Not sure OpenIP is worth it

I'm trying to evaluate if OpenLP is worth it. So far, it's not. I'm sorry, I don't mean to discredit peoples' work but to me, having the background stretch to the full width of the screen is a no-brainer and should have been put in version 1, not whenever version 3 is coming out - or at least be able to specify the width and height of the resolution. Also, when using a transparent theme, the text of the songs overlap each other. If I use an image (3000 x 2000), it the transition from verse to verse is fine. If I use a transparent theme, so the background actually covers the entire screen... the text just appends and covers over each other.

I wish I tested this before loading all of these songs but you know what they say about assumptions. I get this is free but it's costing me time and energy. I don't have time nor the desire to learn another programing language to help improve it.

If someone is paying attention and can point out where I'm missing configuration options to correct this, please do so, otherwise, I'm going back to just using PowerPoint or will look into programs that will meet the basics.


  • I simply size my background images to the screen I will be outputting to and don't have a problem. I would suggest you should probably just go back to what works for you. I use OpenLP because it is the easiest option for me and it saves me a lot of time. The hard drive on my projection computer crashed once and because I was in a hurry I used OLP rather than re-install the program that I had paid for, figuring I would fix everything the following week. I never switched back because OLP has been easy and stable for me. If you are like me, you don't have time to waste on something that doesn't work for you so use what works.
  • I don't know if you realise, but a lot of images if stretched may not look the way you want them to....  Most modern monitors and projectors are 16:9 or 4:3 which is fine, except that most still cameras are 4:5 or 2:3 there are 4 solutions to this as follows:

    1) Stretch in both dimensions, this will distort the image, a picture of a globe will look like an oval, because you need to change the pixel dimensions from a square to a rectangle to make it work.   

    2) this method requires that you stretch in both dimensions to a virtual space, and then cut to fit the screen dimensions, this is also not ideal, in that it cuts off part of the image.  The picture of the Sunday school where everyone's head is cut off, is a good example.

    3) Letter box, You stretch equally until you hit a screen limit, then use black bands to make the other dimension fit the screen size.  This is the easiest to do, and most graphics libraries do it this way.  

    4) Double Letter Box, in this case you don't stretch anything just paint a black border around the image to fit the new screen format.  

    With options 3 & 4 the border can be black, or any other colour including a blurred partial copy of the image itself.  

    Because options 1 & 2 distort the image, most software does not support them, the code to implement option 1 is horribly ugly, and requires copious amounts of C language or assembler code, to implement, I've played with this stuff.  Not only this, but the code for Windows will be completely different on Linux and different again or a Mac 

    You always have the option to do the stretching by hand using Photoshop or The GIMP, then feed the edited image into your imaging software.  

  • The backgrounds work best if sized to the screen they are running on.  We have used projectors in the past and when switch to 60' TV's in our new build.  All we needed to do was use GIMP to set the image to the correct size and it works.
    If you stretch an image to fit the congregation will be complaining about the image and not concentrating on what they are doing.
  • //I get this is free but it's costing me time and energy.
    Our church has been using Easyworship 2007 up till recently when it aka Windows started being problematical. 2 Weeks ago I installed OpenLP and found to my delight you can even drag the UI around to resemble previous software to keep users happy. Granted, there has been some time spent by me setting it up to our conditions eg projector resolution vs screen resolution, understanding song imports, and other bits and bobs, but given your investment in time is going to be a long term investment I hardly understand your complaining over loss of time and energy.
    You could also say the creators of this marvelous software have wasted huge amounts of time and energy as well, and guess what - we wouldnt have OpenLP if they hadnt.
    This Sunday we used OpenLP for a full service with slides, videos, songs the whole lot. One hiccup due to my incorrect screen resolution. I say Yea for OpenLP, and if it continues to perform as well as it has so far Im pretty confident our church will be happy to contribute.

Sign In or Register to comment.