My wishes for the next pte beta

[smithore]

I've found in Pte the best graphic engine and the most easy animation interface in slideshow software, however pte isn't only a picture software, we are in the audiovisual world.

Actually it's very very long and difficult to synchronise objects in the animation window: there's no sound!!!! Why?????

Only one audio track, it's very poor, no possibility to change sequences, no flexibility in sound fading and timing...

I don't talk about sound editing and directx or vst effects , I use Wavelab for that; but it's absolutely primordial to insert real-time fading, scrubbing and overs basics functions, without that, it's a big waste of time and archaic edition...

With good implementation of sounds tracks and flexibility, Pte will be the best slideshow software.

Very important also is the capability of playing animated gifs and vidéos as objects.

That's all!!!

[jfa]

G'day S.Bidouze

With good implementation of sounds tracks and flexibility, Pte will be the best slideshow software.

I too agree, basic sound editing on several audio timelines would be a great addition to PTE.

To keep thing tidy this topic should be posted in the "Ideas and suggestions for future versions" area.

[Lin Evans]

I would agree that it would be nice to be able to do some audio manipulation within the program, but you are wrong about audio tracks. There are two audio tracks. You have background audio or music and the ability to add audio on individual slides which plays concurrently with background music. Also the audio is not "very poor" but very good quality - as good as audio in any presentation slideshow program available today. Perhaps it is "a big waste of time" for you but not for everyone. Apparently sound is more important to you than to some others who find the sound capabilities as they are now quite nice. Of course they could always be improved, but this isn't a deal killer for most of us. Many of us believe it "is" the best slideshow program available for the Windows environment, and that includes many of us who have most if not all the competitive products to compare it with.

Animated Gifs are low quality images with only 256 colors and rarely of any value to those preparing serious slideshow presentation programs. Video would be nice but only if high resolution well beyond DVD quality unless you want to degrade the entire presentation to low resolution DVD. If you place current video quality along side high quality hardware rendered images the there is an immediate impression of the quality of the show being diminished to the least common denominator.

There are a number of presentation slideshow products which allow drop-in video and they all have software rendered relatively low quality image production suitable for web or DVD at standard NTSC or PAL resolutions.

Perhaps in the future PTE will allow video clip drop-in, but then when it's used there will be a significant drop in image quality between the video and high quality still image unless the video is rendered at 1080p resolution. Right now there are no video capture devices (cameras) which are up to the standards of PTE's high resolution hardware rendered images. Maybe in the future there will be, but then most present systems including the majority of home DVD players and screens are a few years away from being able to play such video quality.

Lin

I've found in Pte the best graphic engine and the most easy animation interface in slideshow software, however pte isn't only a picture software, we are in the audiovisual world.

Actually it's very very long and difficult to synchronise objects in the animation window: there's no sound!!!! Why?????

Only one audio track, it's very poor, no possibility to change sequences, no flexibility in sound fading and timing...

I don't talk about sound editing and directx or vst effects , I use Wavelab for that; but it's absolutely primordial to insert real-time fading, scrubbing and overs basics functions, without that, it's a big waste of time and archaic edition...

With good implementation of sounds tracks and flexibility, Pte will be the best slideshow software.

Very important also is the capability of playing animated gifs and vidéos as objects.

That's all!!!

[smithore]

Thanks Lin for your answer.

Quality of video, gif or flash is only user's problem.

About the audio, the others slideshow software (ex. proshow) have many more possibilities.

There are two audio tracks. You have background audio or music and the ability to add audio on individual slides which plays concurrently with background music

Not a true second track!!! no fading in/out, no start position (+/- ms), no volume control...

[Lin Evans]

Yes, true - but since you mentioned Proshow, let's look at what happens when you have too many features and not enough testing. Over 300 "fixes" to the "release" version 3.0 including many, many audio complaints within the first two months after release and still not right (I have it and Gold). Jerky pans and zooms, low quality executables, sound sync issues, Flash issues, DVD burning issue, MP3 issues, etc., in fact for many users not much does work right.

PTE is, by contrast, a very stable beta. Features are added a few at a time and thoroughly tested before being included so when the release is made, users can depend on a much higher quality product. Yes, it takes time to introduce features and we all have things we would like to see. Many of these features will eventually be included but again, it takes time to test, debug and identify issues. Some time in the future I'm certain there will be more audio editing capabilities in PTE, but until then I feel it's still by "far" the best presentation slideshow software tool available, and available at a fraction of what the competition gets for buggy beta software marketed and sold as a release product.

Yes, no volume control or fade or precise positioning for second audio track (per slide) but still it is a second track and serves the intended purpose for allowing voice comments on each slide. Perhaps in a future version there will be more control over audio.

Best regards,

Lin

Thanks Lin for your answer.

Quality of video, gif or flash is only user's problem.

About the audio, the others slideshow software (ex. proshow) have many more possibilities.

Not a true second track!!! no fading in/out, no start position (+/- ms), no volume control...

[jfa]

G’day Lin,

Let me say at the start, what PTE does it does better than anyone else, I use it for that reason and also because of this forum where you and many others provide such great support for the product, thank-you heaps.

However the one area where PTE dose not compete is sound addition and editing. This may not be a “deal killer” to you but is important to some, (maybe many), of the PTE users. The sound quality in PTE is excellent but the basics of editing are not there.

Until beta5 I used “Sony Vegas” to produce a show if I wanted to make a DVD or if I had an involved soundtrack. I suggest you look at it to see what ideal sound edition in an AV/Movie application can be. There are many other products that provide very good sound editing well above what is available in PTE. However in all other areas they don’t compare well to PTE, that is why I use it, and would like to see it the standard all others are judged by. I now see this as the last area to develope for PTE to become the standard of excellence for all the others to try and follow if they can.

I don’t want all the “bells and whistles” of sound adjustment and manipulation in PTE these functions are only occasionally needed and don’t warrant the big investment of time to develop in PTE. That can be done in more advanced sound editors as required.

It is the basic sound editing I am asking for. Fading in/out, adjustment of the start and end position in msec, volume control, mixing of 2/3 sound sources, joining sound files with or without fades, inserting silence, etc.

I would suggest this could be done by developing the time-line window to a full screen and adding 2/3 sound channels. One channel could be used for music, one for a second music track or commentary and the last for sound effects.

Each sound file required could be loaded into the desired channel at the point in time the author required, and have its fade in/out and volume adjusted.

Where the author required sound files to overlap, as in music and commentary, the appropriate channel could have its volume adjusted for a selected time period to allow mixing of the 2 files.

The music tabs in project options and customise slide would have their functions moved to this screen. Thus keeping all sound functionally in one area.

Igor this I know would involve a major amount of time and work, maybe V6, please!

[Lin Evans]

Hi John,

Yes, I'm pretty familiar with Vegas Video, I've owned and used it (the entire suite) since it was owned by Sound Forge long before Sony bought it, I also use all of Photodex's products, Memories on TV Pro, several Cyberlink products including Media @Show, My Slideshow, Canopus Imaginate, Pictures Slideshow Maker, Several Adobe Suite top-end products and about a dozen other lesser known video editing software packages. I am quite familiar with sophisticated sound editing capabilities.

My point is that it takes time to develop both specialized video and specialized audio editing features. Let's give Igor, Sergay, Pavel, etc., time to first take care of giving us the complete feature set we had in version 4 before we ask too much too quickly. Personally, I'm willing to wait until they have time to investigate the best way to incorporate sound editing features. Their plate is more than full right now and though I fully appreciate suggestions for improvement and have made several myself, to suggest that the sound is "poor" (not your comment) is simply not correct. Perhaps it was a language issue and if so I apologize. To say that one would like more sophisticated sound handling is more reasonable I think.

As a former software developer myself, I fully appreciate the difficulties in providing certain features, especially when totally immersed in trying to get the initial new version release to market. Only the developers know the issues involved in making the necessary changes to their product to offer more flexibility and I realize that you know this. I have full confidence that in time we will have most, if not all the features we want, but right now we have, in my opinion, the finest overall product available for producing superior presentation slideshows. As I said, I can live with doing my sound editing as well as my image editing in other software until such time as these features may be added as a part of PTE. I've see what trying to add too many features too fast has done in competitive products and I don't want to see anything like that happen to this product.

As an example, I paid over $1200 for my Vegas Video suite and I expect to see rather sophisticated capabilities in terms of sound editing. When I compare that to the investment in PTE I then realize what a true gem we have here.

