Parameter Incorrect

[edsdiscs]

I prepared a simple slide show without music, and without customized properties on any of the slides. There are about 40 slides in the show, some effects were de-selected. When the show is played on a different computer than the one it was prepared on an error is displayed -- Parameter is Incorrect-- . The show plays without error on the original computer.

The computer used to make the presentation is running XP- Home Ed. and the computer displaying the error is running MicroSoft ME-home ed.

Has anyone else had this problem and does anyone have any suggestions on how to correct this?

Thanks,

Ed

[edsdiscs]

PS. The error occurs about 20 slides in and on the same slide, and all there after.

Ed

[nobeefstu]

Welcome Ed

You need supply a bit more details about SLIDE SHOW makeup so we have a better understanding .

Since you seem to have the "Parameter is Incorrect" error on the same Slide # and using no MUSIC in this particular case ... your issue is most likely related to the IMAGE used or TIMING/TRANSISTION/DURATION or your use of OBJECTS (if used).

Many things can bring about a "Parameter is Incorrect" error ... so more details of your IMAGES used ( size,depth,type,etc) and how you have configured your slide TIMING/TRANSISTION/DURATION.

The better the details supplied ... makes it better to troubleshoot/isolate the issues and errors.

[Igor]

Sorry for this problem!

Please could you send your presentation (if it's not more than 4 Mb) to my e-mail address - igor@wnsoft.com And we'll try to fix it as soon as possible.

[edsdiscs]

I was able to get the problem resolved by reducing the resolution of each slide from 600 or 1200 pixel per inch to 200. I added all the slides to a new show and created a new .exe, which worked on both the XP, and ME computers. The point where the Parameter is Incorrect error occured was where the resolution of the slides changed from 600 to 1200 ppi. Could the image taken longer to load (it was about 6 MB) than they were to be displayed 4 sec, and this cause the problem?

Thanks all for your responces.

Ed

[LumenLux]

Ed, there may be some confusion here - possibly on my part. (Help Guido!) The size of photos of 6 MB, if reduced in size could certainly have helped solve the problem. But the way I understand the numbers, your changing any photos from 600 or 1200 dpi to 200 dpi would not have reduced your file sizes. Did you actually reduce the file size by reducing the dimmensions of the photo or saving at a higher compression ratio?

[Guest guru]

Here I am, Bob.

You're right, of course. Setting a different dpi value doesn't change the image size. As I said several times, an 800 x 600 pixels image (say a 100 KB Jpg) is always a 100 KB 800 x 600 image on your monitor, either you set 200 dpi or 2000 or 20. What changes is only the size of the print, if you print it, and the pixels size in the print.

An extreme example. If we set our 800 x 600 image at 1 (one!) dpi, what does happen? Nothing, on the screen. But if we print it, each pixel will be 1" large, so the whole picture will be 800 x 600 inches (that is 66.6 x 50 feet, or 20.3 x 15.24 meters!). If we set now 1000 dpi for the same image, each pixel will be 1"/1000 ( = 0.024 mm), and we'll get a print 2.03 x 1.52 cm.

BUT... But pay attention. There are some softwares (like Irfanview) where you can set any dpi setting, and the picture size doesn't change.

In other softwares (like Photoshop), if you change the dpi value the picture is automatically resampled at a different pixel size (and obviously at a different KB size), to keep identical the size of printed picture.

[JRR]

Guido et al:

I agree with you about changing the resolution etc re file size.

One thing not many people understand well is the image size vs print(document) size vs file size in digital photography.

My take on it (from a PhotoShop perspective)

"Image" size is the pixel size (eg 800x600 pixels) on the monitor screen,

"print(document)" size is the image dimension (eg 4x6 inches) when printed on paper

"file" size is the size of the image on your storage device (hard drive or CD etc) in bytes (eg 250kb).

The initial image and file sizes are determined by the scan resolution or digital camera.

