Page Tiling - Precise alignment of pages

Hello.
I know that I could solve this by using InDesign, but I'd like to have the flexibility of using Illustrator while creating this document.
I am making a presentation which will eventually be saved as a multi-page PDF. I have set up a 6144x2304 pixel document which has the page tiling set up to produce a 6 wide by 3 tall, 1024x768px PDF document for eventual viewing on-screen.
How can I set up the page tiling so that it is PRECISELY accurate when exporting? As far as I know, I can only place the page tiles using the "Page Tool", which has the handle in the lower-left corner of the tiles. This makes precise positioning of tiles in relation to the upper-left corner of my document impossible. Also, the handle is attached to the live area of the page and not the edge of the printed page, so forget about snapping to the edge of the doc.
If there was a way for me to move the handle of the page tool to the upper-left, or if there were a way for me to numerically control the page tool's placement, I'd be oh so happy!
Thanks for your feedback.
--------------S

After setting up the document in the Document Setup window, do a Cmd-P and then select the Setup in the box at the left. Set the origin to 0, 0 and to tile full pages.

Similar Messages

Rep - 1223 (Invalid Page Size)/Urgent

Hi,
I has developed a report in character mode.Then i save the report.In order to have a precise alignment i then changed the design in character units property to Yes.After some time,while running the report it gave an error Rep - 1223 (Invalid Page Size).
On seeing the property inspector for Paper layout for the Main Section,i saw that the width and height property increased to some very high level.On trying to reducing the width and height size ,it gave a message that unable to reduce it since the layout is not large enough to accomodate layout items.
Even when i do not save the report the next time,the error somehow persists.
This kind of error comes very occasionally when try to design character mode reports using design in character units property set to Yes.
Kindly help me out.
Regards
Deepak

Hi Deepak
I suggest you apply the latest patch set and check if issue still exist. There are no known issues like this currently.
Thanks
Rohit

How to print multiple copies of same image (with specific fixed dimensions) on single page

I am using Photoshop Elements 10 on Win 7 PC. I am trying to print multiple copies of one image on a single 8.5x11 sheet of paper? The images are artwork for buttons (to be used in button-making machine) so the dimensions must be exact on the duplicated images. When I select Picture Package, the images are resized to fit the dimensions in the picture package. When I select Contact Sheet, the images are resized to fit the number of columns I selected. Neither is acceptable. How can I repeat the same image on a single piece of paper without having the system re-size the image? I know that I can manually create a new PSE file and manually insert the images into this file. This is what I have been doing as a work-around. But I would hope there is a better/faster way.
Thank-you!

A variation of hatstead's method where the pictures are precisely aligned:
1. Add the picture to the blank file as hatstead described. Use the Move tool to position the picture in the upper left corner.
2. Duplicate the layer. Use the arrow keys (NOT the mouse) to move the new layer to the right.
3. Repeat step 2 until the row is filled:
4. Merge Down the 3 layers into one. Alternatively, link the 3 layers and do a Merge Linked as in this example. The end result is the pictures in the row are on one layer:
5. Duplicate the layer and use the arrow keys to move this down to the 2nd row.
6. Repeat step 5 to create additional rows.
7. Finally, to center the whole thing on the sheet, link all the row layers and position with the arrow keys.
Note that you can also custom-make your own Picture Package. Instructions for this should be somewhere in Help.

Engineer question: The limitations of auto-align

I have a question about the capability limitations of auto-align that I'm hoping one of the Photoshop engineers - or perhaps another qualified member of the community - might be able to field.
I've been trying, unsuccessfully, to use PS CS5 to precisely align groups of star photographs, as many people do with other apps. I need to align all of the images in a group exactly - to a pixel-level of precision - and combine them into a single flattened image. I have to do this with hundreds of groups consisting of thousands of individual image files, so when CS5 announced the auto-stack and auto-align features, this seemed like a nearly ideal solution.
Yet after stacking the different images together, and despite the fact that each layer is very nearly identical to the others, PS always rejects them with the standard dialogue that it couldn't find sufficent overlap ("Needs to have at least 40% overlap", etc). I've tried this with dozens of different star groups, each >99% identical in visual content, and always get the same rejection.
One immediate line of thought I had was whether Photoshop was having too much trouble distinguishing individual stars from the noise typical in astrophotos like these. It doesn't help to apply Noise Reduction first: when PS digs into the images to find alignable content or shapes, it might see them as more different than they appear to the eye, and PS may be having trouble seeing stars as not noise. I just don't know enough about the auto-align function to really say what's failing here.
There are many other specialty apps that perform this function (PixelInsight, Registax, etc etc), but as a dedicated professional user of the Master Collection products, I was hoping to find out from an engineer whether this type of image does in fact exceed the native image recognition capabilities of auto-align. Alternately, if there are additional steps or preliminary adjustments that might assist the algorithm in its processing, I'd be interested to hear about those. I'm also willing to post reference images if that's an aid to analysis.
Many thanks.

Thanks for the quick reply, Chris.
Is there any current workaround here, or, from your vantage, do you feel that the existing capabilities aren't there yet?
Lastly, and without meaning to ask you to reveal anything about future release specifics, do you feel that a functionality capable of handling star alignment at the pixel level is a likely near-term possibility, a far-off possibility, or simply off the table?

Cannot align/trim video clips

I've been trying for the better part of a day to figure out how to precisely align and trim two video clips, but have had no luck. I grew up using Windows Movie Maker quite a bit to edit videos (covers of songs, so they all involve starting with a title slide, fading into a video, and syncing the whole video with a prerecorded audio track), and what I thought would be universal in video editing programs doesn't seem to work the way I thought.
The main problem I am having is the inability to arrange and edit multiple video clips in a linear fashion. For example, if I have clip A, a few seconds of video with the title of the movie, and clip B, the actual video, I cannot seem to precisely edit the two together. In the background is an audio track, so the video has to be synced with the audio. Problem is, I can't just trim either clip A or clip B by a few frames to get it to sync. If I get the clip of the performance in sync with the audio, inserting a title slide pushes the rest of the video to the side, rather than just overtaking the performance video.
I should also mention that I have another video in the picture-in-picture (rhythm guitar track, lead guitar track), so the two need to be perfectly in sync.
I tried to get around this by cutting the clips to the same length. Each of my two clips that I try to align are 00:03:51:06. I thought that by doing this, I could drag the main video to the timeline, and then insert the picture-in-picture video on top of it so that they would be in sync. iMovie doesn't seem to want to align the two clips even though they are the same length, and not being able to precisely edit them is making it so that I can't align them properly.
I know this is a basic movie editing program and I may be expecting too much of iMovie, but is there something I'm missing here that's preventing me from making clean edits?

OK I see the problem,
I've made some videoclips in the past (barbershop quartet), and have to admit that iMovie is limited.
As I'm from Holland, it's hard to me to give you an exact advise of what is and isn't possible in English (as all my menu's are in Dutch and not English), as it's also depends on what kind of footage you have and what you're trying to achieve. The only thing I can help you with is point out some directions you could dig into:
1. You may study the function of beatmarkers and all the possibilities to synchronize music to clips/beatmarkers.
2. As I mentiond earlier you can possible combine that with thwe functionalitty of the precisoon editor, you can make precis edits as wel for vidoe and audio (put apperntly you already studied that.
3. For the picture in picture there is no solution (as far as I know). You might experiment with "cutaway" and/or "next to each other" when it comes to inserting clips.
4. For the production of videopodcasts I used Garageband for fine tuning voice-overs and background music. In Garageband it is possible to make very precise edits on imported video tracks. I asume Logic has similar functionallity. This means you perhaps have to move back and forward video/audio from iMovie to Garageband (or Logic) and visa versa.
If that is all to much of a hassle (which I can imagine) perhaps Final Cut Pro X is you're only option.
Succes, sorry I cann't help you further.
Ben

How to align two 3D meshes

I have two slightly different 3D meshes (same size, different textures, slight modifications to the mesh) that I need to be precisely aligned in 3D space (which I will convert to raster layers and then manipulate).
I tried importing the one mesh (an OBJ file) and manipulating its orientation, then duplicating it, then in the duplicate layer replacing the mesh with the second mesh. The problem is that the second mesh always goes into the default orientation.
How can I align the two meshes (each in a different) layer to have the same orientation in 3D space?
I am running the latest Photoshop CC

I have only played with 3d a little bit. In you case I would first try getting the two 3D objects into photoshop making no adjustment at all. Then use the properties panel for both 3d objects to reset their coordinates. Then select both 3d object layers and merge the object into a single 3d layer. Then manipulate their position and sizes in respect to each other.

