Re: Quicktime Multimedia Authoring - Nearly Dead?
FWIW, I think QT is and has been for many years Apple's greatest single technology. I might now say it's tied with the iPod. :-D Dan On 10/19/06, Stephen Barncard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'm friends with the VP of Quicktime at Apple. If someone can gather all the complaints and needs in one document point-by-point, I can make sure he's aware of your concerns and can perhaps tell us what's in the future for Quicktime without blowing an NDA. He also might be aware of some new QT based authoring products in the pipeline. Glenn was VERY bullish about and proud of the product, and I'd expect he's have a really good answer. It's worth a try. He was concerned and disappointed when he found Realaudio files on my sites! sqb >However, it should be noted you are speaking from a Windows perspective. > >>In my quest for finding the ultimate multimedia authoring tool, >>I've come to the tentative >>conclusion that QuickTime, (as far as an authoring platform is >>concerned), is falling so far >>behind that it could soon be considered "dead". Apple, the very >>folks who should be >>promoting solutions for interactive QuickTime haven't done >>anything, themselves, for years. > >-- >stephen barncard >s a n f r a n c i s c o >- - - - - - - - - - - - >___ >use-revolution mailing list >use-revolution@lists.runrev.com >Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your >subscription preferences: >http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution -- stephen barncard s a n f r a n c i s c o - - - - - - - - - - - - ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution -- ~~ Dan Shafer, Information Product Consultant and Author http://www.shafermedia.com Get my book, "Revolution: Software at the Speed of Thought" From http://www.shafermediastore.com/tech_main.html ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Standalone builder current?
I have a weird problem. I'm seeing a couple of bugs in a standalone that I'm not seeing in the IDE. In fact, both of these are bugs that were "fixed" previously. Since there are two of these I'm wondering if the 2.7.4 version of Rev I have either doesn't have the current versions of things or is somehow incorporating the wrong ones. I have tried it on a couple of different Macs but both of them have previous versions of Rev and were upgraded. When I saw one bug "come back" I figured it must not have gotten incorporated into whatever is used in a standalone. But when I saw the other one two it got me thinking it might be something else. Anyone else seeing this? How can I tell? I seem to recall discussion along similar lines but I can't remember the details. Bill Vlahos ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Multimedia Authoring - Quicktime Dead?
Would fix the Linux video support as well :) ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] Is there a way to capture still frames from .VOB video files?
If you download VideoLAN (www.videolan.org) and 'Open Disc' you can stop playback and take a Snapshot (under the Video menu). Cheers, Luis. On 20 Oct 2006, at 0:37, Martin Baxter wrote: Thought someone might know whether this is possible. A client has sent me some video on DVD. The files have the extension .VOB. I can play them in Windows Media Viewer no problem, but I'd like to be able to grab individual frames for use in Photoshop or whatever. Anyone know if this is possible? And er, if so how it can be done. Martin Baxter ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
[OT] Is there a way to capture still frames from .VOB video files?
Thought someone might know whether this is possible. A client has sent me some video on DVD. The files have the extension .VOB. I can play them in Windows Media Viewer no problem, but I'd like to be able to grab individual frames for use in Photoshop or whatever. Anyone know if this is possible? And er, if so how it can be done. Martin Baxter ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Multimedia Authoring - Quicktime Dead?
Doesn't mean you can't use QT, as a codec it runs in QT too. Cheers, Luis. On 19 Oct 2006, at 23:58, Luis wrote: Well, not sure if this applies in any sense whatsoever, it uses the Theora codec: www.getdemocracy.com/ but it does show how others are approaching the field. Theora can also be played through VideoLAN: www.videolan.org Might make the case for an External to manage playback via VideoLAN and bundle it into a Rev app. I haven't seen the API, but being Open Source I'd imagine it'd be fairly, well...open...! Would that classify as a starting point for a Multimedia Authoring app? Cheers, Luis. On 19 Oct 2006, at 22:37, GregSmith wrote: Dan: No, not according to the documentation. For any movie interactivity you need the freely distributable player. For static QuickTime, you don't. Sure, if you can influence anybody over there to fix the drop shadow default and allow an interactive web demonstration of a MovieWorks movie, I'm all for that. Really, there is an open source opportunity for the kind of project authoring I'm needing. But, if it takes years to complete, I'm not waiting. If someone put together a program of MovieWorks elegance and simplicity and functionality which allowed the addition of "while you watch" narration, (during the authoring process), totally customizable titling, (as you watch), with customizable drop shadows, basic "in-movie" navigation as well as "extra-movie" navigation and linking, all for the low, low price of . . . nothing . . . I think they'd have something there. What they would gain by releasing it freely, I have no idea. But, even if they released it for the low, low price of . . . $129 . . . or thereabouts . . . they'd still have something there. Greg Smith Sounds like a real opportunity for an Open Source project to compete, doesn't it? H Presumably you've talked to the MW guys about your drop-shadow problem? The guy who founded the company and who, last I checked, was CEO, is someone I know reasonably well. I can probably get his attention if that would help. (I'm not sure you're right about the need to include the player, by the way. I think you can export your titles to MP4, e.g., and then they'll play in any QT/Real or presumably other MP4 player, no? -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Multimedia- Authoring---Quicktime-Dead--tf2474177.html#a6906309 Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Multimedia Authoring - Quicktime Dead?
