Highest Resolution for Slides?

Hi,

I used MM a year ago to make a slide show in .wmv format (with great
results) and am trying to relearn some of the finer points I've forgotten. (I
prefer MM to PS mainly because I find it easier to synch the images to music.)

I am making another slide show of about 300 digital photos. All of my images
were taken with a 4mp digicam and edited in Photoshop, but left at their
native resolution of 2272x1704x72dpi.

I did a trial run and tried to save my project as a .wmv file, using a
profile I think I downloaded from PapaJohn's site last year:
SlideShow-1024x768WMV9. (I am aiming for the absolute highest quality
possible.) When I went to create the .wmv file, I got an error message about
the file size being too big or something to that effect. Is this the FAT-32
issue that I've read about in other posts on this forum?

If using the above profile, should I downsize my images to 1024x768? Will
that affect final output quality? I ran another test with the images at
800x600, but while it wrote the .wmv file, the image quality was noticeably
less. I then did a third test, using only about 60 images - but still at
2272x1704 - and it turned out fabulous.

So I guess my question is: Are the images sized at 2272x1704 wasting pixels
and increasing the file size unnecessarily, given the limitations of the
1024x768 output? And if this isn't a FAT-32 issue, are there any other
workarounds?

I was thinking I could break the project into 5 or 6 smaller increments and
reassemble (I have BlazeMediaPro which can do this) but am unsure of how the
stitch points will look, and would have to separate them by musical piece.
Additionally, I would not be able to put transitions at those points, either,
and between songs are some of the more obvious places to have transitions.

Sorry for the long-winded post. Any ideas or advice would be welcome!
Thanks!

John
Sat Nov 17 20:55:32 PST 2007

sundayman wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I used MM a year ago to make a slide show in .wmv format (with great
> results) and am trying to relearn some of the finer points I've
> forgotten. (I prefer MM to PS mainly because I find it easier to
> synch the images to music.)
>
> I am making another slide show of about 300 digital photos. All of my
> images were taken with a 4mp digicam and edited in Photoshop, but
> left at their native resolution of 2272x1704x72dpi.
>
> I did a trial run and tried to save my project as a .wmv file, using a
> profile I think I downloaded from PapaJohn's site last year:
> SlideShow-1024x768WMV9. (I am aiming for the absolute highest quality
> possible.) When I went to create the .wmv file, I got an error
> message about the file size being too big or something to that
> effect. Is this the FAT-32 issue that I've read about in other posts
> on this forum?
>
> If using the above profile, should I downsize my images to 1024x768?
> Will that affect final output quality? I ran another test with the
> images at 800x600, but while it wrote the .wmv file, the image
> quality was noticeably less. I then did a third test, using only
> about 60 images - but still at 2272x1704 - and it turned out
> fabulous.
>
> So I guess my question is: Are the images sized at 2272x1704 wasting
> pixels and increasing the file size unnecessarily, given the
> limitations of the 1024x768 output? And if this isn't a FAT-32 issue,
> are there any other workarounds?
>
> I was thinking I could break the project into 5 or 6 smaller
> increments and reassemble (I have BlazeMediaPro which can do this)
> but am unsure of how the stitch points will look, and would have to
> separate them by musical piece. Additionally, I would not be able to
> put transitions at those points, either, and between songs are some
> of the more obvious places to have transitions.
>
> Sorry for the long-winded post. Any ideas or advice would be welcome!
> Thanks!
===============================
Sorry this is so long but maybe something
in here will be useful:

I suspect that 300 high resolution images
is pushing the limits of your resources.

First I would say make sure no other
programs are running while Movie Maker
is in use. Also...disconnect from the net
and disable your Virus scanner.

Also it could help if you do some routine
maintenance:

Empty your Temporary Internet Files Folder.

(260897) How to Delete the Contents of the
Temporary Internet Files Folder
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=260897

Running Disk Cleanup, Error Checking and
Defrag on a regular schedule is a good idea.

(310312) Description of the Disk Cleanup
Tool in Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=310312

(315265) How to Perform Disk Error Checking
in Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=315265
(check the two boxes..."Automatically fix file
system errors" and "Scan for and attempt
recovery of bad sectors") the utility will run
the next time you restart your computer.
(run error checking repeatedly until it finds
no errors)

Now for something slightly less boring...