Turn off alignment guides in 1 dimension?

I use the alignment guides to neatly and quickly align objects with each other on the slide, but oftentimes when lots of objects accumulate closely on the slide, it seems like every new object wants to align with everything else and it can be a big mess. Using the keyboard shortcut Command-drag temporarily turns off the alignment guides, but then it hard to precisely align objects.
My question: Is there a way to only turn off 1 dimension of the alignment guides in order to, for instance, line up a set of objects on the x-axis without triggering the y-axis alignment guides? I'm using Keynote '09 5.0.3.
Thanks!

is there a way of switching it off so when i double click on a region it opens the full piano roll editor window instead of the all in 1 veiw
I agree, this should be an option.
pancenter-

Alignment Tools

I have several still images I've imported into FCE, as well as numerous text-only titles. Is there anyway to ensure these objects are in the exact same position whenever I use them?
They appear to jump around as my movie plays because they are not perfectly aligned or sized.
What does FCE offer to ensure precision alignment and sizing?

Use the Center parameter value boxes in the motion tab. You can also copy and paste attributes from one clip to another to ensure they are positioned identically.

Differences between 7 and 8 for long books

I am considering FM 7 and 8 for producing a long book. The issue with 8 is that it requires SP2 on XP, and I can't put that on my writing system.
So that would favour 7 unless its features are noticably lacking compared to 8. Here are the book requirements, please read carefully --
* There are 4 parallel columns spread across 2 facing pages -- each column has its own text, layout, font and size, different from texts in other columns.
* All 4 columns in the spread (2 on even pages, 2 on odd pages) must retain their positions on the spread, no matter which page of the book you turn to.
* There is absolutely no left to right wrapping of columns in a parallel column layout. This means all columns flow down - even to even, and odd to odd.
* This page flow must be automatic -- I am simply NOT going to draw frames for all pages and manually link them across a 400 page book, it is absurd.
I need to know which one of 7 or 8 supports automatic wrapping of 2 columns on even pages to the next even page, and the two columns on the right odd pages to the next odd page (if you don't understand this requisite column flow, please leave it for other to reply who do -- thank you). If both FM 7 and 8 are more or less the same, that would be very helpful information too. Please give compative capabilities as it relates to parallel book columns.
BTW, another really crucial feature is being able to manually set a FIXED line height in each column -- not in point size, like InDesign does (that does not work for precise alignment) -- I should be able to specify the line height in each column in decimals of an inch. Which one can do this?
Your help on these specific questions is much appreciated. Please no discussion of FM 9. I will not be getting that version. Thanks

