V4.48 or V5 ?

[d67]

In an other thread on this forum, about my last slideshow Cale & monte, I wrote :

So, for my slideshow, changing for V5 degrades some transition effects (with or without hardware acceleration) and I have to renounce using fade in and out to Desktop.

Then, for that particular slideshow is there an interest to change for PTE V5 ? ... and if answer positive, why ?

... As there was no reply, I suppose that nobody has an opinion

Concerning v5, after

- personal trials (particularily conversion of "old" slideshows made with PTE v4x)

- and reading the numerous messages and trial comments here and in the french forums,

my personal conclusion is that, apart if I need some of the new transitions effects of V5, it is far better to use PTE v4.48 than V5 as the slideshow behaviour will be easily predictable and constant (apart very rare situations) from one PC and configuration to the other.

At the present stage, v5's behaviour from one PC and configuration to the oher is uncertain and, most of all, not predictable with objectiv parameters (mastercard, video card, RAM, number and size of slides, type of slides, transition effects type, duration between slides, etc...).

... so I will stay with v4.48 to avoid severe headaches in the vast majority of cases !

[Igor]

Patrick,

PicturesToExe 1.0 was released in 1999 (8 years ago) and it was before wide spreading of digital photography. I remember as I scanned my 10x15 photos to make slide shows. And quality of many scanners also were not enough good.

In earlier 2001 we added Fade in/out transition effect. It worked smoothly only on powerful PCs.

In 2007 we added Pan/Zoom effects and only video cards released in 2002 and later capable to play ideally smooth these effects.

We always balance on edge and create product for nearest future which appears when new technologies open new possibilities.

I still consider that having "Hardware acceleration" disabled (and excluding some variations of Mosaic effect) v5.00 can operate better than v4.48

Also in v5.00 you can easily burn DVD-Video discs which play anywhere.

However anybody welcome to compare and discuss v4.48 vs. v5.00 but please friendly and with arguments

[d67]

We always balance on edge and create product for nearest future which appears when new technologies open new possibilities.

I still consider that having "Hardware acceleration" disabled (and excluding some variations of Mosaic effect) v5.00 can operate better than v4.48

Yes but even with up to date configurations, and hardware acceleration disabled or not, the end result is unpredictable with v5... even with "older" transitions effects for which, v4.48 is smoothier !

OK for progress but when, with an "older" software, there is far lesser problems... why change ?

[jevans]

Patrick,

Although I have a certain sympathy with your view and have a few concerns as to whether the large range of facilities now available in Version 5 will really enhance our av experience, I have decided to move permanently to Version 5. I have tried some of my old av shows with the new version and, so far, have not had any problems. I showed an av show made with Version 5 at our photographic club last night. The club's computer has a relatively poor graphics performance compared to mine at home, but all the new transitions, pans/zooms worked well without any problems.

Igor and his team have made a great job of the new version. Maybe I will not use all the features, but the ability to add, move and size individual objects to make a composite image is a great feature and there are certainly many instances where pan/zoom/rotate can be used very effectively. I know that often we have a reluctance to move away from our familiar software. I am still using Office 2000 and will not change until I have no option. I was very happy with Version 4.48 but now think that the features and facilities in Version 5 make upgrading a positive experience.

Jeff

[d67]

I know that often we have a reluctance to move away from our familiar software.

Hello jeff

That is not a problem for me.

I created my last slideshow with 4.48 just because I don't want to use limited beta versions.

As V5 beta 16 is a "nearly" full V5, I gave it a try... I had to renounce to fade in and out effects from desktop (not really a big problem) but the "old" mosaic effect do not work smoothly, even on up to date configurations/PC.

Therefore my question : where is the progress for slideshows who do not make use of inserted objects, use the newest effects or often burn DVD (I think I am far from being alone in that situation) ?

Is there something I miss with V5 which enhances such a "basic" slideshow ?

- If the reply is no, I have then no interest in converting some of my anterior slideshows and I will continue using v4.48 if I foresee to create new one with an identical scheme. I will then also wait for a stable and predictable v5x.

