Best QT export option for laptop presentation

Hi there,
I am experimenting with exporting options in hopes to get the highest quality output for a presentation I created in FCE2. This file is 1 hr/20 min. long. (The first hour is a looped slideshow). The graphics and photos used in this were all at square pixel value, 720x540. And again, the final product will be shown from a laptop...
When I export the entire sequence from FCE, do I do a self-contained movie or not? What are the best settings I can select in QT Pro? SHould I change the compressor settings to "Best" or stick with the default settings?
I really appreciate any feedback. Thank you!
Karen

Thanks Tom,
I'll give that a try. I am currently exporting the second segment of the video using the same method i listed earlier. (simply because it worked and i MUST have it done tonight). After it is finished, I plan to do the whole thing in ONE CHUNK using the settings you've given me - as long as I don't have further issues with that "render file."
So I am just curious, will there be any difference between these two types of export methods?
1- Export from FCE Quicktime Movie, self-contained, to desktop. Open in QT. Export using your dimensions of 640x480, "best quality."
VS.
2- Export using QT conversion with the above dimensions.
Thanks! This has been such a learning experience for me. I'm so glad to be at the final phase! Just keeping my fingers crossed that this export goes well. You've been such a great help, thank you.
Karen

Similar Messages

Best Export Options for QT5 Viewing

I run a site for Mac OS 7 users and want to upload some videos there in QuickTime 5 format (the latest version for Mac OS 7). I am working on a G4 running Tiger and QuickTime 7 Pro.
What are some of your opinions on the best export options for QT5 viewing, distrubed over the internet, at say 320x240?

Alas, the data rate of these two video codecs must be a lot higher (at least 25% more than the more modern codecs) to ensure a good visual experience.
A neat html "trick" is to encode with these higher data rates but at a smaller dimension. Instead of 320X240 use 160X120. The smaller dimensions help keep the file size down. During html playback use the object and embed tag to scale="tofit" and enlarge the playback area.
Your src (source) tag dimensions are larger than the original source file. Using scale="tofit" tags the file plays at the designated size instead of the original (160X120) size.
The pages hosted for .Mac users (iWeb and Homepage) use the opposite tag (scale="aspect") that fit the source to the template of the page. One of mine as an example:
http://homepage.mac.com/kkirkster/zoom/

Best export option for Sound Designer

Hi everyone,
I am working on a new short film and I am working with a Sound Designer and composer. We want to create a 5.1 mix for the film (which I have never done before). So I am trying to figure out what would be the best export option for him to work with to make his life easier.
Providing him with just a ProRes export won't help him match up to my cuts in the time line since he doesn't use FCP X. So my thought is that we will have matching files and folder structure for both video and audio before I start editing. But what I am not understanding is once I have a complete rough cut, how do I get him a cut list so that he can totally match up my cuts with the same audio files on his system?
Any advice?
Thanks.

See this pic for an example of how my exports turn out:
http://www.brettmichaelwiesman.com/temp/qtexport.jpg
First off, the titling style is not ideal for DV (or DVD). That is, your font should be a bit fatter (or, at least, bold) and perhaps 1-2 point sizes larger. (This is all because the DV codec makes titles look like s--t if the font size is small and narrow)
Also, for your LiveType files, make sure FCP is interpreting your alpha channel correctly. For every LiveType file placed in your timeline, select it, then press Command-9 to bring up the Item Properties dialog. In the column for Alpha, make sure it says it says Black. If, for instance, it reads Straight, Control-click [right-click] on Straight, then select Black from the contextual menu. You should notice your text 'popping out' a little more. You'll have to re-render, of course.
Also, in QuickTime Player, press Command-, (that's  + comma) to bring up QT's preferences. Make sure that the box for Use High Quality Video Setting when available is checked. (In order to get this working, it's probably best to set this, then restart QT - or close, then open, all movies). With the High Quality flag always used, your titling should always look better in QT player. (That is, there is no change made to your actual file, but at least when previewing, you'll get a better idea of things)
After you've made these changes, export as you were (Current Settings) and let us know if you see any improvements.

Does anyone know how to hide the export option for excel 2007

Does anyone know how to hide the export option for excel 2007?
We are having an issue with negative numbers downloading as text field in excel 2007, works fine in excel 2003.
We are on version 11.1.1.7.0 of OBIEE.
Thanks for any response.

Go to iTunes>Preferences>Devices and highlight the backup you want to delete and click on Delete Backup

Exporting - Option for Best Quality?

Okay. Just upgraded to QT Pro. What "export" option produces the best quality video?
Also, should QT Pro be able to open an WMV file? I've been having to use Flip4Mac, but is water marks everything when I try to do the conversion to *.mov format.
Thanks for any info and insight.

The best quality video will always be lossless or uncompressed. The reality about compression is that it's always a trade off between image quality and data size and as Colin pointed out depends a lot on what you use it for.
While you're working on a piece of video, it's always best to keep it as uncompressed as possible. Compressing footage and then compressing it again leads to a much reduced quality, something like generational loss when recording from tape to tape.
As a good balance between data size and quality in Quicktime, I'd recommend working at the full pixel dimensions and frame rate that you captured and using Apple's MJPEGA codec at full quality.
You might also think about AVI file compressed with DV codec - they won't be as high quality, but will have the advantage of being readable on Macs as well as PCs which don't have Quicktime installed.

What is the best export option for a slide show made with Premiere Pro?

I have just made a slide show, 3 minutes, some music and 3 slides.
I exported it for youtube with 10fps.
The file ended up with 35 Mb.
Isnt there an export option that allows less fps resulting in a much smaller file size?

What frame size are you exporting to?
There is likely a way to get it a little smaller. I will play around with it and see what I can come up with.
Post a screen shot of your export settings. We might be able to spot a problem.
Edit: Well, at 1920X1080 a 3 minute slide show starts to fall apart at less than 30MB or so. The bitrate drops to the point where the images are not clear. Anything under about 1Mbps is just too noisy. I used H.264. There might be a better choice for slideshows.

Best quality audio option for Ipod classic

Hello to everyone, I got a 160 Ipod classic as a present and I dont have previous experience. I am choosing the best way to import the CD collection and came to this 3 choices, after doing some research in the web
-AAC at 320. I have a trained ear and think I can tell the difference with 256, the difference in storage is not that big
-AIFF. I not really counting on this becasuse the files are big and I guess I colud onlu get around 400 CDs on 150 GB
-Apple lossless. I have read the quality is similar to Aiff and they dont take a lot of space.
What do you guys think is the best option for this 160 gb model? quality is important for me. I think the choice is AAC at 320 or Apple lossless, But Apple lossless is still almost double size files than the 320 AAc, so I dont know
Thanks a lot and best regards
Message was edited by: maltess

There is no definite answer for this, your hearing is unique to you.
The best thing to do is choose a few songs and put them on your iPod in all the different formats you are considering. Then listen to the same song in the different formats and see whether if like the lower bit rate version or if you must have the higher bit rate version.
Personally, I use (good quality) Bose on-ear headphones, a Bose speaker dock and a Klipsch speaker dock. Most of my songs are in 192kbps AAC, some are 256kbps and I don't hear the difference. But then, my age means that my hearing is no longer as acute as it was.
Since you have a 160GB iPod, if you have the room (that is, not too many songs), use the higher bit rate. I began using the higher bit rate when I realised I had the room.
Phil

Export option for highest quality posting to Google video and YouTube

I'm trying to figure out what the best export options are for posting video on Google Video and YouTube. My primary interest is skiing video with quick actions. Here are the 5 options I tried on my iMovie HD 6, the latest and the greatest:
MPEG4, LAN
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2913246368993273712
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xL6RHKXydhQ
MPEG4, LAN, High Quality
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1920438333553484589
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0myAYyBx0k
Quicktime, LAN, 320x240, Deinterlace
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2101048758986639008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rExhbmBksVs
Quicktime, LAN
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8289794703671829891
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-nwmyJ-y_g
Quicktime, LAN, Deinterlace
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1116022416411494165
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4Wch75hTzs
You can get the whole list on each site with following URL
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=imovie-quality-comparison
http://www.youtube.com/my_playlists?p=C0D08A3D961234E4
Each video has cross reference URL in the description which link to the same video posted on other site.
Currently my choice is "Quicktime, LAN, Deinterlace" on Google Video. Only thing I don't like is doubling of image for fast moving part, which somehow disappears if I reduce the size to 320x200, but then it is too blurry when displayed in full screen.
None is usable on YouTube. They look horrible, but there are much better quality videos on YouTube.
Since there are so many knobs to play around on each option, I'm at loss what to play around with. I did quick things like increasing the size to 720x480 or increasing the frame rate, but surprisingly, none seems to make any difference when filtered through their encoder.
I like to solicit suggestions on what option to try. I'll export the same video with that options, upload it to both sites and we can take a look.
eMac & iBook Mac OS X (10.3.9)

Hi — I also found you via Slashdot. You've gone to a good amount of effort to solve this scientifically.
I'm just here to say: Face it, you need to go past the built-in options. Here's what you need to know:
1. YouTube is 320x240 (or 320 by anything lower, for widescreen). You must scale to that.
2. YouTube is 30fps maximum, so if you already have that, set that. If you have 25 or 24, use that. If you have 50, it looks better with 25 (I've tried).
3. The interlacing choice is purely up to your original video. Does it have 480 lines or 576 lines? And if so, does it have fluid "live camera" motion, unlike film? If your answer is yes to both, then you have interlacing. Since YouTube doesn't do interlacing, you need to remove it.
4. Both YouTube and Google Video have a problem with the (seemingly open, standard) MP4 format. We think it's because of the VLC software they used. Anyway, use a QuickTime MOV file for the wrapping container, so export to QuickTime Movie (not MPEG-4). But use the H.264 codec. It's good.
OK, that's it. It's your pretty complete, simple guide to making good YouTube videos.
Don't forget to use a tripod and external microphones, and lay off using the zoom too much. That's my other advice, for earlier in the process. Now you've learnt everything technical The rest is only down to viral marketing and you can learn all that by example out on YouTube.
CK.

Best Practice: Export unrendered for internet

Hi
As I recall, in previous versions of FCPX it was considered best practice, at least for exports for web, to export unrendered.
Still true? Ever true for all other export reasons?
I want to post a rough of a film on youtube, unlisted, for a few friends to comment on.
best
elmer
Btw, always seems like when I open my browser while fcpx is open, I get problems and have to delete my prefs to get back to normal. Any reason why? Just curious.

Steve: If these are bitmaps inside a PDF that's going to be viewed on the iPad, you cannot rely on its "native resolution". Think about this: What if the original page size of this PDF is 5.5" x 8"? What if it is 20" x 32"? Which one will show the images "at their native resolution"?

Best QT export setting for istockphoto?

Hi.
I want to export my footage using PPro CS5 for uploading onto istockphoto.com.
The required format is QuickTime (Photo-JPEG).
This is the source summary:
1440x1080 (1.3333), 29.97fps, Upper
(was shot with Sony AX2000)
Does anyone know the best export setting for this footage?
I tried this...
Format:QT
Preset:Custom
Codec:Photo-JPEG
1440x1080
29.97fps
Upper First
Aspect: HD Anamorphic 1080 (1.333)
Then, the exported video looks vertically streched...
What am I doing wrong?
Please help.
Thank you!
Kitty_Kai

You're probably doing nothing wrong. Many players will not unsqueeze the footage automatically, you have to tell it to do that with a keypress or menu setting.

AAF EXPORT OPTION FOR AFTER EFFECTS CC

Hi My name is Marcellus. I use After effects for vex when I import my avid sequence AAF from Media Composer to After effects. Thing is I don't use premiere Pro or Premiere CC. I think that if I have to dynamic link my after effect composition over to premiere creating a new premiere project then exporting my sequence AAF from premiere back to avid it's too much file base creation. May after Effects CC add an AAF export option where it renders the effects in the composition, I can export that workflow as an AAF with effects rendered and import that AAF back into Avid Media composer and link to the timeline like a feature with Davinci resolve?

Hello Marcellus,
YungProlifik wrote:
I use After effects for vex when I import my avid sequence AAF from Media Composer to After effects.
Thing is I don't use premiere Pro or Premiere CC.
See these resources:
The Avid to After Effects Workflow | wolfcrow
Using Pro Import After Effects for Projects from Other Applications - After Effects Tutorial
YungProlifik wrote:
I think that if I have to dynamic link my after effect composition over to premiere creating a new premiere project then exporting my sequence AAF from premiere back to avid it's too much file base creation.
You're correct. See the Avid to After Effects workflow article. That method is possible but not recommended.
YungProlifik wrote:
May after Effects CC add an AAF export option where it renders the effects in the composition, I can export that workflow as an AAF with effects rendered and import that AAF back into Avid Media composer and link to the timeline like a feature with Davinci resolve?
You can always make a feature request here: http://www.adobe.com/go/wish
Hope this helps.
Thanks,
Kevin

Modifying Advance CSV export options for Web Intelligence

When we download a Webi report as a CSV(witha dvance options)
In the CSV download advanced options -- We have options for specifying the 'Text Qualifier which is ( " and ' ) and Delimiter (, and ; and tab)
I would like a 'none' option for the 'Text Qualifier' i.e the output columns of the csv should not be enclosed by single or double quotes....
Any suggesstions as to where I can modify this.

1. have you created any hierarchy in the universe ? after creating required hierarchy, in the webi report you need to enable drill mode.
2. you can use opendocument url with sReportName parameter. Please check this doc for details: http://help.sap.com/businessobject/product_guides/boexir3/en/xi3-1_url_reporting_opendocument_en.pdf
But for this you need to export the report to InfoView.

Outgrowing storage - best NAS/SAN options for OS X Server environment?

Hi All,
We use an Xserve (2x3 GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon) for our production/graphic design team. I have a 1TB ADM dedicated to "live" jobs and another 1TB ADM for "archived" jobs. (A third, smaller ADM houses OS X Server only...)
Both 1TB drives have a dedicated 1TB external drive for nightly backups and another for weekly backups (we use SuperDuper). This very basic system has worked well for us, but our storage needs are increasing. I'd like to double our current scheme -- just bump the "live" and "archived" environments up to 2TB.
I see a lot of NAS and SAN options. Main concerns for me are:
1) compatibilty with our current Mac OS X Server environment;
2) cost; and
3) ideally, preservation of our clean and simple backup scheme
Wanted to get input from other Xserve/OS X Server users as far as the best options for this transition...
Thanks!

I am a huge fan of the Netgear (formerly ReadyNAS) NAS devices. I've owned 2 of them now, and am now standardized on the little 4-bay NVX Pro. It supports AFP perfectly as well as Time Machine, SMB/CIFS for any windows needs, iSCSI, NFS, RSYNC, etc. etc. iSCSI is a great option not to be under-estimated, though NFS is the more traditional backup model for Network storage. I backup several Apple machines to the single NAS, which is now running 4x3TB drives in the XRAID2 format (essentially RAID5). I can pull a drive in live production and swap it out and the RAID re-syncs without interrupting file transfers, etc. It's also got some nice plugin's of some open source tools like Subsonic server, Wordpress, etc. etc. They make a myriad of devices with the same basic software, just different amount of drive bays, enterprise vs. SMB market, etc. etc. Again, I chose the NVX Pro, but there are other options up and down the line-up. And no, I have no officialiation with Netgear, in fact on a certain level, my company competes with them :-) Lastly, remember, there is value in off-site backups as well, in case of fire, theft, etc. If you're really paranoid, like me, you could additionally mirror your NAS to an off-site NAS or other cloud-based solution. Of course, there's a cost for everything. Good luck with it.