Best regards,

Lin

G'day Lin,

Let me say at the start, what PTE does it does better than anyone else, I use it for that reason and also because of this forum where you and many others provide such great support for the product, thank-you heaps.

However the one area where PTE dose not compete is sound addition and editing. This may not be a "deal killer" to you but is important to some, (maybe many), of the PTE users. The sound quality in PTE is excellent but the basics of editing are not there.

Until beta5 I used "Sony Vegas" to produce a show if I wanted to make a DVD or if I had an involved soundtrack. I suggest you look at it to see what ideal sound edition in an AV/Movie application can be. There are many other products that provide very good sound editing well above what is available in PTE. However in all other areas they don't compare well to PTE, that is why I use it, and would like to see it the standard all others are judged by. I now see this as the last area to develope for PTE to become the standard of excellence for all the others to try and follow if they can.

I don't want all the "bells and whistles" of sound adjustment and manipulation in PTE these functions are only occasionally needed and don't warrant the big investment of time to develop in PTE. That can be done in more advanced sound editors as required.

It is the basic sound editing I am asking for. Fading in/out, adjustment of the start and end position in msec, volume control, mixing of 2/3 sound sources, joining sound files with or without fades, inserting silence, etc.

I would suggest this could be done by developing the time-line window to a full screen and adding 2/3 sound channels. One channel could be used for music, one for a second music track or commentary and the last for sound effects.

Each sound file required could be loaded into the desired channel at the point in time the author required, and have its fade in/out and volume adjusted.

Where the author required sound files to overlap, as in music and commentary, the appropriate channel could have its volume adjusted for a selected time period to allow mixing of the 2 files.

The music tabs in project options and customise slide would have their functions moved to this screen. Thus keeping all sound functionally in one area.

Igor this I know would involve a major amount of time and work, maybe V6, please!

[jfa]

G’day again Lin,

Let's give Igor, Sergay, Pavel, etc., time to first take care of giving us the complete feature set we had in version 4 before we ask too much too quickly.

I certainly don’t mean for Igor and team to rush off and develop these enhancements tomorrow, next week next month or possible not even next year. This forum is called “Ideas and suggestions for future versions” and I take that to mean suggestions for next week to the next 5 or more years. That is why I suggested he look at the sound editing enhancement for V6, which I think will be well into next year or even later.

As a former software developer myself

Last year I retired after spending 32 years in the IT industry and got my life/health back, a good nights sleep and back in touch with what really matter. I do understand the demands on people working in software development. Some of that time I was in audio labs in the telecommunication industry developing software tools and I do have a good idea on what is required to develop these enhancements.

As an example, I paid over $1200 for my Vegas Video suite

Here in Australia “Sony Veags Movie/DVD studio Plat” sells for A$299, equal I think to about US$185. Even so PTE is as you said a true gem. I think if they were the same price this would still be true of PTE. I too have tried most of the software you mentioned. In fact I started in AV work when 2 Kodak Carousel projectors, a dissolve unit built myself from discreet components (no chips then), and a 7” reel to reel tape deck was the go. We don’t know just how luck we are with a PC and PTE.

For 35 plus years I have been involved in the camera club area in Australia and because of my IT background I often get a request for help from photographers moving too digital photography and the associated AV area. Most AV makers here use Pinnacle or ProShow and when I suggest they give PTE a try they will come back with the comment "Very good but no sound editing".

Great to have this dialogue with you Lin. Kicking these ideas around on this forum and how Igor listens to user wishers is one of the reasons PTE is so good, thanks.

[ADB]

Interesting thread developing here and I think it highlights one important thing about PTE and that is that it is an excellent EXE producer. There are more advanced softwares out there as discussed with multiple soundtracks and video tracks and everything else BUT they are producing VIDEO. I feel WNSOFT may have pushed EXE presentations almost to the limits that current mainstream hardware can manage, is it actually physically possible to have multiple full function soundtracks and play back full screen, high resolution images complete with animations and effects all in Smooth Real Time? If the answer to that question at this point in time is NO maybe we need to live with producing the audio track in other softwares and importing into PTE.