Well, not sure if this applies in any sense whatsoever, it uses the Theora codec: www.getdemocracy.com/ but it does show how others are approaching the field. Theora can also be played through VideoLAN: www.videolan.org Might make the case for an External to manage playback via VideoLAN and bundle it into a Rev app. I haven't seen the API, but being Open Source I'd imagine it'd be fairly, well...open...! Would that classify as a starting point for a Multimedia Authoring app? Cheers, Luis. On 19 Oct 2006, at 22:37, GregSmith wrote: Dan: No, not according to the documentation. For any movie interactivity you need the freely distributable player. For static QuickTime, you don't. Sure, if you can influence anybody over there to fix the drop shadow default and allow an interactive web demonstration of a MovieWorks movie, I'm all for that. Really, there is an open source opportunity for the kind of project authoring I'm needing. But, if it takes years to complete, I'm not waiting. If someone put together a program of MovieWorks elegance and simplicity and functionality which allowed the addition of "while you watch" narration, (during the authoring process), totally customizable titling, (as you watch), with customizable drop shadows, basic "in-movie" navigation as well as "extra-movie" navigation and linking, all for the low, low price of . . . nothing . . . I think they'd have something there. What they would gain by releasing it freely, I have no idea. But, even if they released it for the low, low price of . . . $129 . . . or thereabouts . . . they'd still have something there. Greg Smith Sounds like a real opportunity for an Open Source project to compete, doesn't it? H Presumably you've talked to the MW guys about your drop-shadow problem? The guy who founded the company and who, last I checked, was CEO, is someone I know reasonably well. I can probably get his attention if that would help. (I'm not sure you're right about the need to include the player, by the way. I think you can export your titles to MP4, e.g., and then they'll play in any QT/Real or presumably other MP4 player, no? -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Multimedia- Authoring---Quicktime-Dead--tf2474177.html#a6906309 Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Basic question: Rev CGI and executing Rev scripts from bash
Interesting - it is working so i will ignore for now :) Thanks. ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Quicktime Multimedia Authoring - Nearly Dead?
I'm friends with the VP of Quicktime at Apple. If someone can gather all the complaints and needs in one document point-by-point, I can make sure he's aware of your concerns and can perhaps tell us what's in the future for Quicktime without blowing an NDA. He also might be aware of some new QT based authoring products in the pipeline. Glenn was VERY bullish about and proud of the product, and I'd expect he's have a really good answer. It's worth a try. He was concerned and disappointed when he found Realaudio files on my sites! sqb However, it should be noted you are speaking from a Windows perspective. In my quest for finding the ultimate multimedia authoring tool, I've come to the tentative conclusion that QuickTime, (as far as an authoring platform is concerned), is falling so far behind that it could soon be considered "dead". Apple, the very folks who should be promoting solutions for interactive QuickTime haven't done anything, themselves, for years. -- stephen barncard s a n f r a n c i s c o - - - - - - - - - - - - ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution -- stephen barncard s a n f r a n c i s c o - - - - - - - - - - - - ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Quicktime Multimedia Authoring - Nearly Dead?
However, it should be noted you are speaking from a Windows perspective. In my quest for finding the ultimate multimedia authoring tool, I've come to the tentative conclusion that QuickTime, (as far as an authoring platform is concerned), is falling so far behind that it could soon be considered "dead". Apple, the very folks who should be promoting solutions for interactive QuickTime haven't done anything, themselves, for years. -- stephen barncard s a n f r a n c i s c o - - - - - - - - - - - - ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Multimedia Authoring - Quicktime Dead?
