Locking Size of Window for animation

I just finished an animation but I want the window size to
match the dimensions of the animation I set in Flash. How do I do
that? I thought I set everything correctly when I published it.
Anyone have a suggestion. The animation is at the link below.
http://www.wooingskills.com/AfterThoughts.html

Sorry I forgot to mention the animation contains mature
content, so only click it if you are not easily offended.

Similar Messages

Where is the window for animation?

I dont know where is the window for animation in Photoshop CS6.
did you guy get rid of this window when you developed Photoshop CS6?
I remember the previous version has this window.
let me know where is it.
Thank you very much.

The Timeline Palette can create both Frame Animation and Video when you have a document open.

Mail on my iPad is locked on a window for adding signup for : iCloud, Google, etc.. How do I get to the email page?

Mail screen on iPad is locked on signup screen! How do I get out of this screen?

Close the settings app and reboot your iPad.
Double tap the home button and you will see apps lined up going left to right across the screen. Swipe to get to the app that you want to close and then swipe "up" on the app preview thumbnail to close it.
Reboot the iPad by holding down on the sleep and home buttons at the same time for about 10-15 seconds until the Apple Logo appears - ignore the red slider if it appears on the screen - let go of the buttons. Let the iPad start up.

What is the size of capture window for MX440-VTD8X?

I am trying to figure out how best to resize video I have captured with my MX440-VTD8X. For the application I am using (AVISynth) I need to calculate the PAR (Pixel Aspect Ratio), for this I need to know the size of the capture window for my video capture card.
I think that this card uses a Philps SAA-7114H, although I cannot be certain as MSI don't seem to publish this fact anywhere. (I found a few references to the 7114 via Google so that is the best lead I have had so far).
Anyway, even if I knew it used a 7114H that doesn't much help as I can't find any published data that tells me what the capture window (in microseconds) is for this card. The WDM driver might modify the window so how, so I can't just look it up in the datasheet for the 7114H.
I am looking for figures for the capture window for both PAL and NTSC,
could someone please help?
many thanks,
Kevin

To quote from the article I have been using which gives step-by-step instructions on how to calculate to aspect ratio ..
(Pixel Aspect Ratio, Source Aspect Ratio and Target Aspect Ratio)
"To determine your source PAR, you first have to know what the aspect ratio of the capture window of your capture device is. This capture window is fixed, but again it is rarely exactly 4:3. The device always digitizes the same area of your video and resizes it to the size you set in your capture application. The raw captured height is always 480 lines for NTSC and 576 for PAL. The width of the capture window has to be determined. A table with known values (and a more elaborate explanation) can be found in section 5.4. A method for determining this value yourself can be found in chapter 11.
Once you know the capture window width, the Image Aspect Ratio of your device can be calculated as:
PAL IAR = (4 / 3) * ([window width in µs] / 52.0 µs) / (576/576)
NTSC IAR = (4 / 3) * ([window width in µs] / 52.6555 µs) / (480/486) "
The 'window width' is given for some capture cards in the guide, but unfortunately not the MSI one I am using, and the 'window width' does vary from one type of capture card to another.
Without this information I am at a brick wall. There is a method to determine the window by using a PAL DVD player as the source video, playing some test image, the problem is that I only have an NTSC DVD player so I can't use that technique,
this is something that the manufacturer must know, but unfortunately they rarely publish it,
Kevin

I cannot use a website I need to use, with Firefox 5.0. So, I need to uninstall and go back to 3.5 or 3.6. Please advise. Also, my control panel locks up since Windows Explorer has pbms. Which is why I am using Firefox instead. Thanks for any help!

I cannot use a website I need to use, with Firefox 5.0. So, I need to uninstall and go back to 3.5 or 3.6. Please advise. Also, my control panel locks up since Windows Explorer has pbms. Which is why I am using Firefox instead. Thanks for any help!

''I figured it was going to be FAFSA causing your problem.''
Install Portable Firefox 3.6.x to your hard drive for that one website. It won't affect your current Firefox installation at all. <br />
http://portableapps.com/apps/internet/firefox_portable/localization#legacy36

Size of SSDs for Photoshop CS5, LR3, Windows 7

Looking at configurations to build a new desktop, I've been reading so many articles on using SSDs for PS CS5 that I'm now confused.
    I'd like to use one drive for OS & programs and a 2nd for a PS scratch disk. I'm looking at 80GB or 120GB to fit my budget. Will either of these sizes be suitable for the two drives. I've noticed that Intel just dropped their prices today and added the 120GB drive.
    I would like to use WD hard drives for a storage drive and another for a working drive (4 internal drives total) as the computer functions for family Internet, too. Now, I store my main Lightroom catalogs and photos on an external drive so I can move them between my desktop and laptop. My PS interests usually lie in collages of 6-8 photos (layers) and stringing photos together for landscapes. Lightroom does a lot of my editing adjustments other than that. I'm looking at 8MB of RAM for now, again for the budget.
    What do you suggest?

Ok, SSD's and photoshop...
there are a lot of differnet ways to handle this question none of them are easier then the other ..
I just did this like a month ago and here is what i did. *** note** Now i am not suggesting you follow my steps, but you can do something similar at a much lower price range
I have an OCZ RevoDrive 110 gig SSD as my primary os drive and program files directory.
second drive set is a pair of 10krpm 300gb raptor drives striped for a 600 gd data drive.
I have a 2x 2TB hard drives that are my archives but i keep them off line.
Now here is where it gets complicated.
You want to write to your SSD as little as possable for longevity of the drives mostly. so first thing is you want no swapper, no automatic defragmentation and several other SSD spacific settings like hibernation etc, if you have been doing the research you already know all this.
Now i took that and went a step even further and this is not something you would want to do unless you are extreeeemly confortable with playing around with OS configurations.
I during the OS build set all my user directories, program data, set the swapper to the Physical data hard drive set as well as the PS scratch disk, Internet caches etc..
This make it so that my primary boot and program files drive never gets written to unless there is an update or i am installing something.
The second Physical drive handles all the changing data. User profiles, personal settings, desktop, etc.
This does a number of things for me, everything launches and runs extreemly quickly it takes seconds for boot to dektop apps launch with out hesitation. It alows me to use a smaller SSD to house all my applications and OS while not restricting my ammount of data i can keep on my desktop or documents folders.
I have only used 35 gigs out of the 110 gig ssd installing all my apps and os including several very large games.
If i had to do it again i would do it exactly the same way.
Now, if you are not so confident in your OS skills and simply want an SSD for the extreme speed it will provide you. I would still suggest only using a single SSD and use a second physical drive.
Several reasons, its a heck of a lot cheaper.
Place your scatch disk, your OS swapper file (ssd does not need a swapper file but unless you have an ungodly ammount of memory you should always have one some place), temp directories and internet explorer cache locations onto the physical drive. Also to store your data on it.
SSD are too expensive to use for data storage or swapper/scratch drives at this point and it does not buy you anything speed wise using it as cache or temp folders. additionally when you are simply storing images you don't need that extreemly quick you will not see a noticable difference opening a photo on physical hd or SSD its just not that much data.
One last thing, unless your in an extreem rush, i would wait 6 months. with SATA 3 and USB-3 coming around and already showing on most new motherboards, newer faster SSD's and physical drives will be making their way to the market pretty quick.

PS SC3 Ext - Keyframe 3D .obj for animation WTF????

Hi guys,
I'm working on a axe throwing sequence, I've imported the Google Sketchup 3D model of the axw as a .obj file, no problems. I can use the 3D tools to rotate it, it looks great. Now I've like to animate it and need a little help. I open the animation window and set the frame rate and duration, no problems. I want the axe to spin across the 1 second duration. I figured I'd keyframe the postion at start with the axe at 0 degrees, set another keyframe of the axe rotated at half way and full return keyframe at end. Keyframes set up but they aren't working to control the rotate, it seems I can rotate the model but can't lock it to points in time for animation. How do I keyframe the axe do that it rotates animated??

Question Nulled,
I reckon I got it figured, ans = 'cs4 upgrade', improved workaround.

