An Observation

[Lin Evans]

I was recently looking on a web site devoted to competing presentation slideshow software and noticed someone had posted one of my quotes from back in June or so of last year.

The question revolved around why PTE was so much cleaner and sharper on executable shows that the competition and I had been quoted in this regard when I had discussed the fact that only PTE had hardware rendering. Someone posing as an expert on the forum had answered "nonsense" and had informed the petitioner that he (the "expert") knew for certain that neither their product or PTE had hardware rendering and that my statement had obviously been made in error. Further, this expert suggested that my statement about "9 megapixel monitors" needed "explanation" LOL.

What amazes me is the extent of ignorance on the web and the number of pseudo experts who influence people with their self-assured attitudes about things which they obviously haven't a clue. It's nice to be self-assured and confident, but it's even nicer when you also know what you're talking about.

For those who are new to PTE - yes indeed, PTE has true hardware rendering. The competition does not. What this means is that the competition renders their animation at low resolution, near the 800x600 level which makes it very easy to convert to NTSC or PAL (720x480 or 720x576 pixels) resolution for DVD conversion which is their principle goal. This is done via software algorithms rather than by using the power of the GPU (Graphical Processing Unit) in the video card.

PicturesToExe gives the user a true "input=output" resolution so that it's possible with the right hardware to have shows output and displayed in true high resolution.

And for the record. For a couple years now nine megapixel monitor and display resolutions have been available. A PTE show on a nine megapixel system is incredibly impressive. All it takes is "money" folks. Several of my art patrons for whom I do photography use IBM and Viewsonic systems for which they pay dearly, but which produce nine megapixel resolution on the displays. These monitors average around $6000.00 U.S.D. and the display cards to drive them are quite expensive as well. Typically some of my clients have over $15,000 in their computer systems so it's not something which is common, but it's very real.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_T220/T221_LCD_monitors

Here are a few links to the monitors used:

http://www.engadget.com/2004/07/06/viewson...hose-new-apple/

http://www.viewsonic.com/support/desktopdi...series/vp2290b/

http://www.monitoroutlet.com/844555.html

http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/ch/intellist...o/why_t221.html

So next time someone tries to tell you that PTE doesn't have hardware rendering - just send them over to the forum and we can straighten them out quickly.

Best regards,

Lin

[pwear]

To name names, I think I was the person who bravely quoted you, Lin, and the forum was for users of Proshow - which I described as feature rich, but output poor.

The criticisms you make about resolution are certainly true in that case, but not, I think, in all cases. I've tried mObjects and Wings Platinum and find them indistinguishable in 'raw' screen output to PTE. PTE may make a better video, I haven't compared that aspect.

Thanks for your dedication to AV and this forum.

[Batman]

Man, you guys are obsessed with Proshow for whatever reason. And you know there is false info about both Proshow and P2E floating around out there. That message is months old. How much time do you spend reading the Proshow forum and then emailing people over their since you no longer post there ? And to think you call me a Proshow 'Fanboy' that drinks the coolaid. Seems your no different except in your choice of coolaid. LOL.

Anyways, if you want to see false info then look no further than at Igors press release for version 5. It states a couple of things that aren't quite true. For example, it says something about slideshow made with P2E 5 will run on ANY computer. Thats just not true...at least ones utilitizing pan/zoom. It takes the right hardware and that hardware needs to be pretty beefy or you do not get those 'butter' smooth motions if it runs at all. He also makes not about P2E 5D being the only affordable slideshow maker to make DVD's with. Thats not true either as there are several in this price range. Maybe not as feature rich, but it didn't state that, which it probally should have.

Ok. I know I am being picky with the press release so dont beat me up too bad. But before you do please know that I have mentioned several times recently that I think when it comes to EXE shows (not DVD) that P2E is the one to use. If Proshow ever gets hardware rendering then I may have to issue a retraction.

Seriously though, this reply is intended to poke at you a little Lin since we haven't argued in awhile. And to prove I have no ill intentions or feeling about P2E I recenlty purchased the upgrade to the deluxe version but dont tell anyone. :0

Later guys and remember....be gentle with me.