Dan: No, not according to the documentation. For any movie interactivity you need the freely distributable player. For static QuickTime, you don't. Sure, if you can influence anybody over there to fix the drop shadow default and allow an interactive web demonstration of a MovieWorks movie, I'm all for that. Really, there is an open source opportunity for the kind of project authoring I'm needing. But, if it takes years to complete, I'm not waiting. If someone put together a program of MovieWorks elegance and simplicity and functionality which allowed the addition of "while you watch" narration, (during the authoring process), totally customizable titling, (as you watch), with customizable drop shadows, basic "in-movie" navigation as well as "extra-movie" navigation and linking, all for the low, low price of . . . nothing . . . I think they'd have something there. What they would gain by releasing it freely, I have no idea. But, even if they released it for the low, low price of . . . $129 . . . or thereabouts . . . they'd still have something there. Greg Smith Sounds like a real opportunity for an Open Source project to compete, doesn't it? H Presumably you've talked to the MW guys about your drop-shadow problem? The guy who founded the company and who, last I checked, was CEO, is someone I know reasonably well. I can probably get his attention if that would help. (I'm not sure you're right about the need to include the player, by the way. I think you can export your titles to MP4, e.g., and then they'll play in any QT/Real or presumably other MP4 player, no? -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Multimedia-Authoring---Quicktime-Dead--tf2474177.html#a6906309 Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Multimedia Authoring - Quicktime Dead?
Sounds like a real opportunity for an Open Source project to compete, doesn't it? H Presumably you've talked to the MW guys about your drop-shadow problem? The guy who founded the company and who, last I checked, was CEO, is someone I know reasonably well. I can probably get his attention if that would help. (I'm not sure you're right about the need to include the player, by the way. I think you can export your titles to MP4, e.g., and then they'll play in any QT/Real or presumably other MP4 player, no? Flash stuff is way cool. The only problem I ever saw with it (other than cost, as you say) was that it allowed the creation of real crap, but then that's not the tool's fault, really. :-) On 10/19/06, GregSmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Dan: I own MovieWorks, and, as far as developing anything purely QuickTime in nature, this is the best value with the best functionality I've found anywhere. I can't use it for the most insignificant reason: I cannot control the drop shadow on the text I create internally. I need it to be very dark, and MovieWorks defaults, with no options, to a medium gray. For the training I'm currently working on, I've got to have a darker shadow, or the text is not readable on the already, unchangeable medium gray background. The only other drawback that I can see is the need to include their freely distributable, cross-platform player with every interactive movie you create. One more thing for the user to have trepidation about. The really good news is that the MovieWorks developers are working on a "Pro" version for release in the spring that includes an e-commerce, in-application, purchasing solution. I'll bite when that comes along. Flash offers stuff that no other environment offers: players already installed on 98% of newer machines, complete control over vector graphic animations, unparalleled bitmap animation support . . . and here's the big one for me . . . "assisted scripting". This is the greatest programming educational tool I've found because it literally lets you see, line by line, what each line of code does by visually demonstrating the results, graphically. It makes sure that you enter your code in the proper syntax, as well. For anyone, this kind of coding assistance is invaluable. The other benefit that helped me decide was a very large pool of tutorial information for specific application examples. But, all these positive things said, it's still way too expensive for what it does. I'm totally surprised that, as of this late date, no Mac killer multimedia application has been invented to pose a serious threat to this monopoly. Greg Smith Dan Shafer-2 wrote: > > Greg, > > What specific kinds of improvements or changes were you looking for in QT > that you didn't find but managed to locate in Flash? I'm curious because > I'm > going to go through this same process soon and want to be sure to pick the > right tool as well. > > More and more video content on the Web seems to be defaulting to Windows > Movie format which is problematic at best and useless at worst on my Mac. > But places like YouTube have video that plays just fine in all of the > browsers I ever try to run on Mac or that other platform. > > Did you look at MovieWorks? That used to be a very powerful QT authoring > tool/environment but I don't know how/if they've kept up either. But it's > only $80 and seems to do a lot of what the multimedia authors I know want > to > do. No scripting, though. :-( > > Ironic that as we move toward more ubiquitous demand for video, QT starts > to > fade, if indeed it is. > > Dan > > > On 10/19/06, GregSmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> In my quest for finding the ultimate multimedia authoring tool, I've come >> to >> the tentative conclusion that QuickTime, (as far as an authoring platform >> is >> concerned), is falling so far behind that it could soon be considered >> "dead". Apple, the very folks who should be promoting solutions for >> interactive QuickTime haven't done anything, themselves, for years. The >> two >> applications that I find to be the most advanced QuickTime authoring >> solutions, (LiveStage and VideoClix), haven't done anything to make their >> packages attractive to new authors, not in years, either. Visiting the >> LiveStage website reveals that they are now focusing on being content >> providers, themselves, rather than offering an authoring solution for >> others. When emailing the VideoClix people for some technical answers, I >> get no response at all. >> >> So, it looks to me like Flash authoring, for the present, is the only >> viable, practical and timely solution for the kind of interactive >> authoring >> I need to perform. Also, for the Mac, there is only one thorough >> solution. >> And, though I hate supporting these corporate monsters, I went ahead and >> purchased the Macromedia Authoring Studio, for the total lack of finding >> anything comparable elsewhere, at any price. Very sad. >> >
Re: Multimedia Authoring - Quicktime Dead?
