Can one do an entire show in one O&A window?

[Ed Overstreet]

Has anyone on this forum tried creating a whole show, say maybe five minutes long, in a single Objects and Animations window? If so, does it run OK, or are there limits to how much one can safely pack into a single O&A window?

I’m asking this on behalf of a friend who is switching from analog (Clearlight-dissolve-unit-based) AV to either PTE or PSG. In his analog shows he rarely used a “straight” dissolve, in which projector B fades up exactly as projector A fades down, he always preferred to de-couple the two projectors so he could fade down slide A a bit before starting to fade up slide B. He found (and I agree, especially when transiting between landscape and portrait format images) this can produce more pleasing fades than keeping the two projectors’ fade actions lock-stepped.

In PTE, as far as I can tell all transitions in the main timeline are lock-stepped, that is that the first slide starts to disappear exactly as the second slide begins to appear, regardless of the transition effect being used. The only way to de-couple the transitions is in the O&A window (and then only using fades, I don’t think you can use the other effects inside that window as far as I can tell, but that’s a separate issue). You can do this by off-setting the two slides’ control points with 0 and 100% opacity settings on the O&A timeline.

As I have mentioned already in another post (see http://www.picturestoexe.com/forums/index....showtopic=9454) trying to offset transitions in the O&A window is frustrating for me, because a) each object has its own timeline and I can’t see the timelines for the two objects simultaneously, which means I have to resort to the low-tech solution of scribbling down the keyframe times and entering them manually, not much fun, and there is no waveform display in the O&A window, which makes it much less easy IMO to get what I want where I want it in the music. So the idea of doing an entire show, maybe 100 images, stretched out on 100 timelines in one O&A window is a bit of a nightmare. (It might be possible if there were a waveform display and the option of maybe two timelines displayed simultaneously, with the user being able to select which images’ timelines (s)he wants to work with at a given moment.)

So I’m not interested in testing this myself, it sounds to me like a lot of work that might result in a show that won’t run well (or would it), depending on what technical limits there are on how much you can safely squeeze into a single O&A window on a given computer. But I thought I’d pose the question, in case someone might have tried packing say a 100-image show over 5 minutes in a single O&A window.

Anyone ever try this? Did it work, and how well?

Thanks for any insights anyone can offer.

[fh1805]

Hi Ed,

I've never tried building an entire sequence in a single O&A window but I did hit a problem with a single O&A window that had a large number of objects in it. Because of the way PTE's "Undo" history stack was implemented, the sheer number of edits I tried to do between saves exceeded the available RAM in my 2GB desktop system. Because of this problem (which was also encountered independently by Lin Evans at about the same date), Igor introduced the "Auto-Save" feature.

Your friend had better ensure that he/she establishes a "frequent saves under new name" policy when developing this single O&A sequence.

From the way you describe it, there shouldn't be more than a couple of objects under "animation" at any point in time - and that "animation" is going to be time-controlled opacity changes rather than PZR effects. I don't think this will stress the graphics card/chipset unduly - if at all.

Good luck to him/her.

regards,

Peter

[xahu34]

... In his analog shows he rarely used a “straight” dissolve, in which projector B fades up exactly as projector A fades down, he always preferred to de-couple the two projectors so he could fade down slide A a bit before starting to fade up slide B...

Hi Ed,

I think that it is difficult to have asymmetric dissolves directly within PTE, and I don’t think that it can easily be done in PSG. Analogue projectors are controlled via lightness (which can be chosen individually) and they naturally blend images in an additive way. Blending in PTE (using fade in/out transitions or using the opacity function in O&A) is totally based on alpha-composition (alpha-blending), and this is symmetric in nature. In Wings Platinum and m.objects you program transitions via light curves, and these curves can be modeled for all images individually. As blending modes you can choose alpha-blending, but the standard mode is a kind of additive blending (I guess it is similar to the layer blending mode "screen" in Photoshop). As a workaround your friend may use normal fade in/out transitions in PTE via externally generated 3rd images.

Best regards,

Xaver

[Ed Overstreet]

As a workaround your friend may use normal fade in/out transitions in PTE via externally generated 3rd images.

