one or all of you say that certain settings in PTE 5, will result in a skinny person looking fat (or the opposite) when viewed on a particular monitor/screen aspect? Or, DaveG does your testing suggest or prove that problem can be avoided entirely by making the right choices at the sequence creation stage? I think also, Al, it might help to have some input from Igor, but this stuff is already tough without adding a language factor.

Robert,

Don't apologize - this is rough stuff - the kind that makes you stay awake at night!! And, I agree, the language factor makes it 10 times worse. In fact I think that Gee, Nickles, and I are not talking the same language all the time, either, and we're all supposed to be speaking English!

But, you can rest easy, as in no way is anyone saying that the end result on any monitor should or will be out of proportion. This is why Igor is struggling so hard to provide a reasonable treatment under all different scenarios. Of course, if someone has a 4:3 monitor and has it set at 1280x768, for instance, everything will look squished, including the PTE shows, but the relative positions of objects should not change.

It all basically comes down to whether images should be arbitrarily cropped, and whether small images should be stretched to fit the screen. At the moment, there are some scenarios where the images don't completely fit the screen, either vertically or horizontally.

[nickles]

I used a monitor setting of 1280x1024 to run Dave's test, without adjusting anything in PO or O/A, other than to substitute my own image, size 3072x2048, a ratio of 6x4) . It clipped the image on both sides, as shown in my previously-attached illustration.

That's It Al!

I think maybe you used Daves original template files. Dave's original files were mislabled based on an earlier 6x4 project we were working on. That's why I posted the revised files above. I changed the name of his image template so that it would make better sense. When you run the 5x4 template the image must also be 5x4 for everything to fit. That's what I was atempting to explain...probably not real clearly..."fit to screen" doesn't always work if the image is not in agreement with the setting for screen aspect. I'm pretty sure if you crop your image from 6x4 to 5x4, i.e., 2560x2048 from 3072x2048, it will work. I did what you did at first as Dave's template indicated 6x4 mistakenly...and got your results...it didn't fit.

If you haven't downloaded the revison...you might try it. I've already put the correct images in them. All you need to do is preview the 16x9template.pte and the 5x4template.pte files.

What I meant in my earlier post is that PTE 4 when set to "fit to screen" fit all slide images in your show to fit any aspect of screen regardless of the images aspect. PTE 5 needs to do this also.

This is all confusing isn't it Al...sure be easier to discuss over a cup of coffee than trying to clearly explain with a keyboard. Come on down...I'm buying...if you prefer lemonade...I'll even get that...anything a little harder...we will need to negotiate.

Sincerely,

nickles

[alrobin]

If you haven't downloaded the revison...you might try it. I've already put the correct images in them. All you need to do is preview the 16x9template.pte and the 5x4template.pte files.

I'm sorry, Ken, but with your example I can't see the borders of the image, so will have to take your word for it that it just fills the frame in all aspect ratios. That's why I developed my transparent grids - so you could see what's underneath, and also so the edges of the images were well-defined. Also to keep the image sizes down (like Dave did in his example). I included a circle in the middle of the grid so as to test for the proportionality of the result, too(i.e. no "squished" images).

However, this example, as adjusted, seems to be consistent with the results I reported in the Excel file included with my previous test examples. (i.e. that the images will always be "fit to screen" in the best possible way.) This doesn't mean that we don't have a potential problem here, though. A successful show will depend on the maker always setting the same aspect ratio in "PO/Screen" as the images used. Human nature being what it is, this could be overlooked in putting together a show, and is one more area for potential error.

Also, if the maker needs to use an image only 1024x768 in size, or smaller, in a show indicated in "PO/Screen" as a "1280x768 show", the image will not be shown "full screen" in any direction. Now, maybe this isn't so bad, as the vertical dimension will be maintained at 576 pixels, the same as the height for the 1280x768 images on the same monitor.

What I meant in my earlier post is that PTE 4 when set to "fit to screen" fit all slide images in your show to fit any aspect of screen regardless of the images aspect. PTE 5 needs to do this also.

I agree, provided that "fit to screen" means "best fit", not "completely cover the screen". In PTE v.5 we now have the capability of indicating this option on an image by image basis.

This is all confusing isn't it Al...sure be easier to discuss over a cup of coffee than trying to clearly explain with a keyboard. Come on down...I'm buying...if you prefer lemonade...I'll even get that...anything a little harder...we will need to negotiate.

You're on - my next trip down to Big Bend.

[davegee]

Al,

I was away all day yesterday and unable to join in but:

Please FORGET about image pixel sizes.

How can anyone possibly get a 1820x1024 image to "FIT" a 1280x1024 screen - it is NOT possible.

But it is possible to create a show on a 1280x1024 screen which will show on any aspect ratio monitor albeit with some black banding somewhere. However, by putting a line around your show the banding becomes less obtrusive.

Re: Windowed Mode not being active? I'll get back to you.

DaveG

[davegee]

Al,

Re: Windowed Mode.

In my examples, if you change the values in the "Windowed Mode" box your Black Background or Canvas in the O & A window changes to suit. Therefore, by my definition, "Windowed Mode" works.

I suppose though, that it is the LINE around the images that defines the "Window" in my examples.

While I'm on definitions, can I give you my definition of "Fit To Screen"?

Fit to screen means that if I create a 5:4 show it will "Fit To Screen" on my 1280x1024 monitor with no black bands around the image. The same 5:4 show will either fit to the height or width of any other aspect ratio monitor.

DaveG

[nickles]

The same 5:4 show will either fit to the height or width of any other aspect ratio monitor.

Good Morning Dave,

I totally agree with this statement. But the same should be true for a show that the designer has made at 4:3, 15:9, 16:9, Custom, etc. Also this must be true even if the show is made up of images with a mix of aspect ratios within the slide list, such as 5x4,4x5,6x4,4x6.....etc. In my humble opinion, PTE 5 should not have the requirement to enter the screen aspect ratio. PTE 5 needs the ability in the Objects and Animation window to "preview the show as it would appear on" with a selection of the particular screen aspect ratio of interest.

Hope I stated your intent properly in the previous threads.

Did you get some good phtos at the Hay Festival?

Sincerely,

Ken

[alrobin]

Al,

I was away all day yesterday and unable to join in but:

Please FORGET about image pixel sizes.

How can anyone possibly get a 1820x1024 image to "FIT" a 1280x1024 screen - it is NOT possible.

But it is possible to create a show on a 1280x1024 screen which will show on any aspect ratio monitor albeit with some black banding somewhere. However, by putting a line around your show the banding becomes less obtrusive.

Re: Windowed Mode not being active? I'll get back to you.

DaveG

Good afternoon, Dave,

We missed you yesterday!

We seem to have different views on "fit to screen". Of course you can get a 1820x1024 image to "fit" a 1280x1024 or any other size screen, for that matter. By the "previous" definition under PTE 4.x and earlier, the definition that I subscribe to, you would simply shrink it to 1280x720 pixels. It would not "cover" the screen, but it would "fit" it the best way possible.

And, I'm not talking about pixel dimensions, either - that's a whole different ballgame. I think we're dealing with square pixels here, but that might be the answer as to what Igor is involved with in v.5 design. I know that in making menus, etc., for some of the video programs, using photoshop, one gets into the subject of rectangular pixels, but that is way over my head. But the size of individual images in pixels is important, as it is individual images that make up a show, so we can't forget about them.

I'm not sure that a border around the "show" is always the answer either. (Looks like we also need a definition for "size of show". I suppose it would be something like: "whatever size fits the monitor being used to view the show and still maintains the aspect ratio set in Project Options/Screen"). I don't mind a simple border. However, whether there is a border or not, I hate to see arbitrary cropping and "fitting-to-screen" of images that one wants to retain in their "original" size, in which case a border might be a distraction.

By the way, in "Windowed mode" in v4.x, you can have PTE put a border around the show for you. As far as I can tell, this is the only way one can define the "size of a show", but this feature is inactive so far in v.5 and, besides, is an option that not too many slideshow designers care for. It may change the size of the black box in v.5, but as far as I can tell, does not have any effect on the previewing of the show, and it doesn't seem to limit the size of the show on-screen.

Looks like we may just have to agree to differ.

[nickles]

Okay Gentlemen:

I think we are at a point of putting this thread and subject to a close. We are beginning to "spin our wheels". I think all three of us are in ageement on "fit to screen" and what we think would work best for PTE 5 slideshow designers. But before we close, I think we need to arrive at some basic conclusions that might be beneficial to Igor and his team as they continue with the development. I'm sure Igor is monitoring our commentary and I don't wish him to think that all three of us are "raving lunatics".

Let me generally summarize the background of this subject. Some time ago I started a thread indicating that I had concerns about Screen Apect Ratios as related to "fit the screen". I couldn't pinpoint exactly what I thought was wrong due to the many variables involved. I finally "through up my hands" in frustration. Al then started a follow up thread in which he had began analyzing the problem, I had suggested. He arrived at the conclusion that under certain situations there could be problems. Dave then started this thread indicating a possible solution and also suggested the use of a border to improve the appearance of the slides when a border was present. I know I've left out many details, but hopefully we generally agree with this summary.

So, I will make the following two points, but there may eventually be more, from you or I. I conclude but do you agree with these two points:

1.) Eventually, when a slide show designer creates a slideshow with PTE 5, he should be able to create a slideshow in which all the slides "fit the screen" regardless of the aspect ratio of the screen on which the show is played. This option being similar to the "fit the screen" option that is commonly use with PTE 4.

2.) The most current Beta #2 does not always result in the desire of 1.) above.

Sincerely,

ken

[alrobin]

Ken & Dave,

Sorry to throw a "monkey-wrench" (spanner) into all this, but I'm slowly coming around to a different way of thinking on this as I alluded to in one of my posts yesterday:

Also, if the maker needs to use an image only 1024x768 in size, or smaller, in a show indicated in "PO/Screen" as a "1280x768 show", the image will not be shown "full screen" in any direction. Now, maybe this isn't so bad, as the vertical dimension will be maintained at 576 pixels, the same as the height for the 1280x768 images on the same monitor.

I think Igor is still one step ahead of us (except for "cover screen", which we will leave for him to sort out for now). I think what Igor has given us may be the best of all worlds. The current "aspect ratio" setting in "PO/Screen" sets the "ideal" aspect ratio which the designer would like to maintain. And, it actually introduces another measure of control over the show.

Let me explain: if I decide, for instance, that I would like my show to have an aspect ratio of 16:9 for wide-screen or someday hd-dvd application, I can indicate this in PO/Screen. This defines the black box in the "O/A" window (unless over-ridden by "windowed mode", but we'll leave this alone for now too).

Having decided upon this particular aspect ratio, it could be undesireable to have a 5:4 image all of a sudden come in "full screen", just because one is viewing the show on a 5:4 monitor. I think what Igor is doing is making sure that all images will be consistent with the 16:9 aspect ratio to avoid a sudden jump up to a larger format in cases such as this. So, the only option is to provide black borders on all sides of the image.

Dave, if this is what you have been thinking all along, please forgive me for being so dense, but I really think this is the intention of Igor's development, not just an accident.

The only question which remains is how one can over-ride this effect in the current design (i.e. provide the option for "true" fit to screen on any monitor, as I have been advocating up until now, and Ken is still favouring) if a show designer wishes to do so. The answer may be a simple one, but my brain is too fried right now to think it all the way through. More later. Gotta run! Hope I have made my thoughts clear

[nickles]

Hello Al,

I gather you must be in disagreement with the two points that I made?

I'm at a loss as to your description of DVD 16:9 format as related to 5:4 screen format as related to "the intention of Igor's development" as related to "full screen" as related to my two points.

If I had only read your last paragraph, I would have thought that you agreed.

ken