PTE Shows, 16:9 and HDMI

[davegee]

I’m sure all of these topics have been covered but here are my experiences with using PTE on a Laptop linked to a 16:9 Television via a HDMI cable.

My first worry was choosing the “right” resolution for my images in order to get the ultimate in quality so I consulted the TV handbook, a thing that I rarely do. This told me two things, firstly that the display resolution is 1366 dots by 768 lines and secondly that the recommended input signal should be WXGA: 1360x768.

The screen display resolution of the laptop is 1200x800 so I began to think that this was not going work! However, when connected to the TV via the HDMI cable I am able to choose three display options: Laptop only, HDMI and Laptop and lastly HDMI only. In the HDMI and Laptop together configuration the screen display and the HDMI output cannot be the same as the television but in HDMI only it is possible to set the output to the required 1360x768 setting.

Preparing the PTE show

The settings I use are:

FULLSCREEN and 16:9

The image resolution I use FOR STATIC IMAGES is 1366x768 and in COMMON the image mode is left at FIT TO SLIDE.

Shows can be prepared on any computer using any size monitor using these settings and will “FIT TO SCREEN”. The shows are not intended for showing to anyone other than family so the ever present “danger” of them being played on a monitor whose resolution is greater than 1360x768 does not present itself.

The Quality?

ABSOLUTELY STUNNING!!

The Advantages?

No more DVDs – I have never been an advocate of the DVD approach because of the issues regarding (lack of) quality, but now I don’t have that “inner struggle” any more.

Problems?

Only the usual one, that to put a white line around an image which is going to have PZR effects applied it has to be done via a PNG file.

DaveG

[JPD]

I agree with you for the quality, there are now Full HD TV (1920 x 1080) and a PTE file with 1920 x 1080 pictures give a wonderfull result.

[potwnc]

The image resolution I use FOR STATIC IMAGES is 1366x768 and in COMMON the image mode is left at FIT TO SLIDE.

Problems?

Only the usual one, that to put a white line around an image which is going to have PZR effects applied it has to be done via a PNG file.

DaveG

Dave,

Do you mean that all your source images are 1366x768 or only those images for which you have no PZR effects? For any image that is 1366x768 you will lose quality with any P, Z or R effects.

As I've posted here before and tried to explain in the HD Appendix of the unofficial guide, output devices will scale the source up or down as necessary. Most "HD" output devices these days are - or are capable of displaying - 16:9 aspect ratio. But I think we all want to have our audience experience what we intended. For .exe output we can do that by specifying the window size in PTE.

But for video output we can't force our audience to view it as we intended. Instead the best we can do is render to one of the HD video output dimension standards and hope our audience will have an output device (or set their output device to the resolution) that matches our intention.

With that in mind download this example by choosing "Save As" from the download link. But before you download it make sure you have VLC Media Player or Media Player Classic installed because Windows Media Player will not play this file. Then set your output device to exactly 1280x720 resolution, and then set your player to view the downloaded video file at "Full Screen" mode - otherwise you won't experience the quality that PTE can deliver.

It is a 1280x720 (16:9) short video with just 2 images. The first was taken on Fuji Provia 100F slide film, the second on Ektachrome 100VS slide film. Both were scanned at 6400 dpi optical, which is at the cutting edge of current "prosumer" technology. The original images are around 8500x5500 optical pixels. The output was 1280x720p with the PTE codec and rendered to AVC using Vegas Pro 8.

If anyone downloads this file and follows the above instructions exactly I'd be interested to hear back on this thread about their perception of the quality.

Ray

[Lin Evans]

Hi Ray,

He's not creating a video but rather playing the executable which was created at the native resolution of his TV being used as a direct display device.

Best regards,

Lin

[davegee]

Hi Ray,

When I said for static images I meant images with no PZR. For images with PZR I scale them UP in proportion to the amount of zoom used.