Dan: I own MovieWorks, and, as far as developing anything purely QuickTime in nature, this is the best value with the best functionality I've found anywhere. I can't use it for the most insignificant reason: I cannot control the drop shadow on the text I create internally. I need it to be very dark, and MovieWorks defaults, with no options, to a medium gray. For the training I'm currently working on, I've got to have a darker shadow, or the text is not readable on the already, unchangeable medium gray background. The only other drawback that I can see is the need to include their freely distributable, cross-platform player with every interactive movie you create. One more thing for the user to have trepidation about. The really good news is that the MovieWorks developers are working on a "Pro" version for release in the spring that includes an e-commerce, in-application, purchasing solution. I'll bite when that comes along. Flash offers stuff that no other environment offers: players already installed on 98% of newer machines, complete control over vector graphic animations, unparalleled bitmap animation support . . . and here's the big one for me . . . "assisted scripting". This is the greatest programming educational tool I've found because it literally lets you see, line by line, what each line of code does by visually demonstrating the results, graphically. It makes sure that you enter your code in the proper syntax, as well. For anyone, this kind of coding assistance is invaluable. The other benefit that helped me decide was a very large pool of tutorial information for specific application examples. But, all these positive things said, it's still way too expensive for what it does. I'm totally surprised that, as of this late date, no Mac killer multimedia application has been invented to pose a serious threat to this monopoly. Greg Smith Dan Shafer-2 wrote: > > Greg, > > What specific kinds of improvements or changes were you looking for in QT > that you didn't find but managed to locate in Flash? I'm curious because > I'm > going to go through this same process soon and want to be sure to pick the > right tool as well. > > More and more video content on the Web seems to be defaulting to Windows > Movie format which is problematic at best and useless at worst on my Mac. > But places like YouTube have video that plays just fine in all of the > browsers I ever try to run on Mac or that other platform. > > Did you look at MovieWorks? That used to be a very powerful QT authoring > tool/environment but I don't know how/if they've kept up either. But it's > only $80 and seems to do a lot of what the multimedia authors I know want > to > do. No scripting, though. :-( > > Ironic that as we move toward more ubiquitous demand for video, QT starts > to > fade, if indeed it is. > > Dan > > > On 10/19/06, GregSmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> In my quest for finding the ultimate multimedia authoring tool, I've come >> to >> the tentative conclusion that QuickTime, (as far as an authoring platform >> is >> concerned), is falling so far behind that it could soon be considered >> "dead". Apple, the very folks who should be promoting solutions for >> interactive QuickTime haven't done anything, themselves, for years. The >> two >> applications that I find to be the most advanced QuickTime authoring >> solutions, (LiveStage and VideoClix), haven't done anything to make their >> packages attractive to new authors, not in years, either. Visiting the >> LiveStage website reveals that they are now focusing on being content >> providers, themselves, rather than offering an authoring solution for >> others. When emailing the VideoClix people for some technical answers, I >> get no response at all. >> >> So, it looks to me like Flash authoring, for the present, is the only >> viable, practical and timely solution for the kind of interactive >> authoring >> I need to perform. Also, for the Mac, there is only one thorough >> solution. >> And, though I hate supporting these corporate monsters, I went ahead and >> purchased the Macromedia Authoring Studio, for the total lack of finding >> anything comparable elsewhere, at any price. Very sad. >> >> Greg Smith >> -- >> >> -- > ~~ > Dan Shafer, Information Product Consultant and Author > http://www.shafermedia.com > Get my book, "Revolution: Software at the Speed of Thought" >>From http://www.shafermediastore.com/tech_main.html > ___ > use-revolution mailing list > use-revolution@lists.runrev.com > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your > subscription preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Multimedia-Authoring---Quicktime-Dead--tf2474177.html#a6905446 Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _
Re: Multimedia Authoring - Quicktime Dead?