Best regards,

Xaver

Excellent suggestion, Xaver, and thanks. I should have thought of that, but didn't. It should produce the same effect as what I'd been thinking of in the O&A window, with the significant benefit of having access to the waveform so the change-overs could be timed effectively and efficiently to the music. I've passed on your suggestion to my friend Paul, he's been doing AV forever (in fact he taught me how to do my first-ever AV show about 20 years ago), so he'll recognize the idea immediately.

Cheers

Also thanks Peter for the reminder about backing up, especially when doing complex things in O&A.

In fact, it might be nice to have access to the "Save As" feature while working in the O&A window, so you don't have to Close and then re-enter, breaking your train of thought even further ... a minor issue perhaps, maybe I'll post that in the forum section for new-version suggestions. Or maybe you could ... doesn't matter who posts the idea as long as Igor sees it.

[xahu34]

... It should produce the same effect as what I'd been thinking of in the O&A window ...

Hi Ed,

with additive blending you can achieve effects which you cannot realize with the opacity function. Here is an example: Consider two analogue projectors where each one is loaded with a low-key image, one having a highlight on the right side, the other one with a highlight on the left side. Both projectors shall run with a lightness of about 90%.

How to do this in the digital situation if you do not have Wings or m.objects? Putting one image on top of the other and reducing opacity to 50% will lead to a flat result. If you put the images into PS layers, reduce lightness a little bit, and then use blending mode "screen", you will obtain a 3rd image giving a similar result as in the analogue situation.

Regards,

Xaver

[LumenLux]

Ed - My experience leads me to an opinion, not a conclusion. My opinion is that in the O & A window, your friend can do anything, I mean anything, he can conceive. But as much fun as I can have in the O&A window, I would certainly bog down before the program would if I made an entire intricate presentation there.

[Lin Evans]

Hi Ed,

Actually, you can do this (complete slideshow using objects under a single slide heading). As mentioned earlier, there "may" be a problem with memory because PTE has to keep an "undo/redo" log which can fill up rather quickly with large memory objects.

I found that it was necessary for me to save my work, quit PTE and reopen fairly frequently when doing this type thing. On the slideshow linked below, the last part where the Earth spins on its axis and the Moon orbits the Earth was done this way using well over a thousand images for the spinning Earth. In order to complete the programming, I had to save, exit and re-open PTE multiple times. One can tell when the memory is getting near the point of exhaustion because the mouse action becomes very sluggish. When this happens, it's time to immediately save, exit the program completely then re-open.

Here's a link to the file if you want to see it:

Link to file

Best regards,

Lin

[Ed Overstreet]

Thanks all for the quick and informative replies, as always!

I've tried Xaver's method, and I agree with his additional points about using a Screen blend in some situations.

However Lumenlux hit the nail on the head -- whether you do this in O&A or with third images, doing an entire show this way would become a nightmare. In O&A, particularly because of the lack of a waveform display and the ability to see the control points for two objects at the same time -- in O&A -- (HINT HINT HINT Igor), getting things to work with the music is tedious. The other way involves a lot of work switching between PTE and Photoshop or whatever.

Also, at least in my first quick attempts, I think the end result looks smoother on the screen when you do it in O&A. BUT I really don't like setting control points for something like this if I can't see the waveform at the same time!!!! (More hints.)

Gotta run my wife wants us to go to dinner now, but bottom line is this isn't something I'd want to do with every image in a show, just for the "problem" transitions (like portrait to landscape) and maybe the odd messy same-aspect-ratio transition.

Cheers everyone. Will keep monitoring for any more ideas.

[xahu34]

Hi Ed,

In my opinion, the standard fade in/out transitions in PTE work well. Generating 3rd images in PS cannot be the general solution, and I really do not see any need for doing it very often. On the other hand, it can be helpful in particular cases. If I had to apply PS for each transition, I would change the AV software, but I am pretty sure that this will not happen.

Regards,

Xaver

[Bobo]

There have even been a few times when I wished there were image blending modes such as additive, subtractive, light, multiply, etc. Maybe that is too complex to implement, or maybe not.

[cjdnzl]

I have had this problem, mainly at the end of a show where the last image fades down before the credits appear.

I use a simple work-around for this, which is to insert a black slide between the two image slides where you want the first image to darken before the next appears. By adjusting the fade and duration times of the black slide you can get almost any effect you want.

Colin

[susiesdad]

Have you thought of creating the transitions from one picture to another in the centre of a slide with the subsequent slide starting at the point of the end of the previous slide. By moving keyframes for each slide along the time line any variation of fade in/out can be acheived. Inserting additional keyframes for an image allows speed adjustment of the fade up or down as well.

Just a thought.

I have attached a zip of a quick test I have made to try my theory before replying. The first slide has a simple fade in fade out at a single point on the timeline the second has an overlap. By moving the keyframes around for the two images in Objects and Animations a change of transition can be acheived. The only draw back would be that it would take longer to acheive than using PTE transitions.

Regards

Alan

transition_test_Apr24_2009_8_51_06.zip

[Ed Overstreet]

Back to my morning troll of the forum ... thanks again for all the replies and suggestions.

Susiesdad's example (the second one) is what I've been doing in the O&A window, but again I stress (sorry for flogging a hopefully-not-dead horse) that I really prefer to have access to the waveform when I'm doing this sort of thing, and we don't have that (yet) in PTE's O&A window.

For my club's AV members I've drafted a three-part example, complete with a Photoshop file showing the third-image approach Xaver suggested (or at least my interpretation of his suggestion). It also has a 2-3 page Acrobat file that describes the two processes, I hope relatively clearly. I've presently only circulated this to four club members who've been doing AV at least as long as I have and who know the problem I'm addressing; I'm posting below a link to the zip file so anyone interested in this Forum can download it and see what I'm getting at. The example is a portrait-to-landscape transition done four ways. First just with a simple fade in/out on the main timeline, which produces a "cross-over" effect on the screen which I and others find distracting. The second method does what Xaver describes (good choice of terminology!) as an asymmetrical fade created in the O&A window, similar to what Susiesdad posted. The third method is my interpretation of Xaver's workaround (any misinterpretatations are my fault not his). The fourth, not described in the Acrobat file, is another trick I've tried, which involves using a slight zoom effect on the landscape image as it is brought up. I used to like the fourth method, until we projected it at our club on Tuesday in a showcase night on our Canon SX50 projector and guess what, even though it's a small zoom and involves no panning at all, the SX50 showed marked jerkiness in the appearance of the second image as it zoomed in. Shades of the other long thread I started a while ago on problems with the SX50 and other projectors on mangling things that looked silky-smooth on my monitor . So I'm not using that effect again until we either find a workaround for the SX50 or our club gets a new projector that can handle something like this without messing it up on the screen. Or Igor figures some way to fix the problem in PTE. Whatever.

Here's the link to my examples: http://tinyurl.com/edsexamples

Any comments or suggestions on better ways of implementing Xaver's method (the third example, Slides 7 through 9 in the sample show) would be appreciated -- or any other comments or suggestions on the show and the methods demonstrated. Any editiorial suggestions on the Acrobat file's wording, clarity or lack thereof, would also be appreciated but that probably would best be handled via private mail to me as it's not really an appropriate use of this forum thread to ask for editorial comments on a document

Personally my preference is for the method displayed in slide 5 (essentially what Susiesdad also posted), but others no doubt will have other preferences among these choices.

My friend Paul finesses this portrait-to-landscape issue by never using portrait format images in his shows, but I think that's too extreme. Some images cry out for portrait format or cropping IMO; I believe in cropping images however they make sense to me and then finding a way for the AV software to deal with the "messiness" on the screen as best as possible, rather than locking myself into only using one arbitrary aspect ratio all the time. Again, different folks have different preferences (which is why I never enter competitions any more -- I'm tired of listening to judges pontificate personal opinions and tastes as if they were Truiths, but that's a whole different screed).

[JEB]

Hi,

I preferance is the method illustrated in slide 5 which I use quite frequently but I find it less irritating if the height of the landscape and the portrait are the same.

Regards

John

[JRR]

.......

My friend Paul finesses this portrait-to-landscape issue by never using portrait format images in his shows, but I think that's too extreme. Some images cry out for portrait format or cropping IMO; I believe in cropping images however they make sense to me and then finding a way for the AV software to deal with the "messiness" on the screen as best as possible, rather than locking myself into only using one arbitrary aspect ratio all the time. Again, different folks have different preferences (which is why I never enter competitions any more -- I'm tired of listening to judges pontificate personal opinions and tastes as if they were Truiths, but that's a whole different screed).

