Follow the Leader - Part 2

Please post your tutorials here for ProShow Producer only. Provide a lnk if you have a file that can be downloaded by others. This is not a discussion section, but rather a source for sharing tutorials.
.
User avatar
Posts: 9321
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 12:37 pm
Location: E. Greenbush, NY

Re: Follow the Leader - Part 2

Postby BarbaraC » Thu Jan 29, 2015 4:33 am

Bravo, Dale!

Barbara
The Frame Locker - styles, transitions, frames, backgrounds, & more.
Subscribe to Frame Locker News for alerts to new products.
How-to's: ProShowThink

.
User avatar
Posts: 850
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:50 pm
Location: Bentonville, AR

Re: Follow the Leader - Part 2

Postby VidQueen » Thu Jan 29, 2015 6:25 am

They could add more complex features, a la After Effects....

What Adobe has done is made the program financially viable for everyone through the new subscription feature. Great, but it's still like sitting in a 747 Cockpit without an instructor. In comes the 3rd Party Vendors, such as Digital Juice, VideoHive, Pond5 and countless others. They do all the hard work, create amazingly beautiful templates, and all the end user has to do is add their content and make any necessary adjustments. Sound familiar? When using 3rd Party AE templates, the end user doesn't really need to understand anymore than 10% of AE's capabilities. Now, if they want to learn more, there are online tutorials out the Yin Yang that can help; some paid (Lynda.com) some free (AETuts)....the level of learning is up to you. If you want to run on Auto Pilot, rock on...buy a template. If you want to fly it yourself, strap in for what will most likely be hundreds of hours of training....but in the end, you'll be flying like a pro 8)

Just for the record, every 6 months or so I search out and download other Slide Show programs to see if anything better pops up (I'm specifically looking for use of multiple layers, Captions as layers, video files, 3D animation capabilities and, of course, the ability to import 3rd Party content). Nada. Zip. Zilch. Even with a full year of deafening silence, Photodex is still leaps and bounds above anyone else.

.
Posts: 1653
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 5:28 pm
Location: near Chicago - Illinois USA

Re: Follow the Leader - Part 2

Postby heckydog » Thu Jan 29, 2015 7:56 am

VidQueen wrote:They could add more complex features, a la After Effects....

What Adobe has done is made the program financially viable for everyone through the new subscription feature. Great, but it's still like sitting in a 747 Cockpit without an instructor. In comes the 3rd Party Vendors, such as Digital Juice, VideoHive, Pond5 and countless others. They do all the hard work, create amazingly beautiful templates, and all the end user has to do is add their content and make any necessary adjustments. Sound familiar? When using 3rd Party AE templates, the end user doesn't really need to understand anymore than 10% of AE's capabilities. Now, if they want to learn more, there are online tutorials out the Yin Yang that can help; some paid (Lynda.com) some free (AETuts)....the level of learning is up to you. If you want to run on Auto Pilot, rock on...buy a template. If you want to fly it yourself, strap in for what will most likely be hundreds of hours of training....but in the end, you'll be flying like a pro 8)

Just for the record, every 6 months or so I search out and download other Slide Show programs to see if anything better pops up (I'm specifically looking for use of multiple layers, Captions as layers, video files, 3D animation capabilities and, of course, the ability to import 3rd Party content). Nada. Zip. Zilch. Even with a full year of deafening silence, Photodex is still leaps and bounds above anyone else.


What I was trying to point out, maybe not clearly enough, is that having a simple right click menu option to have one layer follow a parent layer is LESS complex (for the user) than using modifiers. I agree with Dale in that I don't want Photodex to become like AE. Using the right click menu system is not the same as the pickwhip system that AE uses, but it's certainly simpler to use than modifiers.

I've used BluffTitler for about 10 years. Here's a program that's about 11MB in size and costs around $60 I think. Now, I'm not saying I want ProShow to be BluffTitler. But, they have full 3D capabilities with a camera layer, with lights, reflections, and all kinds of goodies. They use a container system to do the parent/child effects. Moving anchor points (rotation centers) is easy. All of that for $60, so it can be done and it doesn't have to be done the After Effects way ($$$$$) :wink:

And I agree that ProShow is the best slide show program available today.