Greg, What specific kinds of improvements or changes were you looking for in QT that you didn't find but managed to locate in Flash? I'm curious because I'm going to go through this same process soon and want to be sure to pick the right tool as well. More and more video content on the Web seems to be defaulting to Windows Movie format which is problematic at best and useless at worst on my Mac. But places like YouTube have video that plays just fine in all of the browsers I ever try to run on Mac or that other platform. Did you look at MovieWorks? That used to be a very powerful QT authoring tool/environment but I don't know how/if they've kept up either. But it's only $80 and seems to do a lot of what the multimedia authors I know want to do. No scripting, though. :-( Ironic that as we move toward more ubiquitous demand for video, QT starts to fade, if indeed it is. Dan On 10/19/06, GregSmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: In my quest for finding the ultimate multimedia authoring tool, I've come to the tentative conclusion that QuickTime, (as far as an authoring platform is concerned), is falling so far behind that it could soon be considered "dead". Apple, the very folks who should be promoting solutions for interactive QuickTime haven't done anything, themselves, for years. The two applications that I find to be the most advanced QuickTime authoring solutions, (LiveStage and VideoClix), haven't done anything to make their packages attractive to new authors, not in years, either. Visiting the LiveStage website reveals that they are now focusing on being content providers, themselves, rather than offering an authoring solution for others. When emailing the VideoClix people for some technical answers, I get no response at all. So, it looks to me like Flash authoring, for the present, is the only viable, practical and timely solution for the kind of interactive authoring I need to perform. Also, for the Mac, there is only one thorough solution. And, though I hate supporting these corporate monsters, I went ahead and purchased the Macromedia Authoring Studio, for the total lack of finding anything comparable elsewhere, at any price. Very sad. Greg Smith -- -- ~~ Dan Shafer, Information Product Consultant and Author http://www.shafermedia.com Get my book, "Revolution: Software at the Speed of Thought" From http://www.shafermediastore.com/tech_main.html ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
QT cross-platform problems in my Rev scripts.
Hi from Paris, Mark Shonewille showed me that my codec was missing (thanks Mark), and André Garzia showed me how to find out which codec was missing (thanks André) Francis, on any of the quicktime players, press CMD+I or go for the menu "show movie info" under the window menu. This will display the codecs used for the movie. Try reencoding your movie with a codec that you know both machines have such as Mpeg-3. Cheers andre So now I have all the answers, all I have to do is to find out how to control the codec which is used when splitting my .avi file into individual segments. Something to do tomorrow . Thanks guys -Francis "Nothing should ever be done for the first time !" ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
[ANN] Scripter's Scrapbook 5.23 Update
www.FlexibleLearning.com/ssbk or www.ssBk.co.uk UPDATE AVAILABLE An incremental update has just been uploaded and is now available that includes immunity to Rev's tools palette and easier access when 'Parked'. The new 'Silver look' works especially well on XP with the same theme; the updated 'Graphite look' matches OSX rather well. We have also fixed a couple of bugs that crept in recently. v5.23 (Update released 19-OCT-2006) - Interface: A 'parked' Scrapbook now floats above all windows as a systemWindow so it is accessible in all applications. - Interface: Vanilla and Silver have been added to the color scheme options. Blueberry, Graphite and Metal (OSX only) options have all been revised. - Feature: Added access to the 'What's New' web page when updating. - Bugfix: Issues with overflow Toolbar icons have been resolved. - Bugfix: Speaking dialog messages has been re-instated. For Revolution users... Your Scrapbook should now be immune to the RevIDE tools palette. NEXT STEP - Registered and Trial users should update through the Help menu or in the Preferences. - New users and those interested in reviewing the changes since an earlier trial may obtain a free 30-day starter-kit at www.FlexibleLearning.com/ssbk. You will be asked if you wish to obtain the most recent version, and it will automatically download this update for you - Full size screen shots for both Mac OSX and Windows XP are at www.FlexibleLearning.com/ssbk/preview including useful mouse shortcuts illustrations. FEEDBACK Finally, if you have a moment to support the software's continued improvement we would very much appreciate your feedback at www.flexiblelearning.com/ssbkFeedback.htm Hugh Senior FLCo Home of the Scripter's Scrapbook ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
RE: Multimedia Authoring - Quicktime Dead?
> In my quest for finding the ultimate multimedia authoring > tool, I've come to the tentative conclusion that QuickTime, > (as far as an authoring platform is concerned), is falling so > far behind that it could soon be considered "dead". Apple, > the very folks who should be promoting solutions for > interactive QuickTime haven't done anything, themselves, for > years. The two applications that I find to be the most > advanced QuickTime authoring solutions, (LiveStage and > VideoClix), haven't done anything to make their packages > attractive to new authors, not in years, either. Visiting > the LiveStage website reveals that they are now focusing on > being content providers, themselves, rather than offering an > authoring solution for others. When emailing the VideoClix > people for some technical answers, I get no response at all. A lot of functionality is dependent on Apple continuously improving and adding to the Quicktime APIs. It seems any efforts at improving Quicktime have been in just improving compression to clarity and export targets. That's all Apple's tools really need. The last really cool interactivity I thought they added was Cubic VRs. I don't think QT is going to die but Id guess any future improvements will follow the market with the biggest wallet. Best regards, Lynn Fredricks Worldwide Business Operations Runtime Revolution, Ltd ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: searching list archive via Google gone wrong
