I created a fractal animation using JWildfire. It consists of 5772 1024x768 still images. I tried importing all of the images into OpenShot one step and had serious problems. So, I broke it down the three "parts" of 1924 images apiece. That was still problematic, but I got the images imported. However, only the first 1924 will animate and when I tried to do subsequent video frames like I did with the first 1924 images, OpenShot would indicate that the first image in the set was not valid. However, I tested it and even resaved it and it would open in other apps without a problem. So, I imported the last two sets of 1924 without creating the video frame (I don't recall the exact term) thinking that I could edit the first frame to include all 5772 images. Apparently, I was wrong. How can I fix this so that it will play through all 5772 images rather than just the first 1924? The PC that I have is far from top notch. Here are my specs:
Processor Intel(R) Core(TM) i3-3225 CPU # 3.30GHz 3.30 GHz
Installed RAM 8.00 GB (7.88 GB usable)
Device ID 87BC0DCC-B603-4158-9700-09CEF99A171C
Product ID 00330-80000-00000-AA170
System type 64-bit operating system, x64-based processor
Pen and touch No pen or touch input is available for this display
Edition Windows 10 Pro
Version 21H2
Installed on 7/11/2020
OS build 19044.1503
Experience Windows Feature Experience Pack 120.2212.3740.0
I'm using OpenShot 2.6.1 64-bit. Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks.
I solved my problem by installing Shotcut. It made creating three separate image sequences and adding them to a timeline trivial. Now, the animation plays through seamlessly just as it should. Shotcut seems to be written much better. It doesn't take up nearly as much RAM with all 5772 images loaded. It wasn't anywhere near as problematic to get all of those images loaded and creating the three image sequences was super easy. The UI isn't very "shiny", but it gets the job done. So, goodbye OpenShot and hello Shotcut! Oh, and the xml/mlt movie file is much smaller than the osp movie file. So, that's awesome too.
Related
I'm new to blender, after creating an animation, I want to render it. With the help of a large number of guides on the Internet, I think, I got the optimal animation rendering settings, as a result, but the beginning of the animation rendering I get 6 hours to render only 1 frame.
A computer:
RTX 3050 Ti 4gb
Ryzen 7 5800
16gb RAM
Settings:
I realize that the problem is in my settings, but I do not understand where.
Also, for some reason, when rendering 1 picture, the entire background I created change to orange due to technical error:
View in blender:
After render:
Thank you a lot for your time, I would really appreciate your help
(Im using Blender 3.4)
To reduce the render time make sure you head onto Edit > Preferences > System in that make sure you have CUDA enabled in Cycle render services. And for the change in background, that can be caused by some bug. So, upgrade your Blender to at least 3.8, because that's more stabler the its previous ones. Also make sure you have all the dependcy files(.dll) fixed and your DirectX version is 11.
So I have a big 32 inch display with a resolution of 1440p, and I want to set the DPI scaling to 75% instead of 100%. But I can't find any way to do so on multiple monitors.
I currently have:
Display 1 [2560 x 1440] (Main display I want to change)
Display 2 [2560 x 1440] (This one is 27 inches so it's fine as is)
Display 3 [3840 x 2160] (Set to 100%, fine as it is)
This trick (click me) changes DPI scaling via some registry keys (LogPixels & Win8DpiScaling), but when I use that trick it downscales display 3 instead of display 1.
Is there a way to get this to work? I see no reason for Microsoft to limit the scaling in displays.
Note: I have a 2070 super, all the displays are plugged into the GPU via displayport directly, with the latest avalible firmware at the time of writing (september 2021)
The tl;dr:
Technical limitations aside, there are very solid user experience reasons why this probably isn't allowed.
No, Windows will not let you set UI scaling below 100%.
(even if a stable workaround were to be discovered, most users would probably be quite unhappy with the results)
While I would love¹ to be proven incorrect, the implications of scaling at less than 100% are so fraught that this limitation is unlikely to change in the near future.
Background:
This has been the case for ages, likely since Windows first introduced the feature.