Hey Ed, when I did 35mm AVs (like Paul did - glad he is lurking into digital now) I used to only use landscape mode (I told people the film would fall out of my camera if I turned it upright

When I moved to digital AV, I thought the pixels would fall out of the camera, so I stuck to landscape, but since then I graduated to using a background equal to the landscape mode and put up the verticals (or multiple images) on the background.

I like the look of the Fade to Black effect using the O&A, I just have to try it and see if I will use it sometimes.

As you say different strokes for different folks

Thanks for starting this thread

[Ed Overstreet]

Hi,

I preferance is the method illustrated in slide 5 which I use quite frequently but I find it less irritating if the height of the landscape and the portrait are the same.

Regards

John

Yep, done that too, and that's what you arguably need to do when tiling two portraits side-by-side over a landscape, as Jim mentions. However this means down-sizing the portrait images relative to what they could be on the screen, which reduces the impact of those images somewhat. (Having more than one image on the screen at the same also tends to do that IMO, the viewer doesn't "know" where to look in the limited time available, and all the images lose impact to some extent, unless they reinforce each other in some way -- sometimes that works well.) On balance I prefer the method in slide 5 without constraining the height of the portrait image to that of the landscape image. But, as Jim says, different strokes for different folks. And, as with almost everything in photography, it's all about trade-offs, there's seldom a perfect solution, there are pros and cons to almost every option

[Ed Overstreet]

Hi Ed,

Actually, you can do this (complete slideshow using objects under a single slide heading). As mentioned earlier, there "may" be a problem with memory because PTE has to keep an "undo/redo" log which can fill up rather quickly with large memory objects.

I found that it was necessary for me to save my work, quit PTE and reopen fairly frequently when doing this type thing. On the slideshow linked below, the last part where the Earth spins on its axis and the Moon orbits the Earth was done this way using well over a thousand images for the spinning Earth. In order to complete the programming, I had to save, exit and re-open PTE multiple times. One can tell when the memory is getting near the point of exhaustion because the mouse action becomes very sluggish. When this happens, it's time to immediately save, exit the program completely then re-open.

Thanks Lin. Returning back to the original topic of the post you and a few others are saying there is no technical limit to doing an entire show in a single O&A window, other than eventual undo/redo-log memory clogging and slowing down the system and risking a crash. Good thing to keep in mind.

We (actually I) drifted a wee off topic by getting into the portrait-landscape issue, but not really because (at least from my standpoint) the only reason to try to do the whole show in a single O&A window is to be able to have asymmetrical fades on most or all of the images, and the only compelling reason for THAT, again in my personal opinion, is because you've either gots lots of variations in the image aspect ratios throughout the show or you've got a lot of arguably messy transition blends that might work better with a fade between the images. Though as Colin mentions you can to some extent finesse some of those problems by judicious use of black slides in the main timeline, though doing that repeatedly throughout the show might make some audience members wonder what's happening to the voltage going into the projector Reminds me of an AV night a few years ago when in the middle of someone else's show, and exactly on the beat of the music, the projector bulb suddently blew with a loud "bang." The screen went black of course, and a for a few seconds I thought "what a strange effect to put into the show at this point," until I realized what had happened. It was a much shorter night than we'd planned

Interesting discussion, thanks for the contributions to everyone (not to cut anyone off who has another suggestion, of course

[Ed Overstreet]

Hi again everyone.

Inspired by a number of your responses to my original post here, I have prepared a tutorial for members of the AV Group of my photo club (the R.A. Photo Club of Ottawa, Canada) on the subject of “Handling Awkward Transitions between Two Images in PTE 5.6.” That is really the issue which sparked my post on the present thread. This is an issue that has generated a lot of thought and debate in my club and in my own mind over the years, and your comments helped nudge me into organizing and setting down my thoughts on “paper” and in a tutorial show.

I am grateful to Peter for pointing out to me the real issue is handling awkward transitions of any sort, of which of course the landscape-to-portrait transition arguably the most awkward and vexing, at least for some of us, but it really only a special case of the larger issue.

At Peter’s suggestion, I am posting my reference to my tutorial in the Tutorials and Articles section of the Wnsoft Forums, here: http://www.picturestoexe.com/forums/index....c=9817&st=0

Please address any comments on the tutorial to that other thread, not to this one. Thanks.