ScratchyBoy wrote:
Mike --
That weird work-around is indecipherable to me (column less than a character width??) -- would you care to explain it in the context of this thread?
I noticed that Arnis has already explained the reason for using a tiny frame in each thread to carry the flow across pages where you don't want to display that content.
The reason Jay posted that is because he was on my question in InDesign, realized the serious failing of InDesign to handle a 2-page spread of parallel columns, and obviously wanted to see if FM could do it. He did a book in FM with only 2 columns, hence the "entrenched" concept of even-to-odd page flow worked fine for him.
You know, I have personally read 100+ books with 4 parallel texts like I am describing, and I am sure there are thousands of ones I haven't read with a similar layout. It takes scarcely 2 seconds to realize, looking at the 2 page spread, that even page columns MUST wrap to even page columns, and odd to odd. It's not an "unusual, special" request, it is a NECESSARY REQUIREMENT of 4 parallel columns spread across facing pages. Surely you can see that? But it seems that Adobe developers either never read any scholarly texts, or they just don't understand parallel texts -- period.
Have you contacted the folks who created the books you're referring to, to learn what tools they used for the books? Just seeing the final print version, or even the PDF, can't reveal the underlying construction.
Maybe the truth came out in that thread. Framemaker, as it was originally conceived by the original developers, DID allow correct page flow for parallel columns -- but once Adobe got it, they killed that ability, dumbing it down to InDesign's level, which cannot do it. Peter so much as admitted to that fact on that thread, that somewhere in the versions, this feature was killed. Which confirms the above paragraph.
Winfried Ring responded to my question about the feature not working in later FrameMaker releases, in that other thread, that the technique still works in later FrameMaker releases. The key, Winfried pointed out, is to begin the document with one body page, regardless of whether it's a single-page or facing-page layout. This keeps FrameMaker from getting confused about where the flows should go on the new pages it creates as any of the flows grows to the point that it creates a new page.
I think you're trying to imagine how these techniques will work, rather than trying them out hands-on. I've done that myself; it's a good learning style for some things, but in this particular case, you need the empirical experience of seeing how the software's built-in mechanisms behave. Until and unless you do it and gain the experience, you can't imagine, project, empathize, conjure, or visualize how these things work. You do have a clear vision of what you want for the end result, however.
In FrameMaker, as in InDesign, as in PageMaker, as in QuarkXpress, you draw text frames on document pages, or on master pages, using a text frame tool. It's named differently in each application.
The tools are for users to apply their vision and creativity, so if you need a certain kind of layout, you need to lay it out yourself. If your particular layout were common, there would very likely be at least one template for available in each professional publishing tool's community.
Why should I even consider FM 9 ?? Adobe wants $1000 bucks for it -- they brag on its "improved features for book production". What a laugh! They can't even conceive of scholarly comparative books across a HUGE gamut of subject areas -- so why should I consider it ?? I'd love for someone to tell me: "YES !! I am proud to announce that FrameMaker can do this natively out of the box !! " But I don't see it coming, do you?
Professional tools cost huge money to develop. If you use them professionally, your work should bring in the revenue to pay for the tools.
As has been said by many posters on many threads in regards to most software, especially the professional tools, it's very unlikely that you'll find a legitimate copy of a past version for sale. The older the version, the less likely there will be a legit copy on some dealer's shelf that pops up, and is put on eBay for a song. It's illegal to sell old versions that one uses to upgrade to a new version. You'll not be able to register the license; in recent versions of Adobe products, you won't be able to use the software at all after the trial period expires, without a valid license.
Using a license cracking tool is also illegal.
It sounds as if your hardware and Windows version limitations are constraining your software choices. It's a tough set of choices.
Oh, BTW, here's a link to a PDF of a FrameMaker example of what I think you're talking about:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/363247/fm%207X7%204-parallel%20flows%20across%20same-side%20pages. recover.pdf
EDIT:
In the PDF, the small fragments of text are the "pass-through" threaded frames that Arnis described. They're larger than a single character, so you can see the text flow through; in real use, they should be teensy.
/EDIT
It's trickier in InDesign because it's built-in ability to create new pages as stories grow is trick to accomplish the same behavior. The In-Tools plugin that was mentioned can do this.
If you're persnickety about typographic control, InDesign is the better tool. FrameMaker isn't a slouch, it's just that InDesign's been bred for the task.
Regarding lining up the text across columns, InDesign and FrameMaker both can control baseline alignment. You'll need to try out both tools to decide which works the way you need.
HTH
Regards,
Peter
Peter Gold
KnowHow ProServices

DVD - Fails After Burn

Please help,
I have tried two DVDr's now and the same problem.
I have put together a dvd with slideshows created in idvd, added music from itunes to the 4 chapters, plus the main title screen.
The project info is as follows.
3.8mb of 4.7, so there is enough free space.
However when the burn has done, we pop the finished disk in the DVD, title screen works fine, menu / chapter works fine, but the disk then fails in the same place in each of the slideshows ( About 15 minutes in )
I have used Sony DVDr's 16x and Maxwell DVDr's 16x.
Any help would be gratefully received as we have family waiting for this disk back in the U.K and U.S.
Thanks.