Valid size not available for this creation when using Greeting Card feature

Using PSE9 with a Mac. When attempting to create a greeting card, after selecting the photo, the Greeting Card, I receive a pop up error message as follows:
"Valid Size Not Available For This Creation". (All other Create functions such as Photo Book, Photo Calendar, and Photo Collage appear to be working). I have been in contact with Adobe Support and have been instructed to do a number of things from creating a new preferences file to uninstalling and re-installing the PSE software, with no result. Has anyone else run into this problem, and if so have found a fix? Thanks.

I've been tearing my hair out over this one also. I've been on hold for over 10 hrs with Adobe Support waited over almost 2 weeks and still no resolution. I'm trying to create the Save the Date cards for my wedding and I can't wait for Adobe. Removing the preferences file and uninstalling/reinstalling does not fix the problem.
That said I did figure out a workaround for this. It's easy but it does require Windows. For me this was no big deal as I do own a Windows box.
Get the free trial version of PE9 for Windows and install it. If you don't have a Windows computer get to a friend that has one
Upload some of your photos to the PE9 Windows Organizer (it's identical to the mac version)
Select Create and then Greeting card. Photoshop will launch the guided edit feature for greeting cards.
Select the Layout feature and once you find out that you like save it as Photoshop project. Repeat this step for as many layouts as necessary.
Copy your Photoshop project files (and any folders) to your mac.
Open the project files as you would with any other Photoshop file.
You can now select the Create feature. You will be able add your pictures and resize them, you will be able to add/remove text, you'll be able to change the backgound/borders, add graphics...pretty much anything...EXCEPT automatically modify the layout. If you click on Layout, PE9 returns nothing. You can however go into full edit mode and if you have decent Photoshop skills you can make any changes to the layout manually.
If I had to put money on this I'd say that there is a problem with the PE9 Mac installation package. For some reason it is not deploying the layout data/files or it is not putting them in the right place. For this reason the program can't find the layouts when the user selects the greeting card guided edit.
Good luck.

Server 2012 Hyper-V locks up Virtual Server for no reason.

Server 2012 Hyper-V locks up virtual servers for no reason.
This is a production server. I began building this server in February. I installed the server in November. 2012 server R1 is full of bugs!
First who was the rocket scientist that decided that the TURN OFF function in Hyper-V means "Please turn off when the
F*#@$*% you feel like it"? Idiots!
I have a Supermicro server with perfect memory (for those who want to blame this on memory).
It is running 12 Virtual Servers. Every morning, at a random time, at least 1 of the servers lock up solid. Sometimes as many as 5 decide that for no reason they all want to lock up. The servers that lock up may be 1 or more: a database server, a terminal
server, an exchange server, a Windows 8.1 Ent VDI server, an IIS server, and or AD server. All 2012 R1.
They are running all current Microsoft and other vendor patches and hardware updates.
The only common denominator is the Hyper-V server.
I cannot shut them down using the Hyper-V manager. I cannot turn them off. I have a hundred users standing by while I nicely ask them to turn off. The VM will turn off after 20 minutes and a lot of gentle coaxing.
I cannot Kill the vmwp.exe process associated with the locked Virtual Machine.
No .DMP are created. No events in the event viewers. No reason at all. When they restart, there is no indication of a problem.
I ran two VMWP dumps and posted it here.
www.a1bcs.com/hyper-vlockup.zipx
Does anyone know why these are locking up?
Thanks in advance for any help.
Robert

I'm not positive of the cause but I was able to stop the problems.
It turned out that Network Load Balancing (NLB) between the two terminal servers and another between the two gateways was causing the lockups.
This is a normal configuration and it should work. Especially since Microsoft has seen fit to remove the DRAIN USERS function from RDP as well as the LOCK OUT till next reboot function. JUST FYI these functions are still available at a DOS prompt
by using the CHGLOGON command. But still the NLB also provides these functions.
Anyhow, once I removed the NLB I haven't had the lockups anymore.
That doesn't however change the fact that TURN OFF should mean TURN OFF not turn off please!
Thanks again,
Robert

Pre-Size Your PPI for Best Print - Once Good Advice Still Good?

In another thread someone mentinoed pre-sizing image data to prepare it for best printing.
For a long time it's been "standard advice" to resize images so that the ppi is an even division of the printer's dpi, because some years ago occasionally one would run across printers that would produce poor results if you didn't - you might see jaggies in straight edges for example.
Thing is, computers have (not so) quietly been getting more powerful over time, and printer makers have been competing with one another to try to make their printers produce better results than the other guys. One way they've done this is by improving the quality of the algorithms in the printer drivers. Use of mega storage and high accuracy math, which was once taxing on older computer systems, is now standard practice.
So it's time to question the old rule of thumb.
Making a few assumptions about the many variables (what printer, what OS, what version of drivers, what application being used to print) , there seem to be several questions here:
1. Can the image resolution be too high, causing the printer driver to make bad decisions about what ink dots to lay down where on the paper?
2. Does it help or matter if the image PPI is an even division of the printer's DPI?
As I have done in the past, I set out to do some actual testing, to see if I can actually SEE anything to help answer these questions.
I created a sharp image to be printed at 3 x 2 inches: http://Noel.ProDigitalSoftware.com/ForumPosts/Ghirardelli.jpg
Then I printed it at 6 different resolutions (1000, 720, 567, 300, 200, and 100 ppi) by resampling the image, labeling it, printing from Photoshop CS5, and feeding the same sheet of HP Premium Plus photo paper through my older HP 932c inkjet printer 6 times. The printer was set to its highest quality settings, including 2400 x 1200 dpi mode. This was the result:
I then looked critically and as objectively as I could at the different images. Here are my observations:
Naked eye:
The four highest resolution images (1000, 720, 567, and 300 ppi) all seemed to have an equivalent high level of crisp detail.
I could not detect the inkjet dots. Smooth objects look smooth.
Jeweler's Loupe:
I could see significant reduction in the finest details in the 300 ppi print vs. the three higher resolution prints, and a slight reduction in the 567 ppi vs. 720.
At no resolution were any jaggies or evidence of aliasing visible.
The inkjet dot pattern was plainly visible, and it does differ between the different prints. But it was not possible to say whether one was "better".
Things seem to have a little more texture in the 1000 ppi print vs. the 720 and 567 ppi prints.
Macro Photo:
Lacking a high resolution scanner, I took photographs of the 6 different prints. Unfortunately, I didn't have the time to set up with my best lighting and lens combination, so I got some reflections off the glossy paper, and and at this resolution I can't really see the inkject dots in the photos. I want to repeat this when I can find more time to do it better. As I did these photos hand-held, I believe the variances between them could be slightly influencing the results. But I'm going to post them anyway, for you to see.
I could see ever so slightly more detail in the 720 ppi print vs. the 1000 ppi print, though from the size of the tiny dust/light reflections I think it may have just been the better focused. Note that this observation is not supported by direct observation through the jeweler's loupe, above.
The 1000 ppi and 567 ppi prints seems to have slightly more noise or texture than the 720 ppi print. Again, this might be issues introduced by the photography process, though I did note a possible increase in texture in the 1000 ppi print with the jeweler's loupe as well.
Beyond just the blurring, I could see some evidence that straight lines are not quite as straight in the lower resolutions (300 ppi and lower). This seemed more apparent than with the jeweler's loupe examination, and I wonder whether the Photoshop downsampling process could have introduced it.
Left to right, top to bottom: 1000, 720, 567, 300, 200, 100:
Conclusions:
Printing to my HP 932c inkject printer on Windows 7 x64
300 ppi is not sufficient to coax the best possible detail out of an inkjet printer. It appears a number in the vicinity of 720 or more is better, and this number could be much higher with modern very high resolution printers (mine's old).
Speed was no different in printing any of these - a modern computer can process a huge amount of data in the blink of an eye.
When a sufficiently high resolution image is printed (in this case 567 ppi or higher) I saw virtually no evidence that a particular ppi value is superior, for example an even division of the printer's dpi, though in hindsight I realize I should have prepared a 600 ppi image (duh). I will add a 600 ppi image before I re-photograph the results.
It's possible ever so slightly more texture becomes visible at 1000 ppi than 720 ppi, but it might be just noise.
Practically speaking, from looking critically at the results I could not see a reason to pre-size the image for a specific ppi value.
I encourage you to experiment and report your results with your particular combination of gear.
Your comments are welcome!
-Noel

Noel Carboni wrote:
Jeff Schewe wrote:
I would never suggest people actually downsample though...why waste the pixels?
Exactly. There was a statement in another recent thread that downsampling to be an even fraction of the print dpi was important to do.
It might have been a misapplied extension of the advice to upsample. It's not been all that long that we've had big enough high resolution data that even makes downsampling a possibility.
-Noel
I believe I was the one to make that statement, which was based on recommendations by an Epson Print expert at a seminar demoing printers. He showed to prints from the same file, one set at an even multiple of 720 and the other some random number. It was subtle but visible the difference. That was probably 5 years ago.
In the meantime, I have made extensive tests of prints on my Epson 3800 trying many combinations of single pass, hi speed, Super fine print (2880x1440) and down to the basic level.
Everything evened out at 720 dpi. At 360, which is where I output from ACR, I can make an 8x12 print with no resampling whatsoever. Upping that to 720 and pushing the printer hard (2880x1440, single pass on Canson Platine), I see a discernable difference in the smooth tonalities.
As I understood you from past conversations, you employ the maximum output size from ACR which in my case, would double the file size by upsampling, and if necessary, downsample from that. I am not comfortable doing that as a default operation, but perhaps Jeff S might step in here and clarify. After all, ACR does offer that option! But my file size now goes from ~70MP to 143 MP, cutting my storage capability by 1/2. It's not a trivial matter when two of us here can run 600 to 800 images in 1/2 day!

File size extremely high for .avi after render PE 9

I'm very new to PE and have tried to learn quick to redact info (faces etc) in .avi files for a government agency. I was able to open the file (in the trial version) and make the track matte by dragging the original file to the timeline then dragging it again to the video 2 timeline for the top layer, Question 1) is this the same as copy and paste or am I doubling the size already? Anyway, I was able to get the matte and everything done. Now, to Render and save... I choose computer/avi again (I need to keep it the same) and it took 1 hr 45 min to render it, that seemed long to me but maybe not... but mainly the file size was then 100,883 kb! Starting with a 29.7 kb file. This is what my question is about....could this be right? I can't use it if this is what I get. So, here are the particulars as I got G-spot and looked it up, as per serveral suggestions I saw here. I'm trying to understand the CODEC info but I fear I have a ways to go before I can figure out what I did wrong. (This is my test computer, the future work would be done on a newer, better computer). The videos I would be working with come from various sources and will vary in length but will probably all be a kind of avi.
Intel Pentium processor 1600 mhz
221 mhz, 2.00 gb ram
Microsoft windows xp sp3
video:
length: 0:27.261
frms: 817
Kbps: 28770
pic: 720x480
codec: dvsd dvc/dy
I appreciate any help you can give

Thanks for you response and the information was very helpful. I was able to choose and output that gave me a good file size and I do want DV-AVI (I don't remember what I chose but it worked) but, I don't see an option for DV-AVI - is that a general DV output selection, because there seem to be numerous (AVCHD, NTSC, DV STANDARD) acronyms (I have tried to understand what each is) which do I want?
From: Bill Hunt <[email protected]>
To: Mid Century Modern <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 6:07 PM
Subject: File size extremely high for .avi after render PE 9
Re: File size extremely high for .avi after render PE 9 created by Bill Hunt in Premiere Elements - View the full discussion
For the use of Track Matte Keying, with say a Gaussian Blur, or maybe Moasic Effect, if you have not altered the In & Out Points, then just dragging the Asset to both Video 1 and Video 2 will work fine. If you HAVE adjusted the In & Out Points, you can just click-drag from the Source Monitor, where you set those In & Out Points, and all is good. The Copy/Paste is just another way to do it.
As you are doing an "overlay," the output File Size will not be affected in any way. You are also limiting the Blur, or Effect on Video 2 to just the area "exposed" by the Track Matte, so the pixel count will not be altered.
As Steve points out, the output CODEC in the AVI will determine the output File Size. File Size is basically determined by the Timeline's Duration and by the Bit-Rate of the output file. With DV-AVI, that Bit-Rate is pretty well set, and your Timeline determines the Duration. At ~ 13GB/hour, a DV-AVI will be pretty large, but that is the nature of the beast. Also, and as Steve points out, if you are going to do additional editing, and will be Importing that file into a New Project, DV-AVI is about as good, as it gets.
Good luck,
Hunt
Replies to this message go to everyone subscribed to this thread, not directly to the person who posted the message. To post a reply, either reply to this email or visit the message page: http://forums.adobe.com/message/3943683#3943683
To unsubscribe from this thread, please visit the message page at http://forums.adobe.com/message/3943683#3943683. In the Actions box on the right, click the Stop Email Notifications link.
Start a new discussion in Premiere Elements by email or at Adobe Forums
For more information about maintaining your forum email notifications please go to http://forums.adobe.com/message/2936746#2936746.

FCP X Locks up "restoring windows layout"

I've only had this lovely package for 6 days and now it locks up "retoring windows layout" , yes indeed, it is looking more like Windows,can't wait for it to show up on my credit card in a couple of weeks.

Just delete the Layouts folder and also this file
com.apple.FinalCut.plist
it is located here Computer/HD/Users/User_name/Library/Preferences
My problem started after installing new AU audio plugins. The problem this is a temporary fix as will you need to repeat this procedure everytime you start FCP until you find the source of the problem and deal with it. Let me know.

Premiere timeline printing (for animation x-sheet use)

I have used a very old version of adobe premiere (premiere 5 windows) to print timeline pdfs of pix icon and waveform of animatic quicktimes. I would add anotations to these in acrobat for specific animation timing direction ( as replacement for traditional animation exposure sheets). My problem is that adobe long ago dropped their print timeline feature in more recent versions and I can't get the old version of premiere to even launch under any recent OS....
I'm hoping there is a way to do the same thing with new Premiere Pro CC ....(just print premiere timeline of pix icons with audio waveform).. or a third party export for animation exposure sheet use... Any Suggestions?
Thanks,
Woody

Woody,
Thinking about your situation, I wonder if something like this would be useful (what Joe suggested, but with variations):
I just expanded a blank Narration Audio Track, to about 6x the width of the displayed Video Track, did a screen-cap, brought it into Photoshop, and Selected that area of the Narration Track, applied a Hue/Saturation Adjustment Layer to it, to give room for annotations, etc.. As I only have PrPro 2.0 on this old laptop, things will look a bit different, but with the Adjustment Layer, it will not matter if the GUI is a darker gray.
One can always add a blank Track, where desired, and expand it to suit. One could also create a white Filled Shape, w/ grid (see below), and just have that ready to be Pasted into the screen-cap of the Timeline. One could probably create an Action, or a Script, to handle much of that automatically, or at least semi-automatically.
It is missing the grid, that your image shows, but one could easily create that with Paths and a thin Stroke on a Layer.
There IS a little work to be done, but not THAT much.
Just thinking of a workaround.
Good luck,
Hunt

ITunes locks up on Windows

iTunes is now locking up on Windows. I have to use task manager to shut it down. How do I get iTunes working again?

Hey dalefromroseville!
Here is an article for you that will help you troubleshoot this issue:
iTunes for Windows Vista, Windows 7, or Windows 8: Fix unexpected quits or launch issues
http://support.apple.com/kb/ts1717
Thanks for coming to the Apple Support Communities!
Cheers,
Braden

How to display the Get info window for a file or folder

Hello,
How can I display the Get Info window for a file or folder using Applescript - instead of selecting it in the finder and using Command-I ?
Thanks.
lenpartico

The item property that the Get Info was opened for is read only, so it doesn't look like you can just throw a file path at it. You could do something like telling the Finder to reveal the item, then keystroke the command, e.g.:
<pre style="
font-family: Monaco, 'Courier New', Courier, monospace;
font-size: 10px;
margin: 0px;
padding: 5px;
border: 1px solid #000000;
width: 720px;
color: #000000;
background-color: #FFEE80;
overflow: auto;"
title="this text can be pasted into the Script Editor">
tell application "Finder"
reveal "Path:to:your:file"
activate
end tell
tell application "System Events" to keystroke "i" using {command down}
</pre>
... but this doesn't seem to be much different than the regular method. There are other methods to get various information, what are you wanting to do?
Edit:
Hmmm, I could have sworn (I do a lot of that these days) I tried Hiroto's method, but that does work. It still seems to be a roundabout way of doing something though.
Message was edited by: red_menace

Locking Size of Window for animation

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for