As Lin explained, I play the 1366x768 EXE file on my laptop and view on my TV which is connected via a HDMI cable.

My laptop is Blue Ray equipped but PLAY only. Until I can record to Blue Ray (it's getting cheaper) I will continue to do it this way.

DaveG

[Conflow]

Dave,

You do realise that 'Blue-Ray' has been abandoned by Toshiba (Patent-Holders) in

favour of the New 'Open-Format DVD Read/Write' Disc System which offers all the

advantages of 'Blue-Ray' without the Market Application restrictions of the Blue-Ray

System.

I posted the 'Toshiba Corporation Notification' here on the Forum about a month ago.

Brian.Conflow.

[davegee]

Thanks Brian,

It's really irrelevant to this thread because what I am trying to say here is that wherever possible I will use a HDMI connection to my TV monitor to play EXE files rather than burn to any sort of DVD etc.

When the format war is finally over I will have to buy an add-on burner and at that stage I might reconsider.

Having bought a Sony Laptop it is hardly likely that they would put anything other than Blue Ray in it. That apart I am very satisfied with the laptop - it does everything that I require of it and the HDMI connection to my TV opens up new possibilities PTE-wise.

DaveG

[Conflow]

Dave,

I appreciate what you are saying ~ and yes, the HDMI connection to your TV Set

is the way to go, superb quality. Pity that many Laptops don't have that output.

The reason I mentioned 'Blue-Ray' being discontinued, was in case other Readers

would be tempted to buy a 'Blue-Ray System' not knowing the facts.

Brian.

[potwnc]

Actually, Toshiba were behind HD-DVD and it is that format, not Blu-ray, that they abandoned. Blu-ray is alive and well.

My main point in my reply was about quality and the size of the original image for 16:9 output. The issue is much the same for .exe or video output. In fact, for long shows with large files it's even more relevant for video as there comes a point where .exe output is just not feasible. Even for the simple, 2-slide show I uploaded the .exe file is larger than the video output file that I uploaded!

[Conflow]

Potwnc,

I think we are at cross-purposes here with Blue-Ray and HD-DVD ~ Let me explain:-

Currently on the Market you can go out and Rent a 'Movie on DVD-Disc' the modern

equivalent of the 'Movie on VHS-Tape' ~ both are Entertainment Media.

It so happens that the 'Entertainment Industry' has been looking for a replacement

of the 'DVD-Film Disc' because of its limited capacity and other Technical constraints

and lack of Copy protection.

Now enter 'Sony & Associates' and 'Toshiba & Associates' and both are using the new

Blue-Laser Technology (hence Blue-Ray) and both Associations want into the 'New DVD'

Entertainment Industry because its so lucrative.

Sony Associates developed their own Technology and called it Blue-Ray and in essence

its an Mp2 Film System. (However during 2008-2009 thats going to be changed)

Toshiba Associates developed the 'HD-DVD Disc Drive System' and adopted the name

HD-DVD as the 'Entertainment Media Name' and were also using Blue-Ray Laser Technology,

but theirs was compatible with existing DVD R/W Discs, Blue-Ray is not compatible.

This has all been going on since 2003/4. Last January the President of Toshiba announced

that it was getting out of the so-called 'Blue-Ray' Entertainment Market and was going alone

with Microsoft & Others in the development of their 'HD-DVD Entertainment Market'.

Then in mid-April they decided to retire from that HD-Market completely not the least due to

the Vista debacle which Microsoft was going through and the loss of confidence by the larger

Super-Chains like Walnmart, Next, Amazon and others. It cost Toshiba $835.M losses.

This is what you are actually refering to in your above Post:..The HD-DVD Entertainment Market.

As towards the 'HD-DVD Disc Drive' ~ thats now being released as an uncommitted Blue-Ray

R/W Disc Drive, and its my opinion that will surplant the current DVD R/W Drives we now use.