Joe

.
User avatar
Posts: 9321
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 12:37 pm
Location: E. Greenbush, NY

Re: Follow the Leader - Part 2

Postby BarbaraC » Thu Jan 29, 2015 8:31 am

My question in the simpler parent/child type of setup remains, though it may be because of how I'm likely to choose just one of several things the parent might be doing for the child to follow. Are you saying that you'd right-click one aspect of the parent and then somehow get the child to follow that aspect? How would you choose which aspect of the child you want to do the following? For example, what if I want the child's Y zoom to follow the parent's X pan? And what kind of behavior would the child have? Which type of motion?

Or are you saying that, since this would be out of the realm of the right-click method, it would have to be done on an advanced screen that they'd finally make easier and more logical?

Barbara
The Frame Locker - styles, transitions, frames, backgrounds, & more.
Subscribe to Frame Locker News for alerts to new products.
How-to's: ProShowThink

.
User avatar
Posts: 850
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:50 pm
Location: Bentonville, AR

Re: Follow the Leader - Part 2

Postby VidQueen » Thu Jan 29, 2015 8:54 am

heckydog wrote:...Using the right click menu system is not the same as the pickwhip system that AE uses, but it's certainly simpler to use than modifiers.


I agree completely. Right click, drop down menu, checkbox, pickwhip.....the method doesn't really matter, but a nice simple way to parent and entire layer to another would be nice. For those of us that like to pick and choose our attributes, maybe a second modifier window with a bunch of alternate settings would work, but I still wish that the default attributes would be chosen based on the attribute we came in on (as it is currently, if I right click on the rotate attribute and choose to modify based on Variable Amount Using, it always defaults to Pan X, instead of the attribute I came in on, which was rotate).

Esteemed Member
Posts: 222
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 4:58 am
Location: Crowborough, East Sussex, U.K.

Re: Follow the Leader - Part 2

Postby des.tom » Thu Jan 29, 2015 10:28 am

Wow! Amazing what a little thank you note can stir up. It was written mainly to bring what I found a useful theme - it has been dormant for over two years! - back up the list and to the attention of new comers.

Des

.
Posts: 1653
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 5:28 pm
Location: near Chicago - Illinois USA

Re: Follow the Leader - Part 2

Postby heckydog » Thu Jan 29, 2015 12:15 pm

BarbaraC wrote:My question in the simpler parent/child type of setup remains, though it may be because of how I'm likely to choose just one of several things the parent might be doing for the child to follow. Are you saying that you'd right-click one aspect of the parent and then somehow get the child to follow that aspect? How would you choose which aspect of the child you want to do the following? For example, what if I want the child's Y zoom to follow the parent's X pan? And what kind of behavior would the child have? Which type of motion?

Or are you saying that, since this would be out of the realm of the right-click method, it would have to be done on an advanced screen that they'd finally make easier and more logical?

Barbara


With a parent/child method, the child does everything the parent does. Pan, zoom, rotate, opacity, scaling. Personally, I would not want PSP to be so complex it could do the "Y zoom follows X pan". Then you're getting into unknown territory.

Keep in mind a couple things. Pan, zoom, and rotate would probably be used most often. The child layer also is able to do it's own effects while it's following the parent. Just picture the sun and the planets. We orbit around the sun but we also rotate around our own axis. . . . . .while the moon orbits around us, it spins on its axis. Those are examples of parent/child relations.

Another thing to remember. The parent layer does not have to be visible. So if you have a background you want to move from right to left, and photos you want move from left to right, you can add an invisible parent layer for the photos. In AE that would be called a null object but an invisible layer does exactly the same thing without muddying the waters.

One last thing. Let's say you have layers marked A,B, C, and D. You can set it up so A is the parent and B,C, and D all follow whatever A does. Or, A is the first parent layer, then B parents to A, C parents to B, and D parents to C. That's how I did the swinging effect from my earlier post. I would hope if they ever implemented this, any layer could be a parent or a child to any other layer.

It sounds complicated but it isn't really that hard. I understand how it could be hard to follow. I started over 10 years ago with Pinnacle Studio 9 and it had a free 3D plugin called Hollywood FX. Today they are up to Studio 18 and they still have that free plugin. And it took me quite a while to understand the concepts, but it was the stepping stone for me to learn everything I just talked about.

This is why I sometimes voice my frustrated opinion. Because a free, 10 year old plugin can do what PSP should be able to do.

Joe

.
User avatar
Posts: 9321
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 12:37 pm
Location: E. Greenbush, NY

Re: Follow the Leader - Part 2

Postby BarbaraC » Thu Jan 29, 2015 1:26 pm

Joe, your explanation of the parent/child relationship went deep enough for me to now see what you're talking about. I've delved into modifiers with much help from Dale, learning from him how to use an invisible layer (which can be downright cool), but now I'm beginning to realize just how glorious it could be to have what might be essentially a great-grandparent, grandparent, parent, and child relationship.