> I'm glad to know there are other interfaces into this list. This one is my favorite... a nice, clean, simple page. http://www.mail-archive.com/use-revolution@lists.runrev.com/maillist.html Roger Eller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: searching list archive via Google gone wrong
Thanks Andre and Eric, I'm glad to know there are other interfaces into this list. Hopefully one of them will prove to be an adequate replacement. I did try a couple of them to try and find the answer to the question I posted about the Standalone Builder, but I couldn't find any thing of relevance to my problem. Bernard Devlin ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: export image and CGI
Hi Andre, PM! YO! :-D Klaus, the stack is open, I think the thing does not work on the console with no GUI... Yep, I'm afraid of that. By the way, will you be in Malta this year? No, sorry. Andre Best Klaus Major [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.major-k.de ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: export image and CGI
PM! Klaus, the stack is open, I think the thing does not work on the console with no GUI... By the way, will you be in Malta this year? Andre On Oct 19, 2006, at 3:42 PM, Klaus Major wrote: Hi Andre (my spanish friend ;-) Mark, I have the perms, what is happening is that the export command is failing. I think the export image command only works if you have the stack visible on the screen. :-( I found out that the stack has to be OPEN, no matter if visible or invisible! to make "the export image" work! Andre Regards Klaus Major [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.major-k.de ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Reading Excel files on Mac OS X
Hi to all, My name is Josep from Barcelona, Spain. I'm new in Revolution and I have a lot of questions in my mind :) Now I need to read form a excel file. The excel file is pre-formated with two columns data. It's a price list. Any tip to aboard the file? I'm developing on Mac OS X, but the application must be run also on Windows. I need to load and insert the data into mySQL table ckecking the data that was changed from the last import. Thanks in advance, Josep ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: export image and CGI
Hi Andre (my spanish friend ;-) Mark, I have the perms, what is happening is that the export command is failing. I think the export image command only works if you have the stack visible on the screen. :-( I found out that the stack has to be OPEN, no matter if visible or invisible! to make "the export image" work! Andre Regards Klaus Major [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.major-k.de ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: export image and CGI
Mark, I have the perms, what is happening is that the export command is failing. I think the export image command only works if you have the stack visible on the screen. :-( Andre On Oct 19, 2006, at 3:28 PM, Mark Wieder wrote: Andre- Wednesday, October 18, 2006, 8:04:03 PM, you wrote: I am generating some images on runtime for a CGI, I'd like to use export ... as JPEG command to save my image data to a variable that I could output to the browser. This is specially useful for example for I would almost guarantee that you won't have write access to your cgi directory from a cgi app, for obvious security reasons. It's possible to write to other directories, but you'll probably have to specify permissions *very* exactly, i.e., the cgi process itself will have to have write permission to the directory you're writing to. -- -Mark Wieder [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: export image and CGI
Andre- Wednesday, October 18, 2006, 8:04:03 PM, you wrote: > I am generating some images on runtime for a CGI, I'd like to use > export ... as JPEG command to save my image data to a variable that I > could output to the browser. This is specially useful for example for I would almost guarantee that you won't have write access to your cgi directory from a cgi app, for obvious security reasons. It's possible to write to other directories, but you'll probably have to specify permissions *very* exactly, i.e., the cgi process itself will have to have write permission to the directory you're writing to. -- -Mark Wieder [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: searching list archive via Google gone wrong
Hi Bernard, If you have Rev 2.7.x, you can use the Rev Search Engine (last tab in the docs tool bar). With a previous version, you can download the Resources Picker plugin from my website (same features) With it you can: Search the mailing lists with GMane Search the mailing lists with Google Search the mailing lists with Mail Archive Search the mailing lists with Nable Un/Subscribe and Send a Mail to the Mailing Lists Go to other Lists and Groups And many other search types: Rev docs, related web, etc. Le 19 oct. 06 à 16:25, Bernard Devlin a écrit : Mostly, I don't ask for help on this list because I have found that searching the archive via Google usually brings an answer (that and the great documentation esp. in earlier versions of Rev - trust me, after struggling with Applescript last week, I really, really appreciate both xTalk and the Rev docs more). Anyway, I've noticed recently that a) Google searches of the list seem to be bringing up useful results less and less often. Maybe my needs are changing, but in any case there is definitely something wrong with the Google results. Clicking on a returned result takes one to an entry in the list, but it is the wrong entry. Clicking on Google's cached copy of that page takes one to the right page. I don't know if the problem is Google's or Runrev's. But I just thought I'd bring it up, in case anyone else has noticed anything strange. Bernard Devlin Best Regards from Paris, Eric Chatonet -- http://www.sosmartsoftware.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: QT cross-platform problems in my Rev scripts.