Compatibility with current software
The only ~purely technical~ reason I can think of:
The 100% scaling size likely uses the smallest base image (e.g. Explorer and Taskbar icons, mouse and text cursors) resources included in various existing Microsoft and 3rd-party applications.
User experience
Going below the 100% point may cause small UI text and icons, especially in application toolbars and the Taskbar to be blurred to the point of ambiguity.
Those fine lines in the taskbar 'Windows' menu icon? Blurred or gone.
Taken to the extreme, the UI ~might~ become so unreadable that the user is effectively prevented from being able to read the text even in the 'Settings' window and therefore is 'stuck': i.e. not able to navigate through 'Settings' to restore the original '100%' scaling mode.
(Luckily, Windows is never used to run any SCADA software where confusing two icons could theoretically cost money or lives.)
Performance:
Since those carefully-designed graphic assets don't exist, if sub-100% scaling were allowed, it would also likely cause extra CPU/GPU workload - that is why only certain fixed sizes of up-sampling are shown on the normal Display settings screen and why the Advanced scaling settings screen warns that custom scaling between 100-500% is "not recommended".
That might also apply to any fixed scaling option offered below 100%, and absolutely would for custom scaling sizes.
Some people enjoy reading:
Vector-based TrueType/OpenType fonts usually contain a ~lot~ of manual tweaking / hints to enable readable display of very small point sizes.
The marketing department & friends of the C-suite
Could they implement this at a limited range of options? 90%? 75%?
Perhaps - but it's extra testing for a horrible-looking edge case.
The existence of the option, even if only available as a registry hack, might cause some people to actually use it in kiosks and other public-facing displays; this risks the same sort of bad PR as when a BSOD is seen on the 'arrivals' screen at a train station or airport monitor.
Combined with the first example below, even a 90% option could cause trouble in some environments.
Example and tutorial:
Imagine how Windows might look displayed on one of those cheapo '1080p-supported' projectors that actually only contains an imager with a native pixel resolution of, say, 1024x576 (or even 480x234).
Windows thinks it can send 1080p, since that what the HDMI connection advertises, so it does: any text / vector content looks atrocious.
(At least in this case the user could normally² unplug the projector and reconnect to a normal monitor to restore functionality.)
See for yourself... while connected to any monitor (at that monitor's native resolution), with Windows set to 100% scaling:
Open Windows Notepad
Type or paste in any block of text
Now, use the Zoom Out command from the View menu³ five or more times in a row
While not an exact analogue, you may still see how hard it could be to read down-sampled text, even when very high-contrast (the best-case scenario).
¹: As someone currently typing this very answer on a 1080p connection to a 55" 4K television as a second monitor, I came across the question very much hoping this was possible. Sadly, logic intervened and killed my potential joy.
²: Unless the computer is actually stored somewhere locked or inaccessible, such as a NUC-style PC hidden above the false ceiling in a conference room.
³: Alternatively, press <CTRL>-<Minus> five or more times.
I'm trying to render a RAW image with Core Image on OS X, using
[render:toIOSurface:bounds:colorSpace:].
However, often, there are some black tiles in the result (as in the example below).
The location of the black tiles is not consistent.
The problem seems to occur more frequently on older Mac Models.
This happens both on 10.9 and 10.10 (haven't tried older versions).
Any ideas for a solution?
We ran into a similar problem when combining the output of CIRAWFilter and a lanczos filter. We reported it to Apple, but haven't heard back yet. It turns out to be such a problem as you don't really need lanczos with CIRAWFilter output and can more easily use a inputScaleFactor to downsize your output.
What I'm trying to do:
I've added a splash screen to an application I'm creating for Windows Phone 7. I did this simply by replacing the pre-existing splash screen file with my own.
What goes wrong:
The splash screen is not displayed like it should be - it is being down sampled to an 8 bit image or something weird:
-
The image I'm using
-
The image that gets displayed
It's a bit hard to see depending on your monitor, but on a phone it's reasonably obvious. There are fuzzy greenish lines that appear - basically like the image is being down sampled or the quality worsened.
Any idea what I'm doing wrong, or what might be happening?
Thanks.