Now here's the thing about Photodex: They are absolutely determined to make each new version backward compatible, and if they've looked at parent/child perchance, they might have decided they couldn't do it because it would negate all the setups people had done previously. At some point, they're going to have to do what other software companies have done, which is to tell people to keep the older version for use with older files/designs/whatever because the newest version is incompatible with them.

I used to use BluffTitler, but for some unknown reason, I stopped updating it, and then when I wanted to do so, I realized I'd have to buy it again. I weighed that against other things I had to buy, and BluffTitler lost the competition. I've periodically thought how I ought to get back into it.

Barbara
The Frame Locker - styles, transitions, frames, backgrounds, & more.
Subscribe to Frame Locker News for alerts to new products.
How-to's: ProShowThink

.
User avatar
Posts: 3736
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 11:21 am
Location: Parker, CO

Re: Follow the Leader - Part 2

Postby im42n8 » Thu Jan 29, 2015 1:43 pm

Believe it or not but, the contents of any particular layer in any feature's entry box need not have anything to do with the feature itself. Those boxes can contain any value that does not exceed that box's readable value limits and be used for a completely different purpose than for what it was intended. Basically, I'm using it simply as a container for some value which I can then use for any other purpose or function I want to use it for. Just because the box is for pan or blur or white point doesn't mean I have to use it for that purpose. Modifiers, in their current implementation, allow me the flexibility to repurpose the contents of any other box for my own purposes. A pickwick would have to allow a similar functionality.

Further, some layer's functions may be used by other layers corresponding functions for their intended purpose ... but it may not want or need to address ALL of that other layer's functions. I may have function values on that layer that are repurposed. I would NOT want the follower layer to use those repurposed function's values in any way, shape, or form. My ability to use such repurposed cells for other than their intended purpose allows me to do things that would otherwise be impossible to do. An all or nothing functionality is NOT in the best interest of the user ... particularly those who don't necessarily follow the "rules."

While you cannot use the zoom box values (presently) for ANYTHING except zoom related values, nearly every other value containing box is usable (hue needs a correction value and tilt boxes need to compensate for the fact that they're related to a rotation). But, Pan-Y can address the values in Rotate Center-X or Opacity or Blur and do what it needs to do (or what you want it to do). You need that flexibility to do things that are otherwise impossible or difficult to do. I do this stuff quite regularly. Yes, it's an advanced handling of things compared to what most people think of ... but, it's perfectly valid.

Zoom following is NOT simple because of how Photodex implemented the zoom feature (although simple zoom following is only 2 lines long and applied to all keyframes on the layer ... and the maximum zoom of the layer doing the zoom following is set to the maximum zoom of the layer being zoom followed ... "Simple," in this case is a matter of perspective). Also, the workarounds for exact zoom following are easily broken. However, if you know what you're doing, interesting things can be done with it that should NOT be that difficult to do. And some of those "interesting" things are done using multiple modifier lines in the defined modifier itself and the reading of values calculated in boxes that have been repurposed. Sometimes you have to think outside the box to get things done. It's easier too if nobody ever told you you couldn't do it that way. :D

Bottom line is that there is LOTS of room for improvement in many different areas... but, like Barbara said, backwards compatibility is a must. Otherwise, most effects would become obsolete or broken.

Dale
What's New: Tools for ProShow: v11.42a Access ProShow capabilities Photodex doesn't provide (For PSG & PSP).
FPVP Blog "Making the Difficult Easier," FPVP News

.
Posts: 1653
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 5:28 pm
Location: near Chicago - Illinois USA

Re: Follow the Leader - Part 2

Postby heckydog » Thu Jan 29, 2015 3:19 pm

Barbara,

I love that great-grandparent . . . .parent, child analogy :D now you got the idea!

Backward compatibility is do-able I suppose, just leave the modifier option (not my choice). I think it becomes more of an issue for people like yourself, who sell 3rd party products that might break on a newer version. I don't know if it's much of an issue for the end users. How often do you go back and re-do a show once it's "in the can" and all your friends/relatives/co-workers have seen it? But what happens if Photodex ever adds true 3D with a camera layer and all it entails? How does that affect those 3rd party products that use the tilt effect? Would Photodex keep the tilt and 3D? Makes no sense. Would they never implement true 3D because it's not compatible with their tilt effect? Geez, I hope they don't really think that way. :roll:

They're probably being over cautious, but that's just my opinion, and it's their prerogative to be that way.