Jason

[cjdnzl]

Man, you guys are obsessed with Proshow for whatever reason. And you know there is false info about both Proshow and P2E floating around out there. That message is months old. How much time do you spend reading the Proshow forum and then emailing people over their since you no longer post there ? And to think you call me a Proshow 'Fanboy' that drinks the coolaid. Seems your no different except in your choice of coolaid. LOL.

Anyways, if you want to see false info then look no further than at Igors press release for version 5. It states a couple of things that aren't quite true. For example, it says something about slideshow made with P2E 5 will run on ANY computer. Thats just not true...at least ones utilitizing pan/zoom. It takes the right hardware and that hardware needs to be pretty beefy or you do not get those 'butter' smooth motions if it runs at all. He also makes not about P2E 5D being the only affordable slideshow maker to make DVD's with. Thats not true either as there are several in this price range. Maybe not as feature rich, but it didn't state that, which it probally should have.

Ok. I know I am being picky with the press release so dont beat me up too bad. But before you do please know that I have mentioned several times recently that I think when it comes to EXE shows (not DVD) that P2E is the one to use. If Proshow ever gets hardware rendering then I may have to issue a retraction.

Seriously though, this reply is intended to poke at you a little Lin since we haven't argued in awhile. And to prove I have no ill intentions or feeling about P2E I recenlty purchased the upgrade to the deluxe version but dont tell anyone. :0

Later guys and remember....be gentle with me.

Jason

Hello Jason,

Obsessed isn't the right word here, and the PSG post to which Lin is referring was sent by me, querying why PSG is just not sharp, either as an exe file or as a DVD. As for Igor's remarks being not quite true, neither are Photodex's. Stones and glass houses country here.

Originally I was impressed with a few shows put up by wedding pro's, whose images were probably not too sharp anyway, being nice soft bridal shots, and I noised PSG around my camera club, with the result that several members bought PSG on my say-so. Not too long after that, when I was having misgivings about PSG's performance, some CC members complained to me about the same problem, along with other complaints on the PS forum. My contribution to that discussion was along the lines of 'why isn't PSG as sharp as PTE?'. Somehow, PSG manages to throw away 90% of my efforts with a dslr camera to get pin-sharp, breathtaking clarity on the screen. That's the end of the story for me. PTE does it, PSG doesn't.

I made a rule at the local camera club - exe files for computers and data projectors, DVDs for your TV box. DVD's on a computer are third rate quality compared with exe files, not to mention the additional overhead decoding the data, a process which will cause a lot of computers to stumble and stutter.

YMMV,

Colin.

[Igor]

Jason,

You wrote:

Anyways, if you want to see false info then look no further than at Igors press release for version 5. It states a couple of things that aren't quite true. For example, it says something about slideshow made with P2E 5 will run on ANY computer. Thats just not true...at least ones utilitizing pan/zoom.

But I didn't say that any computer can play ideally EXE file with slideshow created in v5.00. Because Pan/Zoom effects requires modern video card.

I wrote in the press-release:

any computer and any video card is suitable for the creation of a DVD-Video disc.

You can create DVD in PicturesToExe on any computer with Windows.

In "Sample slide shows created with PicturesToExe Deluxe v5.0" section of press-release I write for some sample slideshows:

Please note: to view this sample gallery it's recommended to have a video card with 128 MB memory installed for an ideally smooth playback.

In this phrase of press-release:

PicturesToExe Deluxe 5.0 supports JPG, GIF, PNG, and BMP formats. Once an EXE file with a slide show is created, it can be played on any PC

And it's also true. I know that slideshows can be with or without Pan/Zoom effects and requirements of slideshows with Pan/Zoom effects higher, but both kinds of slideshows will play. Recommended PC for Pan/Zoomed slideshows described on our website and Help file:

For slide shows with Pan/Zoom effects:

PC with 1.4 GHz CPU, 256 MB of system memory, video card with 128 MB of video memory.

Windows XP, Vista, 2000, 2003, Me, 98 or 95.

DirectX 8.1 or later.

For slide shows created with simple effects:

PC with 500 Mhz CPU, 64 Mb of system memory, any video card.

Any version of Windows.

Burned DVD-Video disc with slide shows in PicturesToExe Deluxe can be played on any DVD player, on PC or Mac.

Any competition product which creates and plays slideshows in real time with same high quality will has same system requirements.