poor slide show

[caveman]

David

If you are using 4:3 ratio (std TV) this may help. If you work with PS (photoshop) you can do the following.

If you're working in the DV format using CCIR601 pixels at 720x480, create your PS files at 720x534.

Here are three examples of crop sizes that all produce the same result. Crop your images too either:

5.393" x 4" at 133.5 dpi, or 6" x 4.45" at 120 dpi or 7.5" x 5.563" at 96 dpi. There all the same. Each produce a file 720 x 534 at 96 dpi which is the STD NTSC DV/DVD format. I gave you these 3 crop sizes because I don't know what size your pictures are. I also save them as a tif file. Some people may think you need a pictures of great size but it is not true. Try this and you will be suprize how clear it is on a standard TV.

Preset Sizes: If you're working with Photoshop 7, there's a neat feature that allows you to select preset custom sizes when you make a new file. Use the Preset Sizes popup and select either 720x540 Std. NTSC 601 or 720x534 Std. NTSC DV/DVD.

Hope this helps.

caveman

[heinz-oz]

David

If you are using 4:3 ratio (std TV) this may help. If you work with PS (photoshop) you can do the following.

If you're working in the DV format using CCIR601 pixels at 720x480, create your PS files at 720x534.

Here are three examples of crop sizes that all produce the same result. Crop your images too either:

5.393" x 4" at 133.5 dpi, or 6" x 4.45" at 120 dpi or 7.5" x 5.563" at 96 dpi. There all the same. Each produce a file 720 x 534 at 96 dpi which is the STD NTSC DV/DVD format. I gave you these 3 crop sizes because I don't know what size your pictures are. I also save them as a tif file. Some people may think you need a pictures of great size but it is not true. Try this and you will be suprize how clear it is on a standard TV.

Preset Sizes: If you're working with Photoshop 7, there's a neat feature that allows you to select preset custom sizes when you make a new file. Use the Preset Sizes popup and select either 720x540 Std. NTSC 601 or 720x534 Std. NTSC DV/DVD.

Hope this helps.

caveman

Thanks for sharing that with us. In case you haven't noticed, you just violated forum policies. Here we concern ourselfs with ULEAD products. Last time I checked, PS was not a ULEAD product.

You could have given all your advice on a geral basis, without the references to PS, and the same result applies. The reasons for some of your strange frame sizes escape me at the moment but that is a different matter alltogether.

[davidpjr]

Thank you all for your input. I am learning a lot.

In response to one of the questions, yes, I just told it to share and then create disc. And, it looks bad playing it back on whatever I use the dvd playing software that came with my PC or an aftermarket product.

But, honestly, I have had this same problem with Roxio so that is why I tried Ulead.

Unless I missed the answer, which is really possible as my head is spinning, did anyone tell me why the pictures look fine on my TV screen but bad on the computer monitor? Does it have to do with the lower quality of the TV monitor versus the higer quality of the computer monitor.

Tks

[heinz-oz]

What is your current screen resolution on your computer, the same as your TV? The image is stretched on your PC, degrading the display quality.

[Trevor Andrew]

Unless I missed the answer, which is really possible as my head is spinning, did anyone tell me why the pictures look fine on my TV screen but bad on the computer monitor? Does it have to do with the lower quality of the TV monitor versus the higer quality of the computer monitor.

Tks

Hi

When you say the quality is bad when viewed on the Pc, are you referring to VS preview playback, (which can be poor)

Or are you playing the completed disc on your pc.

Trevor

[davidpjr]

In answer to screen resolution, I have changed it to every possible resolution in display properties with no real difference between them when viewing the completed slide show on the DVD.

In regarding the other question, yes, the images when played on the ULEAD viewer (though not full screen on the PC Monitor, that is, the pictures does not encompass the full PC monitor screeen with the ulead viewer) looks perfect.

[caveman]

David

If you are using 4:3 ratio (std TV) this may help. If you work with PS (photoshop) you can do the following.

If you're working in the DV format using CCIR601 pixels at 720x480, create your PS files at 720x534.

Here are three examples of crop sizes that all produce the same result. Crop your images too either:

5.393" x 4" at 133.5 dpi, or 6" x 4.45" at 120 dpi or 7.5" x 5.563" at 96 dpi. There all the same. Each produce a file 720 x 534 at 96 dpi which is the STD NTSC DV/DVD format. I gave you these 3 crop sizes because I don't know what size your pictures are. I also save them as a tif file. Some people may think you need a pictures of great size but it is not true. Try this and you will be suprize how clear it is on a standard TV.

Preset Sizes: If you're working with Photoshop 7, there's a neat feature that allows you to select preset custom sizes when you make a new file. Use the Preset Sizes popup and select either 720x540 Std. NTSC 601 or 720x534 Std. NTSC DV/DVD.

Hope this helps.

caveman

Thanks for sharing that with us. In case you haven't noticed, you just violated forum policies. Here we concern ourselfs with ULEAD products. Last time I checked, PS was not a ULEAD product.

You could have given all your advice on a geral basis, without the references to PS, and the same result applies. The reasons for some of your strange frame sizes escape me at the moment but that is a different matter alltogether.

For some reason I forgot about the forum rule and I apologize for that error. However, the last time I checked I don't think that your references to PhotoImpact is a Ulead product either. About the crop sizes! Not nowing what image editing program David may be using to crop his pictures I decided to relate to him three crop sizes too chose from which all end up with the same pixel dimension of 1.1 mb (STD NTSC DV/DVD 720 x 534 at 96 dpi ). Some image editing programs can crop upward and some can not. I agree the image must be croped to the correct size and changed to either BMP or Tif.