I've only paid for one upgrade with BluffTitler and that was when they split it into 3 product types and added a whole bunch of features to the Pro version. I was happy to pay the upgrade. They have version 12 in beta right now and it's going to be another major update. But I haven't heard if they will be charging for it. I'll pay for it if I have to, even though I don't use it as much as I used to.


Dale,

You are truly a one in a million master of ProShow. And I have no idea about what you're talking about but I'm sure you are right about all of it.

However, I like my shows like I like my women, plain and simple . . . . . . and in true 3D I guess. No offense meant to anyone, any gender, anywhere in the world. :wink:

Joe

PS I'm not in favor of a 64 bit version. If you want to beat me up on that, please start a new thread.

.
User avatar
Posts: 9321
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 12:37 pm
Location: E. Greenbush, NY

Re: Follow the Leader - Part 2

Postby BarbaraC » Fri Jan 30, 2015 4:53 am

Joe, why not a 64-bit version?

Barbara
The Frame Locker - styles, transitions, frames, backgrounds, & more.
Subscribe to Frame Locker News for alerts to new products.
How-to's: ProShowThink

.
Posts: 1653
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 5:28 pm
Location: near Chicago - Illinois USA

Re: Follow the Leader - Part 2

Postby heckydog » Fri Jan 30, 2015 9:05 am

Nothing against 64 bit per se, but Photodex only has X number of software engineers and X amount of money for R&D and I think they would best use their resources on some of the things we discussed earlier.

Do we really need a 64 bit tilt effect? Or 64 bit modifiers? I sure don't. It's just a matter of priorities.

On the Pinnacle forum there's discussions about the latest Studio version 18 which is the first 64 bit version for that software. The general feeling is there's little to no change and it may even run slower than the older PS17 which is 32bit. No one has yet pointed out any great benefits.

I've had similar experiences with some of the Adobe products that were switched from 32 to 64bit. I don't see any change in performance when I use Encore. I've had both versions of Photoshop installed and I rarely use the 64 bit because some of the plugins I've had for years, the 64 bit is not available or I don't want to spend the money for it. So I use the 32bit 99% of the time and it's more than adequate.

I'm not sure what people expect from a 64bit ProShow but if it's a giant leap in performance, they may be disappointed. What do you expect to gain from an "upgrade" to 64 bit?

Joe

.
User avatar
Posts: 9321
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 12:37 pm
Location: E. Greenbush, NY

Re: Follow the Leader - Part 2

Postby BarbaraC » Fri Jan 30, 2015 9:24 am

Interesting. I tried Photoshop CS6 and went scurrying right back to CS3. :!: :D

I've assumed all along that 64-bit software runs faster than 32-bit. In theory, it should, shouldn't it?

Barbara
The Frame Locker - styles, transitions, frames, backgrounds, & more.
Subscribe to Frame Locker News for alerts to new products.
How-to's: ProShowThink

.
Posts: 1653
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 5:28 pm
Location: near Chicago - Illinois USA

Re: Follow the Leader - Part 2

Postby heckydog » Fri Jan 30, 2015 9:58 am

BarbaraC wrote:Interesting. I tried Photoshop CS6 and went scurrying right back to CS3. :!: :D

I've assumed all along that 64-bit software runs faster than 32-bit. In theory, it should, shouldn't it?

Barbara


This video explains it pretty well. In essence the answer to your question is no.



Bummer, isn't it? But you can see why I think the priorities should be elsewhere.

Joe

.
User avatar
Posts: 9321
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 12:37 pm
Location: E. Greenbush, NY

Re: Follow the Leader - Part 2

Postby BarbaraC » Fri Jan 30, 2015 10:20 am

I noticed he talked about phones, which have little need of more memory, and then he never mentioned software that has a huge need for memory. When I upgraded from the 32-bit music sequencing software I was using to the newer 64-bit version, all memory problems disappeared. Poof! People using ProShow have periodically mentioned memory problems, too. Don't you think it might help there, too?

Barbara
The Frame Locker - styles, transitions, frames, backgrounds, & more.
Subscribe to Frame Locker News for alerts to new products.
How-to's: ProShowThink

PreviousNext

Return to PSP - Tutorials

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest