CS3 WMV encoding better than CS4 with AME?

FYI - I am not going to mention audio here as I have not had any problems with it.
I edit presentations (video headshots combined with slides with text, graphs, pictures etc) that are 15-60 min long. These all currently get posted online. We use WMV as we are rebuilding our site with lots of silverlight. I have 2 machines, one is running CS3 and the other is CS4. when I encoded things in CS3 (2 pass VBR@286avg 640x480) the thing comes out beautiful. Everything is legible and when it goes full screen it looks great for the bitrate. It takes 4X the video length to encode and I can't batch encode like AME in CS4. So an 30 min source takes 2 hours and basically locks that machine until it's done.
When I choose the EXACT same settings in CS4 I get junk. Sure it takes a lot less time (that is mainly due to the processor, mem, etc) but it is nearly worthless. The only difference I can physically see is that CS3 uses WMEncodingHelper.exe and CS4 AME does not.
Does anyone know of a way to use WMEncodingHelper in CS4? Yes I've read a ton of post with "push it to AVI and then encode with WME". I actually have Expression and that looks great. But again I am dealing with 15-60min videos that in AVI form take up jabba-the-hut sized storage. I am also trying to get a bunch done at a time. I don't mind leaving the machine on and letting it rip all night knocking out 5-6 presentations with AME but not if the quality is junk.
Too many things I like about CS4 but how can the encoding be worse?
Below are screen shots of the encoded videos and the settings.
From CS3:
From CS4 AME:
Settings (from CS4 but I promise they are identical to CS3 I spent 4 hours today making sure it was the case):
Any help would be appriciated.
- Alan

poweredbydeign wrote:
The bottom one is below the preview monitor.
Just a note: the quality setting associated with the Source and Program monitors has no impact on the quality of exports sent to AME. It only affects the redraw of the video preview in the monitors. The Maximum Quality setting in AME is a different story--that does impact the export quality.

Similar Messages

PS CS3 Noise Filter better than PSElements 6 Noise Filter ?

PS CS3 Noise Filter better than PSElements 6 Noise Filter ?

I appreciate very much you responding and clarifying to see if somebody else does know.
Actually the Noise Filter has five selections to choose from.
I'm most interested in the Dust & Scratches tool. And, very surprised not to find a lot of 'discussion' about it, in fact almost none.
This whole Dust & Scratches Removal thing has got me scratching my butt trying to figure out if any of it by any software is NOT mostly hype.
(long reply follows)
"Retouching" tools like Dust & Scratches Removal seem to be useable only on a 1-by-1 file basis, with lots of 'manual' tweeking required, not as an Auto function to batches of lots of files at the same time.
Which in hindsight from experiences and what I've learned from those, makes sense, but, does not help me.
I have now concluded that 'retouching' some things like Dust & Scratches can only be done on a 1-file-at-a-time basis and takes quite a bit of 'manual' tweeking effort. And works IF one is capable of understanding how to do it. Otherwise, it - meaning me - only seems to make things worse instead of better.
My journey started last year when I got a German Braun Slide Scanner that included ICE, as well as Noise Reduction, which, like the included GEM and ROC only seemed to make things worse instead of better, especially worse when applying the same settings to every slide being scanned.
I have to process 100s or 1,000s of slides, and soon old photos too, at a price that most people can or are willing to pay, which is very low because of the numbers of slides and photos involved, so it's imperative for me to have Auto Tools to apply to batches of files, instead of spending a lot of time 'manually' tweeking each and every file one at a time.
With the scanner, the ICE and other tools can only be used during the actual scanning of each slide, not after scanning on the resulting file. And those 'tools' invariably remove too much, details of faces and other stuff one wants to preserve, and fuzzy the focus.
The settings that work on the very first slide or photo do not work for any other. So, I had to turn off those tools altogether.
There was a software suite recommended for the scanner for after-scanning work, which was a European version of Photoshop, costing about as much as PS, but from the Trial version I couldn't see any benefit to getting it.
I tried various Retouching programs for much less money, many not worth even trying, and again, even for those that did do what I needed to any degree, ran in to the same thing. Way too much time required for 'manually' tweeking each and every file 1 at a time, and never getting a good result because I'm no good at doing that.
THEN I recently got a Kodak Photo Scanner that does photos like the German scanner does slides, only, it does photos a LOT faster. It will scan up to 20 pre-loaded standard thickness photos of various sizes and orientations - in about 25 seconds.
But again, the problem with Dust & Scratches.
There's a program suite for after-scanning 'retouching' available for the Kodak Photo Scanner - but they want $ 700 for that, and it's pretty much a clone of Photoshop.
SO,
when I saw the comparison list between PS CS3 and the Extended version saying the Extended has a better Noise Filter,
It got me wondering..........