For std. TVs viewing (4:3) ratio which I will discuss here, most programs look for the image Std. NTSC DV/DVD format 720 x 534 x 96 dpi (Image size, 7.5" x 5.563" at 96 dpi) to produce a clear image . However, most pictures people deal with are more like 6" x 4" and if your image editing program can not crop up then you need more choices. In the above 720 x 534 format you can prove to yourself that by changing only the dpi without resampling your image maintains the same pixel dimension of 1.1mb. For instance , using the STD 720 x 534 x 96dpi and you change only the dpi to 120 the result image size becomes smaller, 6"x 4.45" . The number of pixels are still 720 x 534 and a pixel demension is still 1.1 mb. Changing the dpi to 133.5 results in a image 5.393" x 4" which is still 720 x 534 and 1.1 mb pixel dimension. Thus, three crop sizes to chose from. Using the Std. NTSC above you can manipulate the dpi to create any crop size you like and each will produce the same resulted Std NTSC DV/DVD 720 x 534 file with the 1.1 mb pixel dimension. Please forgive me if this is confusing. I have never been a good writer or at explaining files sizes. All I can do is try to relate what has aways worked for me.

As far as my back ground or experencies go I worked as a aerial photographer where I not only took the pictures but did all the digital editing for DVD format.. For myself I'am still using an analog video camera and a digital still camera. I like the simplicity of Uleads video studio and movie factory. Retired now, and only work for myself. Hope this has helped clear up questions about the crop sizes. If not, I'm sorry I couldn't help.

[Ron P.]

Yes PhotoImpact is very much a Ulead product, even though there is another vendor that markets it.

Ron P.

[davidpjr]

Well, I did a little experimenting. I resized a jpg to 640x480 using an image editing program I have, and though I asked for the 720x480, it insisted on giving me 640x480.

I also converted my untouched jpg to a BMP and tested an unresized BMP and also the BMP which I resized to 640x480. I then made a slide show with the 4 pictures to compare 1 against the other:
-Jpg unsized,
-Jpg Resized
-BMP converted from BMP and unsized
-BMP converted from JPG and Resized.

The results, there seemed to be minimal difference between them. The BMP improved just a fraction but nothing as good as looking at just the JPG or BMP on the computer screen before putting it on the DVD.

[heinz-oz]

What did you use for the resizing of the images?

[heinz-oz]

@caveman

I didn't mean to attack you over the PS reference, only pointed that out.

In your last post, you refer to resizing an image by changing the dpi value. Of course, if you are printing the images then, yes, you have in fact reduced the physical size of your printed image. That doesn't have an effect on digital media though. In fact, most PC monitors display an image at 72 dpi, some LCD's at 96 dpi (that's why images look better on LCD's). Changing the dpi for any given image does not have an effect on the display at all.

Digital images do not have physical dimensions in inches x inches, that changes with the dpi. A monitor or a TV only has so many pixels x pixels and each pixel can only display 1 point (not 300 because the resolution now is 300dpi).

To resize a display image you have to reduce the number of pixels.

One more thing, the 1.1 MB has not much to do with pixels or dpi, but all with the color depth and image size and ratio of compression. You are confusing too many things.

[davidpjr]

I resized using Paint Shop... I guess I could have tried a microsoft product...

[Ron P.]

I resized using Paint Shop... I guess I could have tried a microsoft product...

No David, that's not what Heinz is saying at all. Use whatever program you are compfortable with to resize your images. Heinz is just trying to explain that dpi has nothing to do with display on a computer monitor or television screen. Dots Per Inch is used for hard print images. It's the number of dots per inch that your printer places on the paper.

Again if you have PS and are used to it, then by all means use it.

Ron P.

[heinz-oz]

I resized using Paint Shop... I guess I could have tried a microsoft product...

And which MS product would that be? MS doesn't have anything decent, AFAIK .

My question was merely to find out what was used to resize the image. Personally, I prefer Ulead PhotoImpact 11 to work with photos, others are using a different product and most, including myself, use a mix of programs, depending on what we are after. As long as you use a good image editor like PhotoImpact, PhotoShop, PaintShopPro etc. Your results should be better than what you describe, that's all.

Depending on how you go about to resize an image and which algorithms are used for the re-sampling, the results will need a bit more work done like resharpening etc.. If you resize an image down or a small image up, the program has to discard or generate pixels. Automatically you will lose clarity, if you like it or not.

For that reason, it is assumed best practice, to re-size from a large image to a small one and vice versa, in a number of steps. The program then does not have to guess too much what the remaining pixels should look like. All re-sized images need a little sharpening applied also.

I learned this the hard way during my participation in the free ULEAD PhotoImpact Beginners workshop. One of the lessons required an image to be partitioned into a number of squares, with lines drawn onto the image, and the resulting squares/rectangles to be colored in, each with a different transparent color. I did this to one of my 8 MP photos and then had to resize it because the uploaded images had to be a lot smaller. I did that without checking the result to closely and failed the lesson. During the re-sizing, some of the lines I drew onto the image had disappeared in the process even though they were 3 pixels wide to start with.

[davidpjr]

heinz,
thank you as well as everyone for all your help.

David