To add the music within iPhoto, create a playlist of the songs you wish to use. Then select _that playlist_, not the individual titles, for your slideshow.
To add music within iMovie, follow the directions from Help:
*Adding music from your iTunes library*
You can give your movie a musical soundtrack by importing music from your iTunes library.
To import music from iTunes:
1. Click the Timeline Viewer button.
2. Drag the playhead (B, shown above) to the frame where you want the music track to begin.
Tip: To precisely adjust the playhead position, press the Left or Right Arrow key to move the playhead one frame at a time. To move the playhead in ten-frame increments, hold down the Shift key while pressing the arrow key.
3. Click the Media button, and then click Audio.
4. Choose your iTunes library or a playlist at the top of the Audio pane.
5. Select a song from the list.
Tip: You can also search for a song by typing text in the search field. As you type, songs that contain the text you entered appear in the Audio pane. To see all songs again, click the Reset button (an "x" in the search field).
6. If you want, click the Play button to the left of the search field to listen to the song you selected.
7. Click "Place at Playhead."
The song appears as an audio clip in the timeline viewer.
If you want to lock the track to a particular part of the video, choose Advanced > "Lock Audio Clip at Playhead." When you move a video clip with locked audio, the audio clip moves with the video.
You can also adjust the volume of an audio clip, change its length, and more. For more information, see Related Topics below.
Related Topics
Making your movie louder or softer
Fading audio up or down
Changing the length of an audio clip
Precisely aligning audio to video
Moving an audio clip
Was this page helpful? Send feedback.

Centering a background image [was: How is this done.. what am I doing wrong....]

Hi,
I am kinda new to DW. I have a .jpg that is 1000pixels wide and 1100 pixies tall which I want to use as the background for my site. I want that image to be centered (not justified left). Next I want two tables on top of that image. The first one will be for my buttons/links and the second will be for any text and images that will appear below the buttons.
I have got this to work in DW and it looks fine when I preview it in a browser. However, after uploading it, my background image disappears and I get a question mark.
http://test.taffyproductions.com/
Also, both my tables are centered, but the background image is not.
Thanks to anyone that can help.
Gary
[Subject line edited by moderator to make it clear what the question is about]

This file is 404 - not found on server.
http://test.taffyproductions.com/_images/Taffyhome.jpg
Did you upload it to the server? BTW I'm not too keen on using a leading underscore in file or folder names. Why not just name it "images?"
Finally, trying to precisely align images and text over a huge background image is very challenging. It works in Print design but isn't an ideal way to work with web pages. Be sure to test your site often in all browsers and available text sizes. You may be in for some big surprises if you don't.
To center a page background with CSS:
body {
background: url (path/filename.jpg) no-repeat center top;
Good luck,
Nancy O.
Alt-Web Design & Publishing
Web | Graphics | Print | Media Specialists
www.alt-web.com/
www.twitter.com/altweb
www.alt-web.blogspot.com

Centering background graphic

I'm so confused. I have one big graphic which I want behind
my site page. No a repeating wallpaper background.
Is this the order of things:
body: plain color
wrapper div on top of body containing centered graphic
then other divs on top of wrapper div for text on top of
graphic.
Is this the correct logic? Should my bckground graphic be in
the body tag? Or perhaps broken up into separate divs....help.
Gretchen

> Is this the correct logic?
No on several accounts. I suspect when you say "on top of"
you are thinking
of absolutely positioned elements (i.e., 'layers') and that
would be wrong.
Make the background part of the body tag's CSS:
body {
background-image:url(whatever.jpg);
background-repeat:no-repeat;
background-position:center top;
Then just build your page in a centering container (*not* a
'layer').
BUT DO NOT TRY TO PRECISELY ALIGN YOUR CONTENT WITH A
BACKGROUND IMAGE. You
will fail. Think about what will happen to that alignment
when the visitor
resizes their text in the browser. If building websites were
that simple,
everyone would be doing them. It's not.
Murray --- ICQ 71997575
Adobe Community Expert
(If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
==================
http://www.projectseven.com/go
- DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.dwfaq.com - DW FAQs,
Tutorials & Resources
==================
"InwoodLady" <[email protected]> wrote in
message
news:gom3lp$9h6$[email protected]..
> I'm so confused. I have one big graphic which I want
behind my site page.
> No a
> repeating wallpaper background.
>
> Is this the order of things:
>
> body: plain color
> wrapper div on top of body containing centered graphic
> then other divs on top of wrapper div for text on top of
graphic.
>
> Is this the correct logic? Should my bckground graphic
be in the body tag?
> Or
> perhaps broken up into separate divs....help.
> Gretchen
>