Regards

Andrew

[smithore]

Ok, this post wasn't initiate to compare Pte with other video or slideshow software, i know all these programs and use them also (3 years on proshow before using Pte). For sound editing and composition i use Cubase, wavelab and others...

If i ask these basics features, it's because i think Pte is the best slideshow software, i've compared also with m.object and wings platinum and the winner in fluidity animation is....Pte!!! A software 20 times less expensive!!

The only urgent feature is to activate sound in object animation window

[alrobin]

The only urgent feature is to activate sound in object animation window

Stephane, I agree with you! This is the only area pertaining to sound where PTE is lacking at the moment. And I think I remember Igor vaguely promising to look into providing it along with the O&A timeline.

This is an interesting thread. Being a long-time software developer, myself, I agree also with Lin and others regarding the provision of more sophisticated audio editing features, including multiple sound tracks. I also use Cubase for most of my sound mixing and editing, and even if these were provided in PTE, I would still rely on Cubase to prepare a single track in PTE, with some added sound effects or narration on a slide-by-slide basis.

Even though video and still photography technology seems to be merging these days, it has always been the main objective of PTE to provide a means for digitally emulating the capabilities of the old analogue "slideshow" systems. However, with digital technology, we naturally have the capability to take the old analogue features many steps forward (some may disagree here), thus contributing to the current trend toward the merging of video and still-image photography. But I think most of us would still rather be able to display the highest-quality still image in an AV application at the expense, if necessary, of other animation and "video" capabilities.

What I'm getting at here is the idea that in "video" photography, the most important feature is life-like motion, while in "AV" photography, as used by most of us here on the Forum, the quality of the still image is prime. So, in order to achieve these different prime objectives, the technologies for each have developed in slightly different directions, also. Granted, as technological capabilities through faster computers, more memory on video cards, etc., increases, the requirements and standards in each of these areas of photography will undoubtedly merge as is gradually happening already.

In the meantime, however, because of the way "video" technology has developed, there is a need to be able to make some adjustments to the audio in order to match the video (frame-by-frame editing is very tedious, and not possible in some low-end editors), while in "AV" technology, as we know it, it is still very simple to adjust the individual images in order to match the audio. Thus, there is less of a need for audio editing in the case of "AV" systems like PTE than there is in the case of "video" systems such as "Premiere", or "Studio 10", etc.

[Barry Beckham]

Stephane, I agree with you! This is the only area pertaining to sound where PTE is lacking at the moment. And I think I remember Igor vaguely promising to look into providing it along with the O&A timeline.

This is an interesting thread. Being a long-time software developer, myself, I agree also with Lin and others regarding the provision of more sophisticated audio editing features, including multiple sound tracks. I also use Cubase for most of my sound mixing and editing, and even if these were provided in PTE, I would still rely on Cubase to prepare a single track in PTE, with some added sound effects or narration on a slide-by-slide basis.

Even though video and still photography technology seems to be merging these days, it has always been the main objective of PTE to provide a means for digitally emulating the capabilities of the old analogue "slideshow" systems. However, with digital technology, we naturally have the capability to take the old analogue features many steps forward (some may disagree here), thus contributing to the current trend toward the merging of video and still-image photography. But I think most of us would still rather be able to display the highest-quality still image in an AV application at the expense, if necessary, of other animation and "video" capabilities.

What I'm getting at here is the idea that in "video" photography, the most important feature is life-like motion, while in "AV" photography, as used by most of us here on the Forum, the quality of the still image is prime. So, in order to achieve these different prime objectives, the technologies for each have developed in slightly different directions, also. Granted, as technological capabilities through faster computers, more memory on video cards, etc., increases, the requirements and standards in each of these areas of photography will undoubtedly merge as is gradually happening already.

In the meantime, however, because of the way "video" technology has developed, there is a need to be able to make some adjustments to the audio in order to match the video (frame-by-frame editing is very tedious, and not possible in some low-end editors), while in "AV" technology, as we know it, it is still very simple to adjust the individual images in order to match the audio. Thus, there is less of a need for audio editing in the case of "AV" systems like PTE than there is in the case of "video" systems such as "Premiere", or "Studio 10", etc.

[ronwil]

What are you up to Barry? Why have we got to re-read Al's last post? Have you got a bug in your system?

Ron [uK]