Encore CS5.5 Libraries - same, better than CS4?

Hey folks - just wondering whether Encore CS5.5 includes all the libraries we got in CS4. I'm on a Windows 7 64-bit machine and I'm running Prod Premium CS4 now. I just got the CS5.5 Prod Prem in the mail yesterday but I haven't installed it yet. My plan is to uninstall CS4 first since I don't anticipate needing it. But I am wondering about the Encore libraries.
Is there any reason to keep the CS4 libraries installed?
I ask because CS4 Prod Prem came with 4 disks + a Content Disk + a Learning Disk. CS5.5 includes just 4 disks total.
guess I'll find out when I install CS5.5, but I plan to uninstall CS4 first. So I wondered whether I should keep anything from CS4 on my machine.
Thanks for any light you can shed on this.
And Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays!

I installed CS5 only on my new machine when I made the double upgrade (PC and CS5). I left CS3 and CS4 installed on my other machine. I find it handy, but primarily for testing questions other users have. I always use CS5 for work.
There have been a few issues where a bug is introduced and users say it helped to have CS4 as a workaround.
But if I were doing what you are doing today for a production only machine, I wouldn't bother to uninstall CS4. But I might pick that moment for a fresh install of Windows, in which case I would not install CS4.
I think Adobe had a strong recommendation not to install CS4 over CS5 (which you are not planning).
Once upon a time, the Encore libraries were apparently "extra" and installed from a disk called "functional content." The CS4 and CS5 functional content disk is NOT such content. When you install from disks, you automatically install the Encore libraries.
I can't compare CS4 and CS5 directly, but the Encore Library folder for CS3, CS4, and CS5 has files/folders respectively 1316/20, 1318/20, 1316/20. A "quick contents" compare in winmerge between CS3 and CS4 had only 4 differences (for example, CS3 used a mov and CS4 m2v for one of the motion menus).
The interesting (non)difference is that they do not appear to ahve changed the par of the menus form the pre-CS4 days. If you open any of the menus directly in Photoshop, it says the par appears to be incorrect and asks if you want to correct it. (I say no.) If you use "edit in photoshop" from Encore, CS4 and CS5 does not ask (it is obviously making the correction, probably upon import to Encore). Encore CS3 makes no such adjustment.
What this means to me is the the Encore library menus are the old menus with the old pars. It doesn't matter much; there would be only a bit of distortion. I haven't tested to see if there is any. But for me it is evidence that the menus in CS5 are the same ones from at least CS3.
That said, you can simply copy the library folder to another location until you determine whether you need it.

Is using Media Encoder faster than Transcoding with Encore?

I'm fairly new to the Adobe video side of things, I just switched over from Apple but I am really liking what I'm working with. I've been using the Adobe Dynamic link to edit and auther DVDs. It's nice to not have to overload my computer with exported movies, but it seems to take a very long time to transcode within Encore. What seems to be much quicker is exporting the file out of Premiere and then using Media Encoder to transcode it using the highest quality DVD preset (and switched it to CBR 9 Mbps since my video is only 10 minutes long). I guess I'm curious if this is the method that others use or if most people use Dynamic link to author DVDs.
Thanks,
Joel

The problems some users experience tend to involve Bluray and dynamic link.
For DVDs, I use dynamic link and like it. