Timing of Still Images

I am going to try my hand at a music video on Monday and I need a bit of help with the post. The whole thing will be comprised of still frames and I don't know how to time things individually. I know how to import a series of still images as a unit and drop that on the timeline. I also know how to import a single image. The thing I don't understand is how I can import a series of images and spread them evenly across the timeline as a base then adjust the timing of each image seperatly. I am working on a mac in CS5.

I would a use a combination of the following:
First:
Animation>Keyframe Assistant>Sequence Layers...
Adjust end length of individual stills with the folllowing keyboard shortcut:
Option/Alt + ]
And adjust in point of subsequent stills using the following script:
Go to end of previously edited clip by selecting the clip and hitting O, then hit Page Down to go one frame further
http://www.redefinery.com/ae/view.php?item=rd_Shifter

Similar Messages

"Stuttering" when panning/zooming a still image...?

Hello.
I'm working on a small project which is basically a series of zooms/pans on still images. The pans/zooms are quite slow and take place over about 6-8 seconds. There's nothing too fancy going on here, but I notice that when I do a RAM preview or render out a comp, I get small "stutters" in some of them. Does anyone have any ideas why this would be happening and any suggestions on making these animations a little more "smooth". I mean, these things aren't complex at all, and overall they're quite smooth, but there's still times when I get these stutters and I can't figure out why they'd be happening? Would appreciate some advice!
Thanks,
Kristin.

There are certain speeds that sync up with frame rates so that they cause judders, jitters, stuttering or whatever you want to call it. The slower the frame rate the more obvious the problem.
If you've ever watched a western on TV or at the movies you've seen the stagecoach wheels turn backwards at various speeds. This is an example of the problem. It's actually called a stroboscopic effect. Mechanics, in the good old days when cars had carburetors and distributors, used to hook up a timing light to the #1 spark plug so that a light flashed on a timing mark on the crankshaft pulley. This light had the effect of stopping the rotation visually. That's exactly what's happening when you are moving your photograph across the frame at one of the critical speeds. Your eye is fooled and your brain can't process the movement smoothly.
There are also other cases where the sub pixel interpolation between frames causes areas of detail to flicker between frames. The latter problem can be seen by viewing your comp a frame at a time while zoomed in to say 800% and observing the edge detail. This problem can be especially nasty when you're trying to do a smooth title or credit roll. The horizontal lines that make up fine type can almost completely vanish between fields or frames if the text is moving at the wrong speed. You can test this out by creating a single pixel high horizontal line in AE and animating it from bottom to top of the frame. The only speed where you'll get a nice solid line in every frame or field is one that is an exact multiple of the frame rate. IOW, 1 frame 1 pixel of movement, 1 frame 2 pixels of movement, and so on. Move at 1 frame and 1.33 pixels of movement and the line will appear to completely disappear then return.
If you are working at 24fps progressive you'll find that the juddering caused by motion at critical speeds is much more problematic than projects at 29.97 fps. Interlacing, as was mentioned before, helps and gives you a wider range of motion, but interlacing can introduce more pronounced flickering in the detail if you are right at one of these critical speeds.
This problem extends to shooting as well. Cinematography manuals contain critical panning speed charts that list the number of degrees per second you can pan with various lens (angle of view) and shutter speed combinations. There isn't a videographer out there that's tried shooting 24P video and not ended up with an unusable pan due to these critical speeds.
The solution to successfully animating detailed images is to use the right speed (pixels per second) for your frame rate, add extra motion blur to hide the problem, or reduce the amount of detail in the image. These are the only solutions that I know of. They all limit design and timing, but what good is your design if it makes your eyes go buggy.
The best way I know if to tell if the problem is a playback issue is to use a device or program that tells you when you're dropping frames. You can use QT (by looking at the playback rate) or in FC or PPro by having the program report dropped frames. If it's a data rate issue you need more horsepower or a better codec.

Most efficient way of changing still image frame rates?

I'm using Premiere CS5.5 and have been having issues with the audio/video going out of sync when I upload my video to Vimeo (it's not out of sync prior to uploading it...it only happens after they transcode it). The Vimeo support staff says the problem is that I'm using a variable frame rate, but since there isn't any option (to my knowledge) to choose a constant or variable framerate in Premiere/Adobe Media Encoder, I think I have identified the problem. The primary footage that I shot with is 23.976 fps and that is what my sequence settings and output settings have been, but I also have a lot of still images that I'm using for b-roll, which I finally noticed are 29.97 fps. I changed the Intermediate Media Timebase setting to 23.976 fps in the preferences, but my question now is if there is an efficient way to change the frame rate of all those still images without having to re-import them and re-apply all the various motion effects/key framing that I've already spent a lot of time on?
Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks.

Yeah, I downloaded MediaInfo to explore some of the various versions that I've rendered in my effort to get something that works correctly on Vimeo, and depending on the encoder I saw some of what Ann posted, but I also looked at one on MediaInfo that I had rendered through Adobe Media Encoder and it had a Constant frame rate mode of 23.976, yet I remember watching that one on Vimeo at the time and it was still out of sync--Mediainfo says that version has a variable audio bit rate though, but to my knowledge there isn't an option in AME to choose a constant audio bit rate.
I agree that it's an issue on Vimeo's side, but the chances of them getting their **** together in a timely fashion seem low. The frustrating thing is that I can watch documentary style videos on Vimeo that I know were edited and compressed through Premiere/AME, yet they don't have any audio sync issues. The difference that I noticed between one of those videos and mine is the use of still images in my video. As you can see from an image I uploaded earlier, the default frame rate for still images when I imported them was 29.97 until I changed it yesterday, but it didn't update the images I had already imported. So I'm wondering if there is a way to change the frame rate of those still images without having to re-import the images and make all my edits/key framing all over again.

Best way to make a high quality slide show from still images

I know that this may have been asked before but i am trying to create a high quality slide show of my still images that will look great on a TV. I have tried imovie, idvd, and iphoto and i am not happy with the quality. i do own FCP. can anyone walk me through a way to create a high quality slide show and then burn it on IDVD.
any info would be appreciated
John
power mac g5 dual 2 gig Mac OS X (10.4.6)

i usually lay everything out in FCP. if you're going to use music or voice overs, lay down your audio tracks as appropriate. then cut all of the stills to you audio to get the timing just right. don't do any motion graphics in FCP. then, when you're satisfied with the cuts, send the entire sequence to Motion and do all of your motion graphics (grow/shrink, spins, throws, fades).
i find that all of the motion effects can be done more easily in the Motion application. this has been my preferred workflow for over a half-dozen slideshows now.
scott
PowerMac G5 2.5GHz Mac OS X (10.4.5)

CS3 export missing still images.

Hello All,
I'm trying to produce a video which is essentially a slide show timed to a music beat. It's a lot of still images that play really fast. It's almost like stop-motion video, but in some areas of the video, the images are up on the screen longer to match the music. All the still images have been formated as jpgs that are 1920x1080, for 1080p resolution video. When I watch the video in the preview window, all the images play. When I render the work area, all the images play.
However when I export the video out to a mpg4 coded *.mov file, there will be a couple of images that stays on the screen longer it's supposed to. It's like certain pictures get stuck, and subsequent images get skipped. It skips over the next 4-5 images, before resuming the rest of the video which so far seems to export just fine. The images that get skipped over are the images that are intentionally meant to be on the screen longer.
I can't seem to find any differentiation in the jpg files themselves other than some have the icc profile, and some do not. But both types of jpgs images
(w/ & w/o the icc profile) do appear in the export, as well as get skipped over.
The project has even exported at a lower resolution, 720x5XX, and the same thing happens in the same places over the same length of time. I've exported a smaller piece around those areas that get skipped, and it's just a different image that gets stuck on the screen, and the video skips over the images that are intentionally left on the screen for longer.
I'm completely baffled for what could be causing the issue. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated, and let me know if there's any information I can provide that can help lead to a solution.

Don't use the MOV format. And don't use the QuickTime player. See if that helps.

Extending the duration of a still image after applying scaling to it?

I have a still image that I am keyframing to scale down from 100% to 50% over its duration and at the end of the clip I move it to the upper left of the screen. After it moves to the upper left I want it to stay in that spot. What is the best way to do this?
I had my final keyframe on the last frame of the clip. Would I now somehow extend the length of the clip longer?
Thanks.

I suggest Ann's workflow too, but if you have already applied Keyframes to the shorter Duration Still, then extend that Duration, you can then Move the Keyframes to the new Tail/Last Frame. Just remember that that operation will change the timing of the Keyframes by the change in Duration. If that is what you want, then nothing to worry about.
Also, if you have several Effects Keyframed, you can Select all of those Keyframes for each Effect, then drag them all to suit.
Good luck,
Hunt

Adding animated gif to a still image, how do I do this?

I used to know how to do it, but I've forgotten.
Example: The person who told me how to do it had taken an animated gif (butterfly) and placed it on her breast in a still photo of herself. I know that she used Image Ready and as I recall, she created the same number of frames of the still image as the animated butterfly and then she somehow merged the two together. Can someone help, is there a tutorial somewhere? I'm using 7.0 by the way.
Thanks,
Ray
P.S. I also remember that it had something to do with linking the layers so that you just needed to place the first frame in the sequence and link all the other layers to it, but I'm totally lost now!

I don't believe that PS 7.0 supports animation, 'least I don't know how to use this function if it does. That is why I remember using Image Ready to do it. In Image Ready you can use any animated gif file to do what I want, I just can't remember how I did it. I do remember that I had to take my background image and duplicate it to get the same number of frames as the animated gif file, but I don't remember how I merged the two together. It had something to do with placing the first frame of the animated gif where I wanted it on my background and then using the link tool in the layer box to link them together, that way I didn't have to place each individual frame of the animation on to the background and avoid an alignment nightmare. I sure wish I would've taken notes!
Thank you for your suggestions.
Ray

Large Still Images into PE - One Workflow

Everyone wants the highest quality that they can obtain when doing their videos. It’s natural to want the best. Well, when dealing with still images, bigger is not necessarily better, for two reasons. First, overly large still images can really tax a system and second, one is limited to the frame size of the video, so these have to be resized somewhere - this resizing can be in the NLE (Non Linear Editor) program, or in an image processing program like PS (Photoshop), which does a better job anyway. Doing this in PS, or PSE, will result in better resized images, and they are easier for the NLE to work with. Quality is as high as your Project’s Preset will allow, and you are more efficient, with fewer crashes, slowdowns and hangs. It is a win-win situation.
Here is my normal workflow when dealing with still images. This workflow is for NTSC 4:3 720x480 with a PAR (Pixel Aspect Ratio) of 0.9. If your Project’s Presets are different, use those specs to resize to.
Since I shoot my still images in RAW, I Copy my files from the CF card to my system and catalog these images by location, subject and date (if necessary). I’ll do a quick conversion and Save_As Adobe DNG for backup. I then process these RAW images in PS with the ARC (Adobe Raw Converter), correcting them and then doing a Save_As PSD into a sub-folder. All of this is in my still photo library.
Normally, I will edit these PSD’s to find the images that I wish to use in a Video Project, and will Copy the selected images to another folder. You’ll see that I work with a lot of Copies, so my original files are always untouched and stored elsewhere. This guards against anything happening to them.
At this point, I’ll decide how I wish to use these selected images in my Video Project. Let’s just say that they are all horizontal images, and are still full-size from my camera. As stated, my Video Projects are DV-NTSC 4:3 720x480 PAR 0.9. [Remember, your Video Project may vary, so you will need to plug in the dimensions for YOUR Video Project in that case.] I also will have done my Cropping on each image individually, to get them to 4:3 Aspect Ratio. I do this my eye and by hand, rather than via an Action, because I want full aesthetic control.
In PS, I have a set of Actions for Video. An Action is like a Script, but less powerful and less involved in the writing. As I have already done all of my image enhancements and additional processing before I did my Copy to the selected folder, I only have to worry about my Action resizing these selected images for use in my Video Project. My Action here is to resize to 720x480 with a PAR of 0.9, and I normally use the Action that does this with a particular resizing algorithm, Bicubic-Smoother (though I also use Bicubic-Sharper on occasion).
For the next step, I go to my folder structure (remember, this folder contains copies of my selected still images in PSD format), and create a new sub-folder "[Project Name]_720x480." Back in PS, I choose File>Automate>Batch. Here I set my Source Folder, my Destination folder and the Action to perform. In my case, it’ll be the Destination Folder, that I just created, [Project Name]_720x480, and my Action will be my NTSC 4:3 720x480 Smooth. I check to have the Open command by-passed, because I do not need to see this take place on my monitor. When I hit OK, PS grabs all files in my Source Folder, runs the commands of my Action and does a Save_As for all files into my Destination Folder. I can process hundreds of large images down to a great 720x480 PAR 0.9 via Bicubic-Smoother interpolation, in moments. Now, I’m ready to go. Last, I Copy my Destination Folder to my Video Project’s folder hierarchy (usually on another HDD), and then Import these processed stills into my NLE.
What if I need to pan on one, or more of these images, while they are zoomed out completely? I don’t have enough pixels in my horizontal dimension to do this. I am just filling the frame with my still. Well, if I find that there are such images, I go back to my folder with the full sized images in my still images library, and select the ones that need to be larger. I run another Action on these, but it’s one that resizes to something larger than 720x480, say 1000x750. Now, I have another Destination Folder with the name [File Name]_1000x750. I’ll Copy this over to my Video Project, and Import these into the NLE. Here, I can go to Project Panel and remove the 720x480 versions if I so choose, but since a Premiere Project file (.PRPROJ or .PREL) is only an XML database, I may just leave them. It does not contain any media files, just links to where they are on the system and to what operations are performed on them.
By doing my resizing in PS, rather than in Premiere, I have accomplished two things:
1.) I have better quality resized images, using the algorithms in PS, plus have a choice of several interpolation methods to work with.
2.) I have lessened the processing load on my NLE and on my system, while doing the editing
I get higher quality and lower resource overhead - hence my reference to "win-win."
Now, back to my aesthetic control. I do not do any automatic zooming or panning. If one allows the NLE to do this, then they will want to probably process all of their images to 1000x750 (remember, this is for an NTSC 4:3 Project, so you will need to calculate what YOUR Project will require).
The two programs that I use are Photoshop and Premiere Pro, but Photoshop Elements can do the same things, though the exact commands might be different. Premiere Elements will handle the resized still images, just like Premiere Pro and the only difference will be the terminology used when one wishes to Import the still images.
I also keep all of my images in .PSD (the native format of PS), and do not convert to JPEG, or other. If one’s camera shoots only JPEG, I suggest writing the Action to do the Save_As to .PSD, as another JPEG compression will cost one quality. Yes, the JPEG’s will be smaller, but remember we are looking for the ultimate quality, so larger file sizes are just part of that equation.
One does not have to deal with all of the Copies, as I do. However, this allows me to go back to the originals, or to the processed full-sized .PSD’s at any step along the way. There is only one thing worse than not being able to go back to an intermediate version with full Layers and Adjustment Layers, plus any Alpha Channels, and that is finding out that you’ve lost your original RAW and DNG backups! That’s why I do a lot of Save_As and also work from Copies all along the way.
Hunt