In PTE, I don't bother even thinking about the print/document size. After scanning at 1200 or 2400ppi, I adjust the image size for the screen size I want. If the resultant file size is too large, I then control it by the jpg quality. I usually use jpg quality of 6 (out of 10 in PS 5.0). My finished images in PTE stay at the 1200 or 2400ppi that I scanned them at.

In PhotoShop, with "resample" checked ON, (IMAGE>IMAGE SIZE), changing the resolution(ppi) does reduce the image size and thus the file size. This, to me, confuses everyone as they then think reducing the ppi is the only way to reduce file size.

If the "resample" is off, and you change the resolution, the image and file size stay the same, and the print size changes.

In a perfect world, everyone should spend a few hours playing with IMAGE>IMAGE SIZE in PhotoShop to see what really goes on.

Wayne Fulton's "A Few Scanning Tips" at www.scantips.com is of help as well.

That is my two cents worth on my understanding of all this

[edsdiscs]

Thanks for the education on digital images. Being new at this it helps.

To clarify exactly what I did -

I used MS Picture It which seemed to allow me to change the resolution of the image and keep the image size constant. Thus the image was always about 4x6 inches. As Guido noted at the end of his post, the size of the jpg file changed depending on the resolution I selected. When this was reduced form 1200 dpi to 200 dpi the file size droped for about 5-6MB to about 200KB.

Thanks again,

Ed

[Igor]

I just thoughted I could add simple protection in this situation when

resolution of a source picture in several times greater than it's really necessary.

In preview of picture (main window and cust. synch. window) we use

wonderful option of Jpeg format when it allows to load picture

scaled as 1:1 (full size), 1:2, 1:4 or 1:8. So that 1200 dpi's picture

(7000x4000 pixels) will be loaded in 8 times faster and with lesser

memory usage (for example in case of 800x600 screen resolution).

p.s. one only moment with printing - it will require to reload main

picture with original full size to be able print it in maximal quality.

[think(box)]

Great idea Igor!

Would it make sense to display a warning flag about excessive picture pixel count (resolution and file size considerations) to the show creator, so that when we make a mistake we find out early? We should be free to continue, but be warned that a CD-based, or even HD-based in the extreme, show may have performance difficulties.

I can't wait to have the next PTE release! When is it scheduled to happen?

Thanks and Cheers!

[boxig]

Guido (where are you ?)

I need you to write one HTML page for the tutorial I work on about DPI. Since you are the expert about these things and I remember your long explanations in past topics, you MUST write a long article about DPI.

...and why you don't answer my emails ?

Granot

[LumenLux]

Alas Granot, Guido is Italian. It is Saturday night. He may not be allocating energy to PTE right now.

[Guest guru]

Here I am, Bob!

Yes, it's Saturday night (here in Italy it's 1:15 AM), but I'm here. Till now I worked, so I was not with you...

Granot, if you say I must write an HTML page about dpi etc., OK, I'll do it. I cannot rebel against your orders...

As to your emails, I didn't get mail from you since several days... or maybe you wrote me again @yahoo.com?!

[Guest guru]

Jim "JRR", thanks for your contribution, that clarifies my talk and suggests the right terminology about the pictures size. Actually I was searching for an appropriate and clear English terms to indicate the various pictures sizes (pixels, KB, inches).

So from now on I'll use these terms:

- Image size to indicate the pixel size of the picture

- File size to indicate KB (or MB) size on the disk

- Print size to indicate the actual size (in inches or centimeters) of the printed images.

OK?

[JRR]

Guido:

Glad my notes helped.

Sorry about leaving out "centimetres". Us old people on this side of the pond have not fully adapted to the sensible unit of measure. But my kids (28 and 30 years old) have no idea what an inch, foot or yard is.

Maybe someday some of us less fortunate ones born on this side of the pond will also learn more than one language....

[Tripstrilles]

http://www.scantips.com/no72dpi.html

T.