Try forcing the app to display images at 32 bits per pixel (instead of the default of 16)
Add an attribute of BitsPerPixel="32" to the app element in WMAppManifest.xml
See http://forums.create.msdn.com/forums/p/85960/520394.aspx#520394
The problem is that the gradient on your splash screen is causing banding, which you can solve by dithering. Robby Ingebretsen has an action for PhotoShop that you can use: http://nerdplusart.com/photoshop-action-for-windows-phone-7-dithering
I suspect the emulator. Run the emulator at full size or run the app on an actual device.
Windows Phone is currently only supporting a color depth of 16bit, causing especially some gradients displaying downsampled for 24bit images. Some first generation firmwares by HTC had a "bug" that also allowed 24bit. Theoretically it is just a registry key, but you cannot commonly change it. Microsoft has limited the color depth to 16bit for the benefit of performance, but as far as I knnow there are some second-generation models without this limitation now.
You may try to downsample the image in Photoshop to 16bit and optimize it for this color depth.
I'm developing an app for WP7 (VS2010 Express for Windows Phone RTM and WP Emulator), but now im facing a big problem related to memory usage.
The app itself has like 12 views, and some of them are reused with different data. It's a newsreader, so the views are mostly listboxes (image thumbnail, stackpanels and textblocks).
The first view has a listbox with 30 items. This takes about 20MB of RAM, but as i navigate between views the current and peak RAM usage start to rise. Well the peak usage it's around 55MB which i think is OK, but the app has a gallery section in which after selecting a thumbnail it navigates to another view which displays a downloaded image (JPEG, 1131px × 1647px, ~486KB) but initially fit to the screen. Until here all good, but for scaling purposes i'm using Laurent Bugnion's Multitouch Behavior and the problem is that when i zoom in the image, the memory usage gets near 90MB (like 87MB last time i tested with the maximum scale size at 2.5).
Also after i navigate the views the current ram usage may permantly reach and stay at 35MB, which i beleive is due to the device caching some things.
So, as the title says, how can i avoid such huge ram usage?
Edit----
Also i'd like to ask if the fact that in my app one can navigate from any view to almost every other and that in between there's always a page transition animation (like the one for the phone list application template in the beta tools), may be contributing to the excessive memory usage.
Generally speaking you want to keep images as small as feasible (in dimensions and color depth, not necessarily file size). In order to display an image, the device must decompress it to an actual Bitmap, so in this case you're looking at a 1131x1647pixel image, let's say at 16bpp, means that you have a 3.7MB memory footprint for the image, not the 486k file size.
Depending on your zoom/rotate, there may be a second copy buffer, so you can effectively double that. It doesn't take long at that rate to get to 90MB. I'd certainly try either download smaller image files or try resizing them locally and then using the resized image.
Well maybe i should look into deepzoom (but when i first read about it, i thought it was for using it with the same image at different sizes, like google maps in satellite view), but yesterday i solved it by using a webbrowser inside my view, so if before i had:
<Image x:Name="imgPlaceHolder" delay:LowProfileImageLoader.UriSource="{Binding Path=ActualImageSource}" MaxHeight="800"
MaxWidth="480" >
<interac:Interaction.Behaviors >
<tbeh:MultiTouchBehavior x:Name="ImageMTB" IsScaleEnabled="True"
MinimumScale="0.4"
MaximumScale="2.5"
IsRotateEnabled="False"
IsDebugModeActive="False"
IsTranslateXEnabled="True"
IsTranslateYEnabled="True"
>
</tbeh:MultiTouchBehavior>
</interac:Interaction.Behaviors>
</Image>
I changed that to:
<phone:WebBrowser Source="{Binding Path=ActualImageSource}" x:Name="wbbigimage" />
It uses less memory and takes care of the zoom with no problems.
I'll wait a bit for someone with a better solution before checking this one.
A couple of things to note. First, make sure that you are clearing out any lists or images that you are using on pages durring the onNavigatedFrom method. The way WP7 Deals with images is "interesting". One of the things I have found to help is to null out the background of any panorama controls when the page is not being displayed.
As for your specific issue, have you considered using a MultiScaleImage (Deep Zoom) to cut down on memory?
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.windows.controls.multiscaleimage(VS.95).aspx