QT '.mov' files are just containers which can contain almost any kind of data - if you simply saved the cut up bits rather than exporting them via a new codec, the original avi codec is still being used within the file. If that avi codec is present on your Mac but not the PC that would explain the problem. Does the original .avi file play in QT on the PC? Ian On 19 Oct 2006, at 16:20, Francis Nugent Dixon wrote: Hi from Paris, I used Quicktime Pro on my Mac to slice up a .avi file into several .mov files (apparently the only option). In my Rev stack, my player script worked a treat, and played the .mov files (and also the original .avi files). Then I ran my .rev stack on the PC (StackRunner), and the files wouldn't play. Mark Schonewille (off- forum) suggested that I was missing a codec, which is quite a logical suggestion, but for a .mov file created by Quicktime (although Mac) itself, I was curious. So I first tried opening the .mov file on my PC, by launching Quicktime (I don't have the Pro version on my PC), isolating the problem from my Rev script. Surprise, although it displays the window, and plays the audio track, the video track is not displayed. So it is not a Rev problem, but a QT problem. I have the latest iTunes/Quicktime on my XP PC, so why can't I read .mov files created by QT itself ? I realize that this is not a Rev problem, but perhaps other users have come across this cross-platform QT problem which prevents Rev "Play Video" scripts from running correctly. -Francis "Nothing should ever be done for the first time !" ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Quicktime Multimedia Authoring - Nearly Dead?
In my quest for finding the ultimate multimedia authoring tool, I've come to the tentative conclusion that QuickTime, (as far as an authoring platform is concerned), is falling so far behind that it could soon be considered "dead". Apple, the very folks who should be promoting solutions for interactive QuickTime haven't done anything, themselves, for years. The two applications that I find to be the most advanced QuickTime authoring solutions, (LiveStage and VideoClix), haven't done anything to make their packages attractive to new authors, not in years, either. Visiting the LiveStage website reveals that they are now focusing on being content providers, themselves, rather than offering an authoring solution for others. When emailing the VideoClix people for some technical answers, I get no response at all. So, it looks to me like Flash authoring, for the present, is the only viable, practical and timely solution for the kind of interactive authoring I need to perform. Also, for the Mac, there is only one thorough solution. And, though I hate supporting these corporate monsters, I went ahead and purchased the Macromedia Authoring Studio, for the total lack of finding anything comparable elsewhere, at any price. Very sad. Greg Smit ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: QT cross-platform problems in my Rev scripts.
Francis, on any of the quicktime players, press CMD+I or go for the menu "show movie info" under the window menu. This will display the codecs used for the movie. Try reencoding your movie with a codec that you know both machines have such as Mpeg-3. Cheers andre On Oct 19, 2006, at 1:20 PM, Francis Nugent Dixon wrote: Hi from Paris, I used Quicktime Pro on my Mac to slice up a .avi file into several .mov files (apparently the only option). In my Rev stack, my player script worked a treat, and played the .mov files (and also the original .avi files). Then I ran my .rev stack on the PC (StackRunner), and the files wouldn't play. Mark Schonewille (off- forum) suggested that I was missing a codec, which is quite a logical suggestion, but for a .mov file created by Quicktime (although Mac) itself, I was curious. So I first tried opening the .mov file on my PC, by launching Quicktime (I don't have the Pro version on my PC), isolating the problem from my Rev script. Surprise, although it displays the window, and plays the audio track, the video track is not displayed. So it is not a Rev problem, but a QT problem. I have the latest iTunes/Quicktime on my XP PC, so why can't I read .mov files created by QT itself ? I realize that this is not a Rev problem, but perhaps other users have come across this cross-platform QT problem which prevents Rev "Play Video" scripts from running correctly. -Francis "Nothing should ever be done for the first time !" ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Multimedia Authoring - Quicktime Dead?
In my quest for finding the ultimate multimedia authoring tool, I've come to the tentative conclusion that QuickTime, (as far as an authoring platform is concerned), is falling so far behind that it could soon be considered "dead". Apple, the very folks who should be promoting solutions for interactive QuickTime haven't done anything, themselves, for years. The two applications that I find to be the most advanced QuickTime authoring solutions, (LiveStage and VideoClix), haven't done anything to make their packages attractive to new authors, not in years, either. Visiting the LiveStage website reveals that they are now focusing on being content providers, themselves, rather than offering an authoring solution for others. When emailing the VideoClix people for some technical answers, I get no response at all. So, it looks to me like Flash authoring, for the present, is the only viable, practical and timely solution for the kind of interactive authoring I need to perform. Also, for the Mac, there is only one thorough solution. And, though I hate supporting these corporate monsters, I went ahead and purchased the Macromedia Authoring Studio, for the total lack of finding anything comparable elsewhere, at any price. Very sad. Greg Smith -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Multimedia-Authoring---Quicktime-Dead--tf2474177.html#a6899139 Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
QT cross-platform problems in my Rev scripts.
