Video and markers
March 3, 2007 12:00 AM
JohnGreat reply... Very helpful. I have not used th *s in the past, and often wondered if they were better for video/audio manipulation than are the default players.I have recently, in the last few days finally upgraded and obtained a few programs. They begin with Lectora 2006 and Lectora 2007 - I am currently on v2005 sp4 - so this is exciting.I have also obtained a few audio editing programs and they are NCH's "Switch Sound Format Converter" which converts any audio format into another format, NCH's "Verbose Text-to-Speech" which will take any text file (even PDF) and convert it to an audio speech format, NCH's "WavePad Sound Editor" for editing and remixing WAV's and www.mp3towave.org/video-to-audio-converter/ "Video to Audio Converter" which extracts all audio out of any .avi or other video format. All of these run less than a hundred bucks for all of them, except the Lectora of course!Additionally, I also use Canopus ProCoder 2, which enables me to rip any video format into any other video format. This includes your referenced MPEG4. I also use a little program for ripping videos for my PSP and PS3 called "PS3 Video Converter 3" and dont let the name fool you. This cool program, for about $20 enables you to take any video format, avi, mpg etc and rip it rapidly into MP4 format (even 1080P mp4 format!), again which you used.I recall ripping my videos I used in my Safety DVD into .wmv's, which now I question this tactic... I wonder if I would have been better to utilize the MPEG4 technology?I havent examined lately the video formats that Lectora 07 will support, so I will need to examine this and look into the compression state of the two formats .wmv vs. mp4... can you offer any insight?Now, I am interested in whether the * enables a faster loading of the file than the default media player does, and if the file will begin to load quicker without having to be fully cached, as is the case with my .wmv and default media player used in Lectora 2005... are you familiar with the difference and which is better? It appears that your solution is better, that is to use the *... also, last thing: Do you think there is a difference between the way you have this playing, in HTML or an EXE vs my version which is hosted solely on L E A R N.com and uses no other technology, such as a media server or similiar, but works solely based on the entire SCORM package uploaded to the hosting service and users connect to it?And is it possible for me to see a sample of your .awt showing how you did this so I can compare it to my exising one? I can send you a copy of the .awt if you like or give you temp access to it online?You can reply back to this forum, or email me directly at work at bfredrick@cmsstl.com.Thanks for the reply.... great feedback. I look forward to hearing from you.
Discussions have been disabled for this post