Your workflow looks good. I do similar, but use PS, in lieu of LightRoom. I also do DNG's for my archives.
Provided that one chooses a JPEG compression algorithm setting that does not do too much compression, I doubt that anyone, but the most very critical, could tell the difference in Video. Most of my tests on PSD vs JPEG have been for print. There, one can more easily detect the differences. Video "hides" some of that.
To date, I have not had a Project where the Asset size differences between equally sized PSD's vs JPEG's caused any slowdown, or problem. There could be a resources savings with the smaller JPEG files, but there is a tiny bit of overhead dealing with the JPEG compression. I have never tested this, so can only guess that the smaller Asset size of the JPEG would trump that overhead - just a guess on my part.
For me, keeping the images in PSD does save a tiny bit of work in my Action (basically one less operation to perform), but I doubt that one could measure that time difference, even over the automation of hundreds of images. Besides, it's only one additional line in the Action. My feelings on JPEG vs PSD is firmly based in my print experience, and I am probably being too critical with images going to video. When I move up to HD and BD authoring, I need to apply a very critical eye, to see if I can tell the differences on an HD TV. So long as one does not apply too much JPEG compression, the differences should be very slight, at the worst, and maybe not even noticed, at best.
I do minimize the impact of many files on my Project by sizing to what I need. If I will not be doing any pans on zoomed-out images, I size to my Project. For pans on zoomed-out images, I calculate just what I will need for those pans, and might end up with several groups of sizes, to accommodate each. Still, the vast majority will be sized to exactly what I need for the Project - very few extra pixels.
In my case, and yours too, I have my RAW, my DNG, my working Layered PSD's, and then my sized output. I always keep all working PSD's, as I might change my mind, or my client might change theirs, and I do not want to have to go back and redo work, if I still have those working files. I also do as little destructive editing, as I can, using Dupe Layers, and Adjustment Layers, whenever possible. If I can, I never Flatten, or Merge Layers, so I can make any/all changes at any time, and only have to do the resizing via the same Actions. That is basically a "one-button" solution, once I have made the changes required.
Good luck,
Hunt

How to Work With Still Images in Premiere Elements 10

I am struggling with the still images in my Titles for my video project, and would really appreciate some help. I have done a lot of googling on this and searched this forum, but can't seem to find the answer I need, maybe not searching the right questions or just "not getting it". Not even PE Adobe tips or Adobe TV cover this, although it seems important to know. I am not clear how PE10 will handle the resolution of an imported still image or graphic art from Photoshop. Perhaps this topic will also help others as well.
I am working on a video project for my job, editing an old training video. Created new Title graphics in Photoshop, inserted the Title images and integrated with video clips, then exported the video segments as MPEG files. I burned the whole video to DVD.
When the final DVD plays on a computer or TV screen, the photo images in the titles are fuzzy even though they were clear 300 dpi images. (I know dpi doesn't matter in video). The title text is also a bit fuzzy and the title text that has animation applied to it is even more fuzzy. Yet the old MPEG video clips look fine - it's just my title graphics and text that look bad (embarrasing).
So I need to know how to improve the quality of the still images/graphics for a video??
Project settings:
- Hard Disk, Standard 48kHz
- Editing Mode: DV NTSC
- Frame: 720 x 480 (0.9091)
- Frame rate: 29.97fps
- with "Optimize Stills" box checked
Using these settings because I am working with MPEG files from an old training video CD.
File Export: MPEG, NTSC DVD Standard
I export the video clips as MPEGS because they will be burned to a CD or DVD for distribution to our staff offices.
Work Details:
In Photoshop, I created still image graphics for each Title sized at 720 x480 with high resolution photos and company logo (300 dpi), and save them as a bitmap to import into PE10. In the Timeline, I insert the still image in "Video 1" track, then in Video 2 track create a Title over it for text (some animated, some still). Sometimes I stack 2 or three titles with text in separate video tracks over one still title image. Yes, there is a red line across the top in the Timeline because I didn't render the still images.
Questions:
• What is the best resolution for images imported into PE10 from Photoshop?
• Should I be creating title graphics/images at 720 x 480 or a larger ratio like 1920 x 1080 so it will display better when seen on a computer or TV?
• Do I need to render each title image in the timeline so that it will eventually display better in the MPEG?
• Is it better to create a title and then insert the still image into the title so they are integrated, rather than layered on separate video tracks?
I would greatly appreciate any assistance.

When the final DVD plays on a computer or TV screen, the photo images in the titles are fuzzy even though they were clear 300 dpi images. (I know dpi doesn't matter in video). The title text is also a bit fuzzy and the title text that has animation applied to it is even more fuzzy. Yet the old MPEG video clips look fine - it's just my title graphics and text that look bad (embarrasing).
Remember that DVD-Video was designed for CRT TV sets, and was a major step up from VHS tape. However, when viewed on an HD computer monitor, or HD TV *, it is still ONLY 720 x 480, with is about 1/4 of the resolution as 1920 x 1080, which is about what we are used to seeing on those display devices. That is but only 25% of the quality. It can never look as good as HD material.
Good luck, and if I missed something, please point that out to me.
Hunt
* With the advent of BD players, and up-rezzing DVD players, things HAVE improved, when viewing a DVD-Video on an HD TV. The newer players have up-rezzing chips, that do a very good job of "improving" the viewed material's quality. However, even with those amazing chips, DVD-Video will NEVER be as good as a full-HD source. Also, computers do not have those up-rezzing chips, so when one views a DVD-Video on a high-rez computer monitor, it will still look pretty bad. There ARE a couple of new DVD software players, that improve the quality of DVD-Video played on a high-rez computer monitor, and a few look fairly promising. I speculate that we will see some more development in the DVD-Video area, especially as BD is not proving to be the big seller, that many promised. Even 3D is not helping BD realize its promise.

How to make a podcast with one still image with iMovie 09

I'm using trying to transfer my podcasts to Vimeo. I've been using iWeb to create a person web site with video and podcasts. I have embedded Vimeo with "html snippet widge." I want to do the same thing with audio, however Vimeo only accept "video" files.
In my attempt to work around Vimeo's video issues, I had the idea to use iMovie 09 to create a "video file" using a single still image with my audio podcast play in the background. The single image would be consistent for the entire length of the audio. It seems simple...one still image file and one audio file.
All of my audio files are less than 45 minutes in length. The problem is that when I insert an image in iMovie I can't get it to last for more than 10:00 minutes of my podcast. I've had to drag the same image over several times, extend each image's length to 10:00 minutes until I have enough images to last the full length of the audio file.
I'm sure there's a simple way to do this with one image, used one time, and have the audio added.
Anyone understand my situation and have a good idea?

The most efficient method would be for you to do this in iMovie 6. You can download a version if you don't already have it on your computer. http://supportdownload.apple.com/download.info.apple.com/AppleSupport_Area/Apple_Software_Updates/Mac_OSX/downloads/061-3532.20070807.nq3ER/iMovieHD6.dmg
Put all your clips into a new iMovie project, in the order you wish them to play. Use the chapters tab and add chapter markers for each clip (except the first one; iDVD will add that one for you). Close iMovie.
Open an new iDVD project. Use the Media tab, then Movies, to locate your new iMovie. Drag and drop it onto the main iDVD window, taking care not to drop it into a drop zone. You should then see the title of your movie and the two options: Play Movie (which will play all the clips sequentiallly) and Scene Selection (which will take you to submenu(s) where you can select which clip to view).

How do I make still Images the same size as the video when importing? CS5

Hi,
I'm having a problem importing and using still images as they are so large.
The video is 720 x 576 and the image I want to use is 4752 x 3168
How can I scale it down to fit with the video. Currently it just zooms in to a part of the picture making it pretty useless.
Any suggestions would be much appreciated.
Thanks,
Lois

I made a tutorial on this exact thing.
Part One: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXeblQFIGlM
Part Two: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjHNHf7IhKQ

Can anyone help me figure why there is a popping sound when I move from an iphoto still image to a new video clip? The sound has been removed from the video clips and there is another soundtrack underneath it all. Help?

My current project is like many I have created in the past. I have removed the sound from my video clips and laid another soundtrack under the entire project. Now, when I add an iphoto still image to the project, when it goes back into video there is a popping sound. I've never had this happen in the past and have made many projects in the past just like this one. Any way to troubleshoot this issue? Thanks so much for your help.
Ben

What audio output are you using? What mac and version iMovie

How do I convert an flv file to still images?

This may sound stupid, but I have a downloaded flv file, and I want to use about
8 seconds to make still images so I can trace into Illustrator and then export it into Flash. (both are older versions).
Is this possible?
It is for an animinated logo.
Thanx.

Andrew J wrote:
Everybody's wrong wrong wrong. You don't need garageband. Select the song, go to info. You need to select a start and stop time for the song that can't be any longer than 40 seconds in length. Then in advanced mode you convert the song to acc. once done locate the file on the computer. it should end in .m4a . Change the a to an r so it reads .m4r Drag the file to the desktop, double click and it ends up in ringtones folder.
That's it! Works every time. Or for those who want easier:
http://www.ambrosiasw.com/utilities/iToner/
My drug of choice.

Using still images with Final Cut (and the apple suite in general)

I have had a re-occuring and long term problem that has caused me many lost hours of head scratching and work arounds, and as of yet I have not been able to come up with a good solution.
Its to do with integrating still images with the Final Cut suite.
If I receive a high quality image from a client to use in their video and I then try importing it into Final Cut and animating it, it always ends up looking like a pile of ahem. Often I will get "swimming" lines appear across fine detail on the image, and parts of it will flicker as it moves across the screen. For instance, if I have a picture of some blinds or other fine detail (especially horizontal and vertical lines), when I add a grow and throw movement to it the detail will become very noisy - buzzing and flickering like mad.
I have found I can counter this by resizing the image in photoshop to a resolution closer to SD video (700w or 500h) - but I always end up losing detail, and the flickering and noise is only reduced, not eliminated. Other things that have helped are blur effects applied at a very low level, like 0.5 blur, so its not noticeable visually, but Final Cut seems to treat it differently and quieten the noise and flicker down.
However, all of these workarounds are ultimately still giving a reduced quality product.
Also, this problem is not necessarily constrained to Final Cut, I am currently fighting DVD Studio Pro because it is murdering the text quality in a stills slideshow I am creating - and in this situation there is no animation being applied. No matter what file type (psd, jpeg, tiff, png...) or size I output the text and images from Photoshop in, the moment DVD studio pro gets hold of it, it turns to cripe.
For a while I was putting it down to the fact that I usually edit in SD (PAL) formats, and there just wasn't the resolution available to reproduce fine detail. However, I do often see other people achieving pin-sharp fine detail on still images and text in SD formats (the Apple templates are a good example)
So, my question to you, oh great and high boffins, if you are dealing with still images and text, how do you do it? How do you work around any noise problems you have, and how do you produce those pin-sharp images (both moving and still) I see in other professional productions?
Quad G5 Mac OS X (10.4.8)

still images with too high a resolution will always cause problems. this is due to the detail of the image being finer than the scanline of the tv can display ... obviously this will caise the image to flicker as these details alternately appear and disappear as and when the scanline can display them. as you have discovered, the answer is to apply a very small blur, the effect being that the detail is spread by the blur such that the scanline can dislay it correctly.
text issues are often rooted in the same problem ... unless the text is placed very carefully (whole even number on the y axis) then the quality may be impaired due to the resulting interlacing/scanline issues

Can you merge two still images into one in premiere elements?

I am working on a slide show for a memorial service and would like to have one still image showing and then have the next one come in without replacing the former- somehow merge the two. Is that possible?

Depending on what you mean by "merge," you can use PiP (Picture in Picture) to have the second image come in and occupy part of the screen with the original image. There are many ways to display PiP, from say a small image located in the screen to having it occupy one half of the screen.
Does that sound like what you are hoping to do?
Besides the rather simple PiP, one can also use Track Matte Keying to bring up the second image and to soften edges, drop it into an image of, say a TV set, or a window.
The possibilities are endless, or nearly so.
Let us know if PiP works for you, or if you need a more intricate merging of the images.
Good luck,
Hunt

Timing of Still Images

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for