Its capacity will be from 15.Gb -25.Gb....Compared to 4.Gb and 7.Gb double density DVD's.

As towards Sony Blue-Ray, yes that will replace the existing 'DVD-Rental Market', problem being

when they drop the Mp2 format you will not be able to Copy the Blue-Ray Disc ~ and that is

what they wanted for the past 10 years ~ Copy Protection.

Hope this goes some way in explaining the 'bare bones' of this Media War ~ its not over yet !!!

Brian.Conflow.

[potwnc]

As towards Sony Blue-Ray, yes that will replace the existing 'DVD-Rental Market', problem being

when they drop the Mp2 format you will not be able to Copy the Blue-Ray Disc ~ and that is

what they wanted for the past 10 years ~ Copy Protection.

Well I won't enter into any political or ethical discussion on this point (and I don't think the members of this forum want to either), but I see that as an advantage, not a problem. There's nothing about the Blu-ray disc format itself that requires data (video or any other content) to be copy protected. If some (e.g., commercial film studios) choose to copy protect their content that's their business.

Hope this goes some way in explaining the 'bare bones' of this Media War ~ its not over yet !!!

My point was that the "Disc Format War" is over and Blu-ray won it. As users of PTE if we want to distribute video on disc we should consider that - for the near future at least - most of our audience will most likely be able to watch it only on either DVD disc or Blu-ray disc. The choice of the media (data) format on that disc is (again for the near future) up to us. We can make it standard DVD/MPEG-2, AVCHD DVD/MPEG-2/MPEG-4 or Blu-ray/MPEG-2/MPEG-4. Almost everyone now buying set-top players are buying one capable of playing all of these media formats.

[davegee]

Another thread hijacked!!

POTWNC (do you have a first name?) - I agree with you about the file sizes required for the larger resolution monitors / projectors but I'm afraid it is something we are going to have to get used to.

I am (always have been) an advocate of running monitors etc at their maximum/native resolution and I like to see images FILL the screen (or with a SMALL border) - the result is huge files but in my opinion we have to live with it.

Another one of my worries is that authors do not tell the viewer what the optimum size of their show is. I have downloaded a couple lately where artifacts are plainly evident in skies etc and I don't know if it is because of overcompressing when saving as JPEG or that the show is being played on my monitor at a resolution greater than that intended by the author. BB takes steps to ensure that his work is not seen at the "wrong" resolution and the quality of his images is among the highest you will see anywhere.

DaveG

[potwnc]

Another thread hijacked!!

POTWNC (do you have a first name?) - I agree with you about the file sizes required for the larger resolution monitors / projectors but I'm afraid it is something we are going to have to get used to.

I am (always have been) an advocate of running monitors etc at their maximum/native resolution and I like to see images FILL the screen (or with a SMALL border) - the result is huge files but in my opinion we have to live with it.

Another one of my worries is that authors do not tell the viewer what the optimum size of their show is.

DaveG

Dave,

I didn't mean to hijack your thread... I'm trying to post material that is relevant to it.

There's always a trade-off between viewing what the author intended and filling the screen at native resolution. One advantage of video is that the player can easily tell you what the resolution of the content is; the author doesn't have to do anything special to let you know this. As for "living with it" I'd rather not have my audience see "Image load error" instead of the image I intended. But if I don't know the specs of their computer I don't know how to guarantee avoiding that. On the other hand, if I have a DVD or Blu-ray people already know whether they have something that can play it.

Ray

[Conflow]

Dave,

Your comment 'Another Thread Hi-Jacked' ~ sorry about that, that was not my intention at all.

I was simply responding to a wild statement..'Blue-Ray has Won etc'...completely unqualified !

Well I try and consider other's reading a particular thread so as not to accidentally mislead them.

Potwnc, wrote..."There's nothing about the Blu-ray disc format itself that requires data video or

any other content) to be copy protected.

If some (e.g., commercial film studios) choose to copy protect their content that's their business"..

Potwnc must have a short memory because the driving forces behind 'Blue-Ray' are Sony Media and

Warner Media, BMG Media, Walt Disney Media and many others with a vested interest and in BlueRay.

Using Potwnc own words:If some (e.g., commercial film studios) choose to copy protect their content

that's their business !!!...Well if these people named above are not Commercial Studios, what are they?

and if one is so naive to believe that they are not going to protect their interests? What can I say....

Here are the facts from the: 'Optical Technology Storage Association' Link:-

http://www.osta.org/technology/bluelaserfaq1.htm

Dave back to your Thread (its a good one) I will not comment anymore on the above.

Brian.

[davegee]

It's OK guys - just kidding!!

But there is a lot of it going round - and it's catching.

Ray, in my initial post I did mention that I was talking about my own shows on my own TV where I have control.

If I tried to impose this on someone else the same problems could arise as with just posting or sending the EXE file.

If anyone wants to see what the capabilities of PTE and HDMI are they really have to try it for themselves.

DaveG

[potwnc]

... a wild statement..'Blue-Ray has Won etc'...completely unqualified !

Well this is what I actually wrote: "My point was that the "Disc Format War" is over and Blu-ray won it." I think it goes without saying that everyone understands this to refer to the disc format war that has been going on between Blu-ray and HD-DVD for the last few years. How much more qualified do you need such a statement to be? I could qualify it further by pointing out that I currently know of nowhere I can go to rent a movie on HD-DVD disc; nor do I know where I can buy an HD-DVD player. Toshiba themselves have already announced dropping support for HD-DVD format discs and players. I don't know how anyone can look at this and not conclude that the war I'm referring to is over and who the winner is. But if anyone has any doubt they can google "Blu-ray wins" and get the opinion of industry experts.

My statement says nothing about newer disc formats that may one day emerge and be a serious contender to Blu-ray. But right now there is none.

Potwnc, wrote..."There's nothing about the Blu-ray disc format itself that requires data video or

any other content) to be copy protected.

If some (e.g., commercial film studios) choose to copy protect their content that's their business"..

Potwnc must have a short memory because the driving forces behind 'Blue-Ray' are Sony Media and

Warner Media, BMG Media, Walt Disney Media and many others with a vested interest and in BlueRay.

Using Potwnc own words:If some (e.g., commercial film studios) choose to copy protect their content

that's their business !!!...Well if these people named above are not Commercial Studios, what are they?

and if one is so naive to believe that they are not going to protect their interests? What can I say....

Yes I did write that and you're correct about who are among the driving forces behind the Blu-ray disc format... but I don't see how one has anything to do with the other. You said it was a "problem" that "you will not be able to Copy the Blue-Ray Disc." What might be a problem for you might not be a problem for everyone else. Just as it's not a problem for me that my house has doors that lock so I can protect the contents inside it, I don't assume that it is a problem for other people in the world, who may not have the same kind of contents to protect, that their doors don't have locks. But I do assume it is a problem for those who don't have a key to my doors precisely because I want it to be a problem for them.

Just as there is nothing about doors that says they have to have locks, I correctly pointed out that there is nothing about the Blu-ray disc format that has to have the content on the disc copy-protected. If I choose to lock my door that's my business. It's no surprise that the companies behind Blu-ray - the commercial studios - chose a technology that they believe - rightly or wrongly - has the better copy protection. It's also no surprise that the newest generation of Blu-ray discs they are producing are copy protected. I imagine this is because they want it to be a problem for people who want to copy the content on the disc. But the point is that they choose to put this copy protection on those discs. It is not forced on them by the technology itself.

Perhaps you could qualify further why you believe this is a problem?

Here are the facts from the: 'Optical Technology Storage Association' Link:-

http://www.osta.org/technology/bluelaserfaq1.htm

Brian.

You are aware of how old that article is, aren't you?

Ray