A quick primer on audio drivers, devices, and latency

This information has come from Durin, Adobe staffer:
Hi everyone,
A common question that comes up in these forums over and over has to do with recording latency, audio drivers, and device formats. I'm going to provide a brief overview of the different types of devices, how they interface with the computer and Audition, and steps to maximize performance and minimize the latency inherent in computer audio.
First, a few definitions:
Monitoring: listening to existing audio while simultaneously recording new audio.
Sample: The value of each individual bit of audio digitized by the audio device. Typically, the audio device measures the incoming signal 44,100 or 48,000 times every second.
Buffer Size: The "bucket" where samples are placed before being passed to the destination. An audio application will collect a buffers-worth of samples before feeding it to the audio device for playback. An audio device will collect a buffers-worth of samples before feeding it to the audio device when recording. Buffers are typically measured in Samples (command values being 64, 128, 512, 1024, 2048...) or milliseconds which is simply a calculation based on the device sample rate and buffer size.
Latency: The time span that occurs between providing an input signal into an audio device (through a microphone, keyboard, guitar input, etc) and when each buffers-worth of that signal is provided to the audio application. It also refers to the other direction, where the output audio signal is sent from the audio application to the audio device for playback. When recording while monitoring, the overall perceived latency can often be double the device buffer size.
ASIO, MME, CoreAudio: These are audio driver models, which simply specify the manner in which an audio application and audio device communicate. Apple Mac systems use CoreAudio almost exclusively which provides for low buffer sizes and the ability to mix and match different devices (called an Aggregate Device.) MME and ASIO are mostly Windows-exclusive driver models, and provide different methods of communicating between application and device. MME drivers allow the operating system itself to act as a go-between and are generally slower as they rely upon higher buffer sizes and have to pass through multiple processes on the computer before being sent to the audio device. ASIO drivers provide an audio application direct communication with the hardware, bypassing the operating system. This allows for much lower latency while being limited in an applications ability to access multiple devices simultaneously, or share a device channel with another application.
Dropouts: Missing audio data as a result of being unable to process an audio stream fast enough to keep up with the buffer size. Generally, dropouts occur when an audio application cannot process effects and mix tracks together quickly enough to fill the device buffer, or when the audio device is trying to send audio data to the application more quickly than it can handle it. (Remember when Lucy and Ethel were working at the chocolate factory and the machine sped up to the point where they were dropping chocolates all over the place? Pretend the chocolates were samples, Lucy and Ethel were the audio application, and the chocolate machine is the audio device/driver, and you'll have a pretty good visualization of how this works.)
Typically, latency is not a problem if you're simply playing back existing audio (you might experience a very slight delay between pressing PLAY and when audio is heard through your speakers) or recording to disk without monitoring existing audio tracks since precise timing is not crucial in these conditions. However, when trying to play along with a drum track, or sing a harmony to an existing track, or overdub narration to a video, latency becomes a factor since our ears are far more sensitive to timing issues than our other senses.   If a bass guitar track is not precisely aligned with the drums, it quickly sounds sloppy. Therefore, we need to attempt to reduce latency as much as possible for these situations. If we simply set our Buffer Size parameter as low as it will go, we're likely to experience dropouts - especially if we have some tracks configured with audio effects which require additional processing and contribute their own latency to the chain. Dropouts are annoying but not destructive during playback, but if dropouts occur on the recording stream, it means you're losing data and your recording will never sound right - the data is simply lost.   Obviously, this is not good.
Latency under 40ms is generally considered within the range of reasonable for recording. Some folks can hear even this and it affects their ability to play, but most people find this unnoticeable or tolerable. We can calculate our approximate desired buffer size with this formula:
(Sample per second / 1000) * Desired Latency
So, if we are recording at 44,100 Hz and we are aiming for 20ms latency:   44100 / 1000 * 20 = 882 samples. Most audio devices do not allow arbitrary buffer sizes but offer an array of choices, so we would select the closest option. The device I'm using right now offers 512 and 1024 samples as the closest available buffer sizes, so I would select 512 first and see how this performs. If my session has a lot of tracks and/or several effects, I might need to bump this up to 1024 if I experience dropouts.
Now that we hopefully have a pretty firm understanding of what constitutes latency and under what circumstances it is undesirable, let's take a look at how we can reduce it for our needs. You may find that you continue to experience dropouts at a buffer size of 1024 but that raising it to larger options introduces too much latency for your needs. So we need to determine what we can do to reduce our overhead in order to have quality playback and recording at this buffer size.