I don't think FAT32 is the issue and you've
already touched on the alternatives.

Personally, I think you could reduce the
size of your images to 1024x768 and
have a good final result.

Actually...you can batch resize the images
quickly and easily if you download an install
the following free WinXP Powertoy.

OK, go to the following link and download and
install: ImageResizer.exe

http://tinyurl.com/2meyw

Then you can open any folder that contains
images and you will have an option to resize.
Just right click the selected image files and
choose Resize Pictures from the menu. You
can select one image or a whole group.

The program will place the resized copies in
the folder with your originals.
(Tip: *Never* overwrite your originals)

To insure that images in both portrait and
landscape orientation are resized to the
same dimensions...go to...Advanced...
and enter the largest number in both fields.
IOW...for 1024x768...enter 1024 in both
fields.

Good luck.

--

John Inzer
MS Picture It! -
Digital Image MVP

Digital Image
Highlights and FAQs
http://tinyurl.com/aczzp

Notice
This is not tech support
I am a volunteer

Solutions that work for
me may not work for you

Proceed at your own risk

PapaJohn
Sat Nov 17 20:59:20 PST 2007

If I guess that you don't have a FAT32 drive or issue, and it's the
complexity of the project keeping it from being saved.... I'd

1 - save the music track alone to a high quality wma file....
2 - leave the higher quality pictures in the project but break it down into
the parts you need to render successfully to the 1024x768 quality you
want... note the transitions you leave out at the break points
3 - combine the wmv files into the final project assembly, add the
transtions you left out, add the music track.... save the final movie.

--
website references are to www.papajohn.org

PapaJohn


"sundayman" <sundayman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:87920A5D-5BA1-43D6-B34E-F3623699FE76@microsoft.com...
> Hi,
>
> I used MM a year ago to make a slide show in .wmv format (with great
> results) and am trying to relearn some of the finer points I've forgotten.
> (I
> prefer MM to PS mainly because I find it easier to synch the images to
> music.)
>
> I am making another slide show of about 300 digital photos. All of my
> images
> were taken with a 4mp digicam and edited in Photoshop, but left at their
> native resolution of 2272x1704x72dpi.
>
> I did a trial run and tried to save my project as a .wmv file, using a
> profile I think I downloaded from PapaJohn's site last year:
> SlideShow-1024x768WMV9. (I am aiming for the absolute highest quality
> possible.) When I went to create the .wmv file, I got an error message
> about
> the file size being too big or something to that effect. Is this the
> FAT-32
> issue that I've read about in other posts on this forum?
>
> If using the above profile, should I downsize my images to 1024x768? Will
> that affect final output quality? I ran another test with the images at
> 800x600, but while it wrote the .wmv file, the image quality was
> noticeably
> less. I then did a third test, using only about 60 images - but still at
> 2272x1704 - and it turned out fabulous.
>
> So I guess my question is: Are the images sized at 2272x1704 wasting
> pixels
> and increasing the file size unnecessarily, given the limitations of the
> 1024x768 output? And if this isn't a FAT-32 issue, are there any other
> workarounds?
>
> I was thinking I could break the project into 5 or 6 smaller increments
> and
> reassemble (I have BlazeMediaPro which can do this) but am unsure of how
> the
> stitch points will look, and would have to separate them by musical piece.
> Additionally, I would not be able to put transitions at those points,
> either,
> and between songs are some of the more obvious places to have transitions.
>
> Sorry for the long-winded post. Any ideas or advice would be welcome!
> Thanks!

sundayman
Sat Nov 17 21:56:01 PST 2007

PapaJohn,

Thanks! I never thought about isolating the music. Definitely will try that.

In the past, I tried saving off .wmv's in MM and reimporting to reassemble,
but didn't have much luck for some reason... The clip I tried to bring back
in "exploded" (for lack of a better word) and ended up in my Collections file
as a random series of clips - some containing multiple images, others with
just a single image. And when I tried to play the imported video in MM, it
jumped all over the place (some images remained the original length, but
others lasted for a second or two). Totally random. That's why I mentioned
trying to reassemble in BlazeMediaPro rather than back in MM (which would
obviously be much more preferable). Any idea what I might be doing wrong?
Thanks again!