Best AVI export settings for a XDCAM EX 1080i60 35VBR FCP timeline

I've editted a couple of XDCAM EX 1080i60 35VBR timelines in Final Cut Pro. The dimensions of the source footage and timeline sequence settings are 1920 x 1080 XDCAM EX 1080i60 35VBR.
They will be used at a large conference center and the client has asked me to delivery HD AVI files.
So far, everytime I export an AVI file from either the FCP timelines, or HD Quicktime XDCAM EX 1080i60 35VBR composites that I've made from the timeline, the AVI file that results is either alot smaller than the 1920 x 1080 quicktime file and/or pixelated to some degree, and not as clean as the HD quicktime.
I have very little experience with AVI and was hoping someone could suggest appropriate export settings. As I said, the client only indicated they want AVI files, and that their equipment can display HD files.
So I'm trying to maintain the quality of the original and editted footage.
I'd like to work with the tools and export options available within FCP7 (FCS3) and quicktime, as opposed to having to purchase some AVI transcoder, but I guess I'd be open to that if I had to otherwise take a huge quality hit.
Thank you in advance for any assistance.

I'd like to work with the tools and export options available within FCP7 (FCS3) and quicktime, as opposed to having to purchase some AVI transcoder
As far as I know there are no tools/export options within FCP7 (FCS3) and/or Quicktime to do what you probably want to do (compressed HD AVI export). But if a fully uncompressed 1920x1080 AVI export is ok for you / your client then you can use Export > Quicktime Conversion, set the Format to AVI and change the Options >> Video >> Settings >> Compression type to "None" ... bear in mind that this will produce some pretty big exports file size wise (about 6-7 GB per minute).
Or instead, you can download and use MPEG Streamclip. Open your HD Quicktime XDCAM EX 1080i60 35VBR composites into MPEG Streamclip and choose File > Export to AVI ... then in the AVI Exporter window you can +choose the codec+ you need and press the "Make AVI" button (leave the settings at default, especially Frame Size which should be "unscaled"). Note that AVI is just a wrapper, not a codec. Make sure you chose an HD capable codec that your client can handle (it's unlikely that they will be able to play back any Apple XDCAM EX variant, or indeed any codec that starts with "Apple").
Or just send them an unscaled H264 test file and see how they get on with that (and you can export H264 from FCP, Compressor, Quicktime and/or MPEG Streamclip). It's scalable (handles any resolution including HD) and is pretty much universally supported delivery codec. I'd expect your client would be happy to accept it if you explain that the format will offer the quality the need.
However you proceed I'd strongly recommend you send the client a few test encodes first to have them confirm that they can indeed read / handle your encodes correctly.
Hope it helps
Andy

Best image EXPORT settings for best quality

What should i have my export settings at when exporting to a jump drive to give to clients for web and printing use???
When i see my images uploaded on Facebook for example, the qulity looks poor which worries me that when printing the quality will be poor as well. Am i missing something in the setting for exporting? What is the proper way to export for the best quality image? HELP!
My settings now under Aperture>Presets>Image Export:
JPG Original size
300 dpi

t_hall10 wrote:
The information provided was helpful, but did not completely answer my question...
Are there specific settings with-in Aperture I can set for exporting so that clients have the ability to print as wanted and post on the web as wanted whithout losing any major amount of photo quality?
No, not for one size fits all.
I do appreciate this may be a frustrating answer, but non-the-less, that's how it is.
t_hall10 wrote:
Should I be gving 2 folders of pictures, one for web use and one for printing use? If I were to do that, what should the exporting setting be set for both folders?
Maybe, it's your choice.
Let's go through the settings.
The only real quality setting is for JPG compression. 12 is virtually no (lossless) compression but gives huge file sizes which may breach a websites limits.
A 16MP images on quality 12 will be about 22MB. 11 brings it down to 8MB and 10 down to 7MB. You'd be very hard pressed to see the difference between a 12 and a 10. But if you want to feel you are giving the best quality without the extreme file size, go for 11.
The the vast majority of web sites, like facebook, will either resize uploaded images and/or re-compress them. They may also crop them to a different aspect ratio to fit their browser software.
Many report the best size for upload to facebook, for small images is 960 pixels on the long side. For large images it's 2048. For different websites it may be different. It is discussed on many photography sites and blogs. You will find some promoting the 960 / 2048, and others with their own preferences. Here's a good one which also shows you many ways FB will mess with the images:
http://havecamerawilltravel.com/photographer/images-photos-facebook-sizes-dimens ions-types
The safest colour space is sRGB (Mac profile: sRGB IEC61966-2.1) as it will more often be right than wrong. You should preview your images on screen with this profile to get a feel for how it will look and avoid unexpected colour shifts in your files. Ideally your screen should be calibrated so you know what you are giving them is accurate.
To understand the printing issue, try this exercise:
If you have a printer installed on your Mac, it probably also installed some printer profiles. In Aperture, look at one of your nicer vibrant images. From the view menu turn on 'Onscreen Proofing' and then from the 'Proofing Profile' sub menu, select one of your printer profiles and look at how the onscreen image changes. Repeat with each of the printing profiles and see how the image changes each time.
This is only a fraction of the colour shifts that will be occuring after you give your file to someone and they print it on their own uncalibrated system with their uncalibrated printer.
Many photographers don't offer full size images to their clients. They will usually give them smaller versions for their own use, which may include small size printing.
They will either do the main printing themself on their own calibrated printer, or work with a print shop, and may have installed calibrated profiles on their system for the shops printing equipment so they can use onscreen proofing to gauge what the pictures will look like when printed on that equipment.
But if you are just giving a file to someone, you lose all control of how they will print it. Even experienced photographers and computer users can struggle to make the prints match close to what they look like on screen.
Most often photos will appear too dark, or the colours look wrong, or it lacks sharpness. There are some settings on the export presets for gamma and blackpoint compensation. Gamma will brighten the image for when it's printing too dark, and blackpoint will try to stop the shadows turning black (within the chosen colour space). But as you don't know in advance whether the images are going to print too dark, or the shadows are turning black, you can't really set these for a one-size fits all scenario.
So there are not many settings to help you here.
You are actually moving into the realm of defining your product. You could, for example, ask the client which site they intend to publish the photos on, research that site and produce files optimized specifically for that site.
You also need to decide what size (resolution) files to give them for printing and whether you are happy giving away your full size images.
These choices will lead you to a number of a different files sizes as 'your product', all should be in sRGB colour space, and all with quality 10 or 11. For any client's who know how to make use of a wider clour space like Adobe RGB for printing, they will probably ask you up front to supply the print versions as such.
Next, for each size and usage, you now need to sharpen these images.
This is because sharpeing is best applied to images that have been resized to their intended output size and should be sharpened in accordance with how they will be viewed. Images displayed on computer screen generally need less sharpening than those that will be printed. Depening on the printer, the images may need some oversharpening in the file, in order to appear crisp and sharp in the print. As you won't be controlling the printing process you should probably avoid oversharpening. The bottom line is, if people are taking on the task of their own printing, they'll need to figure out what they are doing to get good results, or use a commercial printer.
Andy

Best QT export option for laptop presentation

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for