Effects: A common cause of playback latency is the use of effects. As your audio stream passes through an effect, it takes time for the computer to perform the calculations to modify that signal. Each effect in a chain introduces its own amount of latency before the chunk of audio even reaches the point where the audio application passes it to the audio device and starts to fill up the buffer. Audition and other DAWs attempt to address this through "latency compensation" routines which introduce a bit more latency when you first press play as they process several seconds of audio ahead of time before beginning to stream those chunks to the audio driver. In some cases, however, the effects may be so intensive that the CPU simply isn't processing the math fast enough.   With Audition, you can "freeze" or pre-render these tracks by clicking the small lightning bolt button visible in the Effects Rack with that track selected. This performs a background render of that track, which automatically updates if you make any changes to the track or effect parameters, so that instead of calculating all those changes on-the-fly, it simply needs to stream back a plain old audio file which requires much fewer system resources. You may also choose to disable certain effects, or temporarily replace them with alternatives which may not sound exactly like what you want for your final mix, but which adequately simulate the desired effect for the purpose of recording.   (You might replace the CPU-intensive Full Reverb effect with the lightweight Studio Reverb effect, for example. Full Reverb effect is mathematically far more accurate and realistic, but Studio Reverb can provide that quick "body" you might want when monitoring vocals, for example.) You can also just disable the effects for a track or clip while recording, and turn them on later.
Device and Driver Options: Different devices may have wildly different performance at the same buffer size and with the same session. Audio devices designed primarily for gaming are less likely to perform well at low buffer sizes as those designed for music production, for example. Even if the hardware performs the same, the driver mode may be a source of latency. ASIO is almost always faster than MME, though many device manufacturers do not supply an ASIO driver. The use of third-party, device-agnostic drivers, such as ASIO4ALL (www.asio4all.com) allow you to wrap an MME-only device inside a faux-ASIO shell. The audio application believes it's speaking to an ASIO driver, and ASIO4ALL has been streamlined to work more quickly with the MME device, or even to allow you to use different inputs and outputs on separate devices which ASIO would otherwise prevent.
We also now see more USB microphone devices which are input-only audio devices that generally use a generic Windows driver and, with a few exceptions, rarely offer native ASIO support. USB microphones generally require a higher buffer size as they are primarily designed for recording in cases where monitoring is unimportant. When attempting to record via a USB microphone and monitor via a separate audio device, you're more likely to run into issues where the two devices are not synchronized or drift apart after some time. (The ugly secret of many device manufacturers is that they rarely operate at EXACTLY the sample rate specified. The difference between 44,100 and 44,118 Hz is negligible when listening to audio, but when trying to precisely synchronize to a track recorded AT 44,100, the difference adds up over time and what sounded in sync for the first minute will be wildly off-beat several minutes later.) You are almost always going to have better sync and performance with a standard microphone connected to the same device you're using for playback, and for serious recording, this is the best practice. If USB microphones are your only option, then I would recommend making certain you purchase a high-quality one and have an equally high-quality playback device. Attempt to match the buffer sizes and sample rates as closely as possible, and consider using a higher buffer size and correcting the latency post-recording. (One method of doing this is to have a click or clap at the beginning of your session and make sure this is recorded by your USB microphone. After you finish your recording, you can visually line up the click in the recorded track with the click in the original track by moving your clip backwards in the timeline. This is not the most efficient method, but this alignment is the reason you see the clapboards in behind-the-scenes filmmaking footage.)
Other Hardware: Other hardware in your computer plays a role in the ability to feed or store audio data quickly. CPUs are so fast, and with multiple cores, capable of spreading the load so often the bottleneck for good performance - especially at high sample rates - tends to be your hard drive or storage media. It is highly recommended that you configure your temporary files location, and session/recording location, to a physical drive that is NOT the same as you have your operating system installed. Audition and other DAWs have absolutely no control over what Windows or OS X may decide to do at any given time and if your antivirus software or system file indexer decides it's time to start churning away at your hard drive at the same time that you're recording your magnum opus, you raise the likelihood of losing some of that performance. (In fact, it's a good idea to disable all non-essential applications and internet connections while recording to reduce the likelihood of external interference.) If you're going to be recording multiple tracks at once, it's a good idea to purchase the fastest hard drive your budget allows. Most cheap drives spin around 5400 rpm, which is fine for general use cases but does not allow for the fast read, write, and seek operations the drive needs to do when recording and playing back from multiple files simultaneously. 7200 RPM drives perform much better, and even faster options are available. While fragmentation is less of a problem on OS X systems, you'll want to frequently defragment your drive on Windows frequently - this process realigns all the blocks of your files so they're grouped together. As you write and delete files, pieces of each tend to get placed in the first location that has room. This ends up creating lots of gaps or splitting files up all over the disk. The act of reading or writing to these spread out areas cause the operation to take significantly longer than it needs to and can contribute to glitches in playback or loss of data when recording.

