Transitions in O&A

[stardealer]

Many times when using portrait pictures in a slideshow I arrange them side by side in O&A window and use opacity to make them appear and disappear controlled by opacity, e.g.

1 - first picture appears

2 - second picture appears

3 - third picture appears with overlaying first picture

4 - and so on

I would like to have other controls then opacity to create the transition between these pictures.

My suggestion is to have a new control for transition-effects on every O&A object like the transition control on every slide.

Frank

[fh1805]

Frank,

I'm happy to add my voice to this request. Like you, I've occasionally wanted to apply a transition effect to just one or two objects (usually Page Effect in a horizontal or vertical manner).

[susiesdad]

Many times when using portrait pictures in a slideshow I arrange them side by side in O&A window and use opacity to make them appear and disappear controlled by opacity, e.g.

1 - first picture appears

2 - second picture appears

3 - third picture appears with overlaying first picture

4 - and so on

I would like to have other controls then opacity to create the transition between these pictures.

My suggestion is to have a new control for transition-effects on every O&A object like the transition control on every slide.

Frank

This facilityalready exists. See my attached demo which also has a moving background image. Just click on each object in the O&A list and creat keyframe points along the time line for the slide. at each keyframe point the animations can be changed. Eg. the transparency. See the attached demo. Unzip the file and open the PTE file then go to O&A and examine the three objects by playing etc.

Good luck

Alan

Demo_transitions.zip

[fh1805]

Alan,

I think you've misunderstood the point being made.

Yes, you can animate objects and control the opacity, the position (via Pan and Rotate) and the size (via Zoom) but there is no way that I know of to fade up an object starting at the top of it and bringing the fade up in as it wipes down the object (like a Page effect transition done top-to-bottom on a whole image).

That's the sort of thing we're talking about.

[davegee]

Maybe I'm also misunderstanding, but isn't the following possible:

Slide one - image one one left side (RHS Blank)

Slide two - image one LHS and image two RHS

Slide three - image two RHS and image three LHS

etc. You don't have to use objects - create each slide in PS.

Each slide then has its own transition which does not effect the image being duplicated.

DaveG

[fh1805]

DaveG,

Yes, you could build all the images that way in Photoshop or similar, but you would then lose all the flexibility of being able to chop and change the images around quickly and easily.

[susiesdad]

Alan,

I think you've misunderstood the point being made.

Sorry.

I realise what you both mean now. My mistake.

Regards

Alan

[stardealer]

Hi DaveG,

certainly you can realize many things when you combine P2E with other tools.

But the requested functionality is a typical slideshow functionality.

I generally wish to have typical functionality in the specialized tool (P2E).

And also the range of typical functionality expands over time.

Regards, Frank

[davegee]

Totally agree Peter, but I think that the complications arising out of building transitions on objects into the programme is not / are not warranted for something which can be done via PS. I see what you mean though, about combining opacity with transition.

I keep PS open while building in PTE and it is simple to go from one to the other to make adjustments to a PSD file for something like this.

I see danger in making PTE so complicated (versatile) that beginners can't get a grip of it straight away and dump it for that reason.

DaveG

[stardealer]

Hi DaveG,

The argument - "I see danger in making PTE so complicated (versatile) that beginners can't get a grip of it straight away and dump it for that reason." - one can find in this or another form in many different topics in this subforum.

I won't agree, because versatility and usability are two different things. You can add versatility on additional tabs and so keep the usability for existing functionality at the same level.

And another point - if P2E wanted to be a beginner friendly slideshow software more functions for template based automated generation of slideshows would have been implemented (like in "Memories on TV" or the Ulead slideshow product).

P2E is a slideshow tool for the ones that want the best quality appearance of there pictures with a lot of control for a reasonable price, that's in my opinion the unique selling point.

But, as I said in my last post, I personally don't want to use a picture editing tool to achieve a function that is a typical slideshow functionality.

Your argument can be rearranged like " I see danger in leaving P2E functionally so targetgroup indifferent that beginners don't find automated generated slideshows and sophisticated users are attracted by the functional evolution of competing products". ;-)

Regards, Frank

[davegee]

Hi Frank,

Regardless, I still believe that, for now, I would like to see things that can be easily done utilizing packages such as PS left alone. There are other more pressing things that I think we would all like to see implemented.

From your comments here and in your other thread on text animation I take it that what you want is a higher quality version of PSG?

DaveG

[stardealer]

From your comments here and in your other thread on text animation I take it that what you want is a higher quality version of PSG?

DaveG

Hi Dave,

3 months ago i downloaded trialversions of nearly every slideshow product to find out what best suits me and my workflow.

I then decided to buy P2E and created slideshows of the last 5 holidays and was very pleased with the results. So I spend about 30 or 40 hours working with P2E. The ideas of arranging and presentation the pictures where mostly easy and sometimes tricky to achieve. Some couldn't be realized within an acceptable amount of time and some couldn't be realized because of missing functionality.

When you refer to PSG ($70) I have to say I tried PSP ($250) but after one has seen the output quality of P2E in comparison, especially the smooth pan and zoom, no one can buy another product.

I don't want and I don't need all the functionality of other products.

When I suggest enhancements then it is something I missed more than once. If its only me, then no need to implement. WnSoft has to decide which suggestions can be implemented easy and/or are requested by a majority of users.

There are other more pressing things that I think we would all like to see implemented.

I agree, for example "masks".

Regards, Frank

[mbskels]

Totally agree Peter, but I think that the complications arising out of building transitions on objects into the programme is not / are not warranted for something which can be done via PS. I see what you mean though, about combining opacity with transition.

DaveG

Can I also add my support for this proposal.

The ability to add transitions to objects (if technically possible) would greatly improve on the PS method currently available and described above. The PS method can create major timing problems where the "object" that is being revealed in the transition is small in relation to the size of the full slide. The transition effect (eg from left) appears to do nothing until it works it way across the slide to where the object is located. This introduces a delay before the transition is seen. It becomes very difficult to minimise the delay without then making the transition effect on the "object" appear too quickly.

The ability to apply a transition effect directly to an object would resolve this problem. The facility to add opacity change into the transition would also be significant.

Malcolm