"PapaJohn" wrote:

> If I guess that you don't have a FAT32 drive or issue, and it's the
> complexity of the project keeping it from being saved.... I'd
>
> 1 - save the music track alone to a high quality wma file....
> 2 - leave the higher quality pictures in the project but break it down into
> the parts you need to render successfully to the 1024x768 quality you
> want... note the transitions you leave out at the break points
> 3 - combine the wmv files into the final project assembly, add the
> transtions you left out, add the music track.... save the final movie.
>
> --
> website references are to www.papajohn.org
>
> PapaJohn
>
>
> "sundayman" <sundayman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:87920A5D-5BA1-43D6-B34E-F3623699FE76@microsoft.com...
> > Hi,
> >
> > I used MM a year ago to make a slide show in .wmv format (with great
> > results) and am trying to relearn some of the finer points I've forgotten.
> > (I
> > prefer MM to PS mainly because I find it easier to synch the images to
> > music.)
> >
> > I am making another slide show of about 300 digital photos. All of my
> > images
> > were taken with a 4mp digicam and edited in Photoshop, but left at their
> > native resolution of 2272x1704x72dpi.
> >
> > I did a trial run and tried to save my project as a .wmv file, using a
> > profile I think I downloaded from PapaJohn's site last year:
> > SlideShow-1024x768WMV9. (I am aiming for the absolute highest quality
> > possible.) When I went to create the .wmv file, I got an error message
> > about
> > the file size being too big or something to that effect. Is this the
> > FAT-32
> > issue that I've read about in other posts on this forum?
> >
> > If using the above profile, should I downsize my images to 1024x768? Will
> > that affect final output quality? I ran another test with the images at
> > 800x600, but while it wrote the .wmv file, the image quality was
> > noticeably
> > less. I then did a third test, using only about 60 images - but still at
> > 2272x1704 - and it turned out fabulous.
> >
> > So I guess my question is: Are the images sized at 2272x1704 wasting
> > pixels
> > and increasing the file size unnecessarily, given the limitations of the
> > 1024x768 output? And if this isn't a FAT-32 issue, are there any other
> > workarounds?
> >
> > I was thinking I could break the project into 5 or 6 smaller increments
> > and
> > reassemble (I have BlazeMediaPro which can do this) but am unsure of how
> > the
> > stitch points will look, and would have to separate them by musical piece.
> > Additionally, I would not be able to put transitions at those points,
> > either,
> > and between songs are some of the more obvious places to have transitions.
> >
> > Sorry for the long-winded post. Any ideas or advice would be welcome!
> > Thanks!
>
>
>

sundayman
Sat Nov 17 22:01:00 PST 2007

John:

Thanks for taking the time with all the possible fixes. I will try them all!
I just want to get this show done successfully, so whatever it takes. I know
my HD is 80-85% full, so I know that probably isn't helping (I've heard
performance starts degrading after 75%). Thanks again for all the advice.

"John Inzer" wrote:

> sundayman wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I used MM a year ago to make a slide show in .wmv format (with great
> > results) and am trying to relearn some of the finer points I've
> > forgotten. (I prefer MM to PS mainly because I find it easier to
> > synch the images to music.)
> >
> > I am making another slide show of about 300 digital photos. All of my
> > images were taken with a 4mp digicam and edited in Photoshop, but
> > left at their native resolution of 2272x1704x72dpi.
> >
> > I did a trial run and tried to save my project as a .wmv file, using a
> > profile I think I downloaded from PapaJohn's site last year:
> > SlideShow-1024x768WMV9. (I am aiming for the absolute highest quality
> > possible.) When I went to create the .wmv file, I got an error
> > message about the file size being too big or something to that
> > effect. Is this the FAT-32 issue that I've read about in other posts
> > on this forum?
> >
> > If using the above profile, should I downsize my images to 1024x768?
> > Will that affect final output quality? I ran another test with the
> > images at 800x600, but while it wrote the .wmv file, the image
> > quality was noticeably less. I then did a third test, using only
> > about 60 images - but still at 2272x1704 - and it turned out
> > fabulous.
> >
> > So I guess my question is: Are the images sized at 2272x1704 wasting
> > pixels and increasing the file size unnecessarily, given the
> > limitations of the 1024x768 output? And if this isn't a FAT-32 issue,
> > are there any other workarounds?
> >
> > I was thinking I could break the project into 5 or 6 smaller
> > increments and reassemble (I have BlazeMediaPro which can do this)
> > but am unsure of how the stitch points will look, and would have to
> > separate them by musical piece. Additionally, I would not be able to
> > put transitions at those points, either, and between songs are some
> > of the more obvious places to have transitions.
> >
> > Sorry for the long-winded post. Any ideas or advice would be welcome!
> > Thanks!
> ===============================
> Sorry this is so long but maybe something
> in here will be useful:
>
> I suspect that 300 high resolution images
> is pushing the limits of your resources.
>
> First I would say make sure no other
> programs are running while Movie Maker
> is in use. Also...disconnect from the net
> and disable your Virus scanner.
>
> Also it could help if you do some routine
> maintenance:
>
> Empty your Temporary Internet Files Folder.
>
> (260897) How to Delete the Contents of the
> Temporary Internet Files Folder
> http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=260897
>
> Running Disk Cleanup, Error Checking and
> Defrag on a regular schedule is a good idea.
>
> (310312) Description of the Disk Cleanup
> Tool in Windows XP
> http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=310312
>
> (315265) How to Perform Disk Error Checking
> in Windows XP
> http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=315265
> (check the two boxes..."Automatically fix file
> system errors" and "Scan for and attempt
> recovery of bad sectors") the utility will run
> the next time you restart your computer.
> (run error checking repeatedly until it finds
> no errors)
>
> Now for something slightly less boring...
>
> I don't think FAT32 is the issue and you've
> already touched on the alternatives.
>
> Personally, I think you could reduce the
> size of your images to 1024x768 and
> have a good final result.
>
> Actually...you can batch resize the images
> quickly and easily if you download an install
> the following free WinXP Powertoy.
>
> OK, go to the following link and download and
> install: ImageResizer.exe
>
> http://tinyurl.com/2meyw
>
> Then you can open any folder that contains
> images and you will have an option to resize.
> Just right click the selected image files and
> choose Resize Pictures from the menu. You
> can select one image or a whole group.
>
> The program will place the resized copies in
> the folder with your originals.
> (Tip: *Never* overwrite your originals)
>
> To insure that images in both portrait and
> landscape orientation are resized to the
> same dimensions...go to...Advanced...
> and enter the largest number in both fields.
> IOW...for 1024x768...enter 1024 in both
> fields.
>
> Good luck.
>
> --
>
> John Inzer
> MS Picture It! -
> Digital Image MVP
>
> Digital Image
> Highlights and FAQs
> http://tinyurl.com/aczzp
>
> Notice
> This is not tech support
> I am a volunteer
>
> Solutions that work for
> me may not work for you
>
> Proceed at your own risk
>
>
>

PapaJohn
Sat Nov 17 22:30:34 PST 2007

it might be that you have the option to auto-create clips on when you import
the source files.... it's at the lower left of the import window. Uncheck
it
--
website references are to www.papajohn.org

PapaJohn


"sundayman" <sundayman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CF37CFDC-FFDA-438D-B37F-73D5A3B3EAF8@microsoft.com...
> PapaJohn,
>
> Thanks! I never thought about isolating the music. Definitely will try
> that.
>
> In the past, I tried saving off .wmv's in MM and reimporting to
> reassemble,
> but didn't have much luck for some reason... The clip I tried to bring
> back
> in "exploded" (for lack of a better word) and ended up in my Collections
> file
> as a random series of clips - some containing multiple images, others with
> just a single image. And when I tried to play the imported video in MM, it
> jumped all over the place (some images remained the original length, but
> others lasted for a second or two). Totally random. That's why I mentioned
> trying to reassemble in BlazeMediaPro rather than back in MM (which would
> obviously be much more preferable). Any idea what I might be doing wrong?
> Thanks again!
>
> "PapaJohn" wrote:
>
>> If I guess that you don't have a FAT32 drive or issue, and it's the
>> complexity of the project keeping it from being saved.... I'd
>>
>> 1 - save the music track alone to a high quality wma file....
>> 2 - leave the higher quality pictures in the project but break it down
>> into
>> the parts you need to render successfully to the 1024x768 quality you
>> want... note the transitions you leave out at the break points
>> 3 - combine the wmv files into the final project assembly, add the
>> transtions you left out, add the music track.... save the final movie.
>>
>> --
>> website references are to www.papajohn.org
>>
>> PapaJohn
>>
>>
>> "sundayman" <sundayman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:87920A5D-5BA1-43D6-B34E-F3623699FE76@microsoft.com...
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I used MM a year ago to make a slide show in .wmv format (with great
>> > results) and am trying to relearn some of the finer points I've
>> > forgotten.
>> > (I
>> > prefer MM to PS mainly because I find it easier to synch the images to
>> > music.)
>> >
>> > I am making another slide show of about 300 digital photos. All of my
>> > images
>> > were taken with a 4mp digicam and edited in Photoshop, but left at
>> > their
>> > native resolution of 2272x1704x72dpi.
>> >
>> > I did a trial run and tried to save my project as a .wmv file, using a
>> > profile I think I downloaded from PapaJohn's site last year:
>> > SlideShow-1024x768WMV9. (I am aiming for the absolute highest quality
>> > possible.) When I went to create the .wmv file, I got an error message
>> > about
>> > the file size being too big or something to that effect. Is this the
>> > FAT-32
>> > issue that I've read about in other posts on this forum?
>> >
>> > If using the above profile, should I downsize my images to 1024x768?
>> > Will
>> > that affect final output quality? I ran another test with the images at
>> > 800x600, but while it wrote the .wmv file, the image quality was
>> > noticeably
>> > less. I then did a third test, using only about 60 images - but still
>> > at
>> > 2272x1704 - and it turned out fabulous.
>> >
>> > So I guess my question is: Are the images sized at 2272x1704 wasting
>> > pixels
>> > and increasing the file size unnecessarily, given the limitations of
>> > the
>> > 1024x768 output? And if this isn't a FAT-32 issue, are there any other
>> > workarounds?
>> >
>> > I was thinking I could break the project into 5 or 6 smaller increments
>> > and
>> > reassemble (I have BlazeMediaPro which can do this) but am unsure of
>> > how
>> > the
>> > stitch points will look, and would have to separate them by musical
>> > piece.
>> > Additionally, I would not be able to put transitions at those points,
>> > either,
>> > and between songs are some of the more obvious places to have
>> > transitions.
>> >
>> > Sorry for the long-winded post. Any ideas or advice would be welcome!
>> > Thanks!
>>
>>
>>

John
Sun Nov 18 00:17:33 PST 2007

sundayman wrote:
> John:
>
> Thanks for taking the time with all the possible fixes. I will try
> them all! I just want to get this show done successfully, so whatever
> it takes. I know my HD is 80-85% full, so I know that probably isn't
> helping (I've heard performance starts degrading after 75%). Thanks
> again for all the advice.
=============================
You're welcome.

True about free hard drive space...it may
be excessive...but I recommend keeping
the hard drive 50% free.

Keeping a system well maintained and
free of unnecessary programs and files
can definitely improve the performance.

--

John Inzer
MS Picture It! -
Digital Image MVP

Digital Image
Highlights and FAQs
http://tinyurl.com/aczzp

Notice
This is not tech support
I am a volunteer

Solutions that work for
me may not work for you

Proceed at your own risk

sundayman
Sun Nov 18 01:08:01 PST 2007

Yes! That did the trick! My hat's off to you... you just saved me a ton of
unnecessary work! Thanks so much again!

"PapaJohn" wrote:

> it might be that you have the option to auto-create clips on when you import
> the source files.... it's at the lower left of the import window. Uncheck
> it
> --
> website references are to www.papajohn.org
>
> PapaJohn
>
>
> "sundayman" <sundayman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:CF37CFDC-FFDA-438D-B37F-73D5A3B3EAF8@microsoft.com...
> > PapaJohn,
> >
> > Thanks! I never thought about isolating the music. Definitely will try
> > that.
> >
> > In the past, I tried saving off .wmv's in MM and reimporting to
> > reassemble,
> > but didn't have much luck for some reason... The clip I tried to bring
> > back
> > in "exploded" (for lack of a better word) and ended up in my Collections
> > file
> > as a random series of clips - some containing multiple images, others with
> > just a single image. And when I tried to play the imported video in MM, it
> > jumped all over the place (some images remained the original length, but
> > others lasted for a second or two). Totally random. That's why I mentioned
> > trying to reassemble in BlazeMediaPro rather than back in MM (which would
> > obviously be much more preferable). Any idea what I might be doing wrong?
> > Thanks again!
> >
> > "PapaJohn" wrote:
> >
> >> If I guess that you don't have a FAT32 drive or issue, and it's the
> >> complexity of the project keeping it from being saved.... I'd
> >>
> >> 1 - save the music track alone to a high quality wma file....
> >> 2 - leave the higher quality pictures in the project but break it down
> >> into
> >> the parts you need to render successfully to the 1024x768 quality you
> >> want... note the transitions you leave out at the break points
> >> 3 - combine the wmv files into the final project assembly, add the
> >> transtions you left out, add the music track.... save the final movie.
> >>
> >> --
> >> website references are to www.papajohn.org
> >>
> >> PapaJohn
> >>
> >>
> >> "sundayman" <sundayman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:87920A5D-5BA1-43D6-B34E-F3623699FE76@microsoft.com...
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > I used MM a year ago to make a slide show in .wmv format (with great
> >> > results) and am trying to relearn some of the finer points I've
> >> > forgotten.
> >> > (I
> >> > prefer MM to PS mainly because I find it easier to synch the images to
> >> > music.)
> >> >
> >> > I am making another slide show of about 300 digital photos. All of my
> >> > images
> >> > were taken with a 4mp digicam and edited in Photoshop, but left at
> >> > their
> >> > native resolution of 2272x1704x72dpi.
> >> >
> >> > I did a trial run and tried to save my project as a .wmv file, using a
> >> > profile I think I downloaded from PapaJohn's site last year:
> >> > SlideShow-1024x768WMV9. (I am aiming for the absolute highest quality
> >> > possible.) When I went to create the .wmv file, I got an error message
> >> > about
> >> > the file size being too big or something to that effect. Is this the
> >> > FAT-32
> >> > issue that I've read about in other posts on this forum?
> >> >
> >> > If using the above profile, should I downsize my images to 1024x768?
> >> > Will
> >> > that affect final output quality? I ran another test with the images at
> >> > 800x600, but while it wrote the .wmv file, the image quality was
> >> > noticeably
> >> > less. I then did a third test, using only about 60 images - but still
> >> > at
> >> > 2272x1704 - and it turned out fabulous.
> >> >
> >> > So I guess my question is: Are the images sized at 2272x1704 wasting
> >> > pixels
> >> > and increasing the file size unnecessarily, given the limitations of
> >> > the
> >> > 1024x768 output? And if this isn't a FAT-32 issue, are there any other
> >> > workarounds?
> >> >
> >> > I was thinking I could break the project into 5 or 6 smaller increments
> >> > and
> >> > reassemble (I have BlazeMediaPro which can do this) but am unsure of
> >> > how
> >> > the
> >> > stitch points will look, and would have to separate them by musical
> >> > piece.
> >> > Additionally, I would not be able to put transitions at those points,
> >> > either,
> >> > and between songs are some of the more obvious places to have
> >> > transitions.
> >> >
> >> > Sorry for the long-winded post. Any ideas or advice would be welcome!
> >> > Thanks!
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>

PapaJohn
Sun Nov 18 21:54:46 PST 2007

glad to have helped... thanks for the feedback
--
website references are to www.papajohn.org

PapaJohn


"sundayman" <sundayman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B0DE6FDD-ECD5-496B-97D1-B866E88A188D@microsoft.com...
> Yes! That did the trick! My hat's off to you... you just saved me a ton of
> unnecessary work! Thanks so much again!
>
> "PapaJohn" wrote:
>
>> it might be that you have the option to auto-create clips on when you
>> import
>> the source files.... it's at the lower left of the import window.
>> Uncheck
>> it
>> --
>> website references are to www.papajohn.org
>>
>> PapaJohn
>>
>>
>> "sundayman" <sundayman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:CF37CFDC-FFDA-438D-B37F-73D5A3B3EAF8@microsoft.com...
>> > PapaJohn,
>> >
>> > Thanks! I never thought about isolating the music. Definitely will try
>> > that.
>> >
>> > In the past, I tried saving off .wmv's in MM and reimporting to
>> > reassemble,
>> > but didn't have much luck for some reason... The clip I tried to bring
>> > back
>> > in "exploded" (for lack of a better word) and ended up in my
>> > Collections
>> > file
>> > as a random series of clips - some containing multiple images, others
>> > with
>> > just a single image. And when I tried to play the imported video in MM,
>> > it
>> > jumped all over the place (some images remained the original length,
>> > but
>> > others lasted for a second or two). Totally random. That's why I
>> > mentioned
>> > trying to reassemble in BlazeMediaPro rather than back in MM (which
>> > would
>> > obviously be much more preferable). Any idea what I might be doing
>> > wrong?
>> > Thanks again!
>> >
>> > "PapaJohn" wrote:
>> >
>> >> If I guess that you don't have a FAT32 drive or issue, and it's the
>> >> complexity of the project keeping it from being saved.... I'd
>> >>
>> >> 1 - save the music track alone to a high quality wma file....
>> >> 2 - leave the higher quality pictures in the project but break it down
>> >> into
>> >> the parts you need to render successfully to the 1024x768 quality you
>> >> want... note the transitions you leave out at the break points
>> >> 3 - combine the wmv files into the final project assembly, add the
>> >> transtions you left out, add the music track.... save the final movie.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> website references are to www.papajohn.org
>> >>
>> >> PapaJohn
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "sundayman" <sundayman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:87920A5D-5BA1-43D6-B34E-F3623699FE76@microsoft.com...
>> >> > Hi,
>> >> >
>> >> > I used MM a year ago to make a slide show in .wmv format (with great
>> >> > results) and am trying to relearn some of the finer points I've
>> >> > forgotten.
>> >> > (I
>> >> > prefer MM to PS mainly because I find it easier to synch the images
>> >> > to
>> >> > music.)
>> >> >
>> >> > I am making another slide show of about 300 digital photos. All of
>> >> > my
>> >> > images
>> >> > were taken with a 4mp digicam and edited in Photoshop, but left at
>> >> > their
>> >> > native resolution of 2272x1704x72dpi.
>> >> >
>> >> > I did a trial run and tried to save my project as a .wmv file, using
>> >> > a
>> >> > profile I think I downloaded from PapaJohn's site last year:
>> >> > SlideShow-1024x768WMV9. (I am aiming for the absolute highest
>> >> > quality
>> >> > possible.) When I went to create the .wmv file, I got an error
>> >> > message
>> >> > about
>> >> > the file size being too big or something to that effect. Is this the
>> >> > FAT-32
>> >> > issue that I've read about in other posts on this forum?
>> >> >
>> >> > If using the above profile, should I downsize my images to 1024x768?
>> >> > Will
>> >> > that affect final output quality? I ran another test with the images
>> >> > at
>> >> > 800x600, but while it wrote the .wmv file, the image quality was
>> >> > noticeably
>> >> > less. I then did a third test, using only about 60 images - but
>> >> > still
>> >> > at
>> >> > 2272x1704 - and it turned out fabulous.
>> >> >
>> >> > So I guess my question is: Are the images sized at 2272x1704 wasting
>> >> > pixels
>> >> > and increasing the file size unnecessarily, given the limitations of
>> >> > the
>> >> > 1024x768 output? And if this isn't a FAT-32 issue, are there any
>> >> > other
>> >> > workarounds?
>> >> >
>> >> > I was thinking I could break the project into 5 or 6 smaller
>> >> > increments
>> >> > and
>> >> > reassemble (I have BlazeMediaPro which can do this) but am unsure of
>> >> > how
>> >> > the
>> >> > stitch points will look, and would have to separate them by musical
>> >> > piece.
>> >> > Additionally, I would not be able to put transitions at those
>> >> > points,
>> >> > either,
>> >> > and between songs are some of the more obvious places to have
>> >> > transitions.
>> >> >
>> >> > Sorry for the long-winded post. Any ideas or advice would be
>> >> > welcome!
>> >> > Thanks!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>>