- If the reply is clearly yes and enhencement sensible, then no problem for me, I rework some of my slideshows and change for v5.

[jevans]

Hello Patrick,

I am not trying to convince you one way or another, but here are some more comments.

On my computer, the mosaic effects work satisfactorily in Version 5 - mid I have a good quality graphics card with 256MB RAM on board. I cannot comment on how a previous show made using 4.48 would work with the mosaic effect when run under Version 5 as I have not used this transition before. Also I have never used the transition to the desktop and cannot see how I might use this in the type of shows I do. As I said before, I think Version 5 may have too many features, but I will probably be proved wrong by the talented and artistic members of this forum when we see what they produce.

But Version 5 has some brilliant features. Mind I am not going to re-work any of my old shows into Version 5. Just use it for new shows from no on. If I don't want to use some of the facilities, then I won't. I like to make historical shows. In Version 5 I can show a complete building, then zoom in to one part where there is an information plate and blow this plate up so that it can be read by the viewer. I can put a number of png files onto one image and resize them to get the best fit without having to keep re-doing then in Photoshop. I can have better titles and credits, etc., etc. Well worth trying.

Jeff

[mandarinfish]

I just want to add a data point. I've already upgraded to v5.0 deluxe, and will continue to use it for the VideoBuilder. But I think I might start all my shows in 4.48, after this experiment...

I had built a recent slideshow using 4.48, and I also created a version of it in 5.0 (no differences except for the version of PTE used to create the EXEs). My main platforms are Mac based, and so I use Parallels as well as Bootcamp to run slideshows. Parallels is my main method to use Windows to run the slideshows, so I compared them using Parallels.

Anyway, I tried both my older 4.48 version of this slideshow, as well as a version built using 5.0 with hardware acceleration turned off. The 4.48 version plays very smoothly (I only use fade in and fade out transitions). But the 5.0 version is very jerky during the transitions. It looks as though the framerate is really low, or frames are being dropped in the 5.0 version. Any clue why this might be? Is there a new setting I need to be using (besides turning hardware acceleration off)?

Thanks..

[Igor]

Yes, PicturesToExe Deluxe 5.0 requires DirectX 8.1 or higher (for perfect Pan/Zoom effects). So it should be enough. If you will try Parallels Desktop 3, please let me know about result.

[mandarinfish]

I was using the new release of Parallels Desktop for Mac 3.0, and did have DirectX enabled in Parallels. I did not notice such a difference between the two slideshows on my old XP tower when I tried it later. I will try it in Bootcamp as well, but I expect that I'll see about the same thing as with XP tower. I am not sure why Parallels shows this difference.. I also tried the original "Flowers" slideshow that Igor put together when PTE 5 was in early beta, and the slideshow would not show at all (but at least it did not crash like it did in older Parallels!) - I only saw some strange flickering on the desktop. I am thinking that Parallels has not gotten the DirectX support quite right. But it is interesting that my 4.48 slideshow plays beautifully..

Linda

[Igor]

I just wrote to Parallels company and asked them test PicturesToExe Deluxe 5.0 with Parallels Desktop for Mac.

[mandarinfish]

Thanks, Igor; it will be very interesting to see what happens with their testing. As one more data point, I tried the newest VMWare beta, which also supports DirectX 8.1, and the performance for both slideshows is worse than on Parallels. With the 4.48 slideshow, there is visible decrease in frame rate (on Parallels, this one was smooth, but on VMWare it looks like the framerate is about 7 fps). With the 5.0 version of the slideshow, it looks like about 3 fps to my eye. The one I find the most acceptable of all these experiments is the 4.48 version of the slideshow on Parallels.

Anyway, not sure if this info helps at all, but this was my experience.

[Igor]

I think VMWare, Virtual PC and Paralles will provide much faster work of graphics in emulation of Windows soon. Because they want to support new 3D graphical interface of Windows Vista which uses DirectX 9.