Making a slide show in VS10+

middlebury madness · Post by **middlebury madness** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 2:41 am

I have made several slide shows in VS8,9,10+ but have always used the digital JPegs downloaded from my camera. I have slides that I am scanning and want to put into a slide show with music. I am scanning tham at 4200dpi in very high quality Jpeg ( most images are 35mb or bigger for archival purposes)
Is there a image size that will give very good quality in the final DVD that is recomended? Should I take each and resize it indivually or is there a program that will convert the images to the correct resolution?
I have 400 images for one slide show. also many were taken in the portrait mode. how are they best handled to avoid cutting off tops and bottoms yet not making them so small that they will be hard to see?
Is there a tutorial or book on this subject?
Looked at many posts and gathered some info but they din't set a standard....

Thank you

MM

MrA · Post by **MrA** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 2:54 am

My experience has been the more mega pixels the better. The reason behind this is, mega pixels means size, not really quality. The reason you want size, is, the effects, like pan and zoom. The bigger the pic is, the better the pan and zoom effect will be. When you do something like pan and zoom, the first thing you do is a zoom, maybe 1/4 zoom, or whatever it takes to get your point accross. Then, you focus on the pan. I found, in Video Studio, you should keep "aspect ratio" (depending on your project settings). As an example, I sometimes use the vertical equivelent to 16:9. I have no clue at this moment what the setting is in my camera, but the effect is like wide screen, only instead of sideways, it's up and down.

middlebury madness · Post by **middlebury madness** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 3:12 am

So I gather I should use these mega files? They are better than 30 MB each. will I be able to fit 400 images with music on a std DVD? I always thought that the more pixels were better unless you were printing out to a printer that only does 600 dpi Aren't there ways of figuring how big a project is going to be?

sjj1805 · Post by **sjj1805** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 9:54 am

MrAmigo2121 hit the nail on the head when he mentions zooming with the pan and zoom option.

If you buy lets say a 5 megapixel digital camera you get a sharper picture when it comes to printing on paper, compared to a 1 megapixel camera. The file size and dimensions of the picture on your computer are much larger.

A television set cannot display resolutions to this degree. If you are not going to include any pan and zoom - termed the 'Ken Burns' effect then there is nothing to be gained by having pictures with dimensions larger than the final TV dimension
NTSC 720x480
PAL 768x576

If you intend to zoom into a picture then I find it is better to give that picture a larger file size when passing it to the Video Editing program to maintain the sharpness when zooming into a focal point of the picture.

So the short answer is resize the pictures to the standard NTSC / PAL sizes but use larger sizes with pictures you intend to zoom into.

middlebury madness · Post by **middlebury madness** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 4:01 pm

Is there a way to resize picture files in bulk or is it a one at a time deal?

Trevor Andrew · Post by **Trevor Andrew** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 5:20 pm

Hi

Most image editing programs will do batch convert. (adobe elements / photoshop springs to mind)

Your scanned images at 4200 dpi are very, very large.
I would suspect that your source images are no where near that.

Dpi relates to print size.
A good quality print image file will use 300 dpi. That is an 8in x 10in print will be 2400px X 3000px.

Pixels 2400 X 3000 relates to file size. ( do not get confused with your printer output)

OK
It would be quicker to scan the images again at pal/ntsc size. Rather than resizing the file using an image program. Unfortunately this is performed one at a time.
At least batch convert will allow you to have a cu-of-tea whilst it performs.

Afaik inserting images larger than frame size will be resized by VS, well not actually resized the spare pixels will be dis-guarded leaving a 768 x 576 pal frame size.

Rendering a large image takes much longer.
VS is not an image editor and as such you should re-size your images.

Trevor

middlebury madness · Post by **middlebury madness** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 5:36 pm

Trevor
I scanned 35mm slides so they were very small to start with. I have an auto slide feeder on my Nikon Coolscan 5000 ED.

many need to be restored and I can resize those after that. But we want also to just show them as is since we couldn't possibly restore all of them realisically.

So If I want to do some pan & Zoom I should make them 50% larger than the NTSC size?

Carol

sjj1805 · Post by **sjj1805** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 1:58 am

There is an image resizer distributed free as a Windows XP "Powertoy"
it will resize an entire sub-directory.
Microsoft Image Resizer

middlebury madness · Post by **middlebury madness** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 2:18 am

I will give it a try thank you

Trevor Andrew · Post by **Trevor Andrew** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 1:44 pm

Hi MM

I was interested in the comments re:- pan and zoom.

I ran a short test using three images

2822 x 2128 from digital camera
1536 x 1152 resized to twice Pal size
768 x 576 standard Pal size

I applied pan and zoom to 300% and viewed each image only the standard pal size showed some reduction in quality.
This was very slight and I do not think it would be noticeable when played as a video.

But to be sure If you intend to use pan and zoom it may be best to resize to a larger size than the frame size. Keep the size to 4:3 ratio
1280 x 960 should be good for Ntsc.

Trevor

middlebury madness · Post by **middlebury madness** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 4:31 pm

Trevor,

Thank you this information is most helpful. It will save a lot of trial and error.

Carol