There is one point in the above that needed a little clarification, relating to USB mics:
_durin_ wrote:
If USB microphones are your only option, then I would recommend making certain you purchase a high-quality one and have an equally high-quality playback device.
If you are going to spend that much, then you'd be better off putting a little more money into an external device with a proper mic pre, and a little less money by not bothering with a USB mic at all, and just getting a 'normal' condensor mic. It's true to say that over the years, the USB mic class of recording device has caused more trouble than any other, regardless.
You should also be aware that if you find a USB mic offering ASIO support, then unless it's got a headphone socket on it as well then you aren't going to be able to monitor what you record if you use it in its native ASIO mode. This is because your computer can only cope with one ASIO device in the system - that's all the spec allows. What you can do with most ASIO hardware though is share multiple streams (if the device has multiple inputs and outputs) between different software.
Seriously, USB mics are more trouble than they're worth.

Synching music to iPhoto slide show

I have created a playlist in iTunes for my iPhoto slide show. It needs some tweaking here and there to align the music with the correct slides. Is there a way to start in the middle of the show to work on this or must I always start at the beginning. I know I could probably do this in iMovie, but I am crunched right now and don't know if I have the time to invest in learning a new program.
Thanks.

Carole:
With iPHoto you get what it gives you. If you want to precisely align the music with slides export the movie without music. Then import the movie into iMovie and add the tracks. In iMovie you can overlap the tracks for transitioning from one to another, cut tracks to fit, etc. The save the movie or export to iDVD depending on what the final use is.
Do you Twango?
TIP: For insurance against the iPhoto database corruption that many users have experienced I recommend making a backup copy of the Library6.iPhoto database file and keep it current. If problems crop up where iPhoto suddenly can't see any photos or thinks there are no photos in the library, replacing the working Library6.iPhoto file with the backup will often get the library back. By keeping it current I mean backup after each import and/or any serious editing or work on books, slideshows, calendars, cards, etc. That insures that if a problem pops up and you do need to replace the database file, you'll retain all those efforts. It doesn't take long to make the backup and it's good insurance.
I've written an Automator workflow application (requires Tiger), iPhoto dB File Backup, that will copy the selected Library6.iPhoto file from your iPhoto Library folder to the Pictures folder, replacing any previous version of it. You can download it at Toad's Cellar. Be sure to read the Read Me pdf file.

Multi-display overlay

Hi
I'm using a matrox triplehead2go external card to connect my macbook pro to 2 LCD projectors. This allow me to have a panoramic projection.
I'm trying to find a way to overlay the 2 external screens. When I use the OS X display menu, I can see the 3 blue rectangles. The main one (mbp) is beyond the others (LCD projectors). I can move the rectangle anywhere and put them side by side but no way to overlay one on another.
The aim is to find a way to overlay the 2 partitions and then use a soft edge blending software to have a perfect panoramic projection. Any idea?
Hope to be clear, my english is not perfect.
Thanks to all
Paul

I do not believe this is possible.
You'll just have to precisely align the two projectors to create the seamless display.
x

Page Tiling - Precise alignment of pages

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for