Hi from Paris, I used Quicktime Pro on my Mac to slice up a .avi file into several .mov files (apparently the only option). In my Rev stack, my player script worked a treat, and played the .mov files (and also the original .avi files). Then I ran my .rev stack on the PC (StackRunner), and the files wouldn't play. Mark Schonewille (off-forum) suggested that I was missing a codec, which is quite a logical suggestion, but for a .mov file created by Quicktime (although Mac) itself, I was curious. So I first tried opening the .mov file on my PC, by launching Quicktime (I don't have the Pro version on my PC), isolating the problem from my Rev script. Surprise, although it displays the window, and plays the audio track, the video track is not displayed. So it is not a Rev problem, but a QT problem. I have the latest iTunes/Quicktime on my XP PC, so why can't I read .mov files created by QT itself ? I realize that this is not a Rev problem, but perhaps other users have come across this cross-platform QT problem which prevents Rev "Play Video" scripts from running correctly. -Francis "Nothing should ever be done for the first time !" ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: searching list archive via Google gone wrong
Bernard, if you check on RevOnline, you'll see a mail list archive search plugin by mark, it provides you with nice results. Google DB seems bloated, too many garbage, I often need to do many refinements to find what I want, this is not google fault if I try to imagine the amount of info they are trying to index. Nor is runrev because runrev mantains no searchable list archives. You can also try the GMane interface here http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.comp.ide.revolution.user Andre On Oct 19, 2006, at 12:25 PM, Bernard Devlin wrote: Mostly, I don't ask for help on this list because I have found that searching the archive via Google usually brings an answer (that and the great documentation esp. in earlier versions of Rev - trust me, after struggling with Applescript last week, I really, really appreciate both xTalk and the Rev docs more). Anyway, I've noticed recently that a) Google searches of the list seem to be bringing up useful results less and less often. Maybe my needs are changing, but in any case there is definitely something wrong with the Google results. Clicking on a returned result takes one to an entry in the list, but it is the wrong entry. Clicking on Google's cached copy of that page takes one to the right page. I don't know if the problem is Google's or Runrev's. But I just thought I'd bring it up, in case anyone else has noticed anything strange. Bernard Devlin ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
searching list archive via Google gone wrong
Mostly, I don't ask for help on this list because I have found that searching the archive via Google usually brings an answer (that and the great documentation esp. in earlier versions of Rev - trust me, after struggling with Applescript last week, I really, really appreciate both xTalk and the Rev docs more). Anyway, I've noticed recently that a) Google searches of the list seem to be bringing up useful results less and less often. Maybe my needs are changing, but in any case there is definitely something wrong with the Google results. Clicking on a returned result takes one to an entry in the list, but it is the wrong entry. Clicking on Google's cached copy of that page takes one to the right page. I don't know if the problem is Google's or Runrev's. But I just thought I'd bring it up, in case anyone else has noticed anything strange. Bernard Devlin ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
xml library missing from standalone
Hi folks I built an app with Rev 2.7.4, and when the standalone is built for OS X, it appears that the xml library is missing. It doesn't matter if I let the Standalone Builder automatically assemble the needed libraries, or if I tell it myself that it should explicitly include that library. If I let it automatically include it when building for Windows, then the revxml.dll gets placed into the externals folder. On OS X that externals folder is empty. I seem to remember having similar problems with the Standalone Builder last year, and someone pointed me to some custom properties of Rev that I could delete and that would give the Standalone Builder a much-needed kick in the pants. Could some kind soul please help me again? I searched the list archive via Google, but couldn't find anything about this property. Bernard Devlin ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Rev Graphics Gurus
On Wed Oct 18, Richmond Mathewson geradamas at yahoo.com wrote:
Have uploaded "COLOUR VALUES 2" to My Space:
this lets one play around with a set of RGB slides and
see the effect upon a control . . .
However, if any of the colours of the control are the
default (empty) the whole thing goes wrong
AND, still do not quite understand why this will not
work with imported images
sincerely, Richmond Mathewson
Hi Richmond,
I took a look at your stack.
As always, things could be somewhat simplified. Here is an alternative
3-line script for your color scrollbars.
First set the start value to 0 and the end value to 255 (your value here
is 510 ?)
Set "show values" to true.
"on scrollbardrag x
put the backcolor of fld "example" into tcolor
put x into item 1 of tcolor # the R value
set the backcolor of fld "example" to tcolor
end scrollbardrag"
Modify the script for the other two Green and Blue scrollbars -> item 2
of tcolor, item 3 of tcolor.
No need for hidden fields to store intermediate variables etc..
I have used as similar approach in an older stack "Farbspiele" ("Play
with colors") intended to introduce students to color concepts. You find
such scrollbars on card "Oberflächenkosmetik 1" ("surface cosmetics").
--
Imported images unfortunately cannot be modified this way, you have to
manipulate the imagedata.
There are many examples for handling imagedata in the stacks below -
which I already mentioned in my last post of this thread:
and
.
Best,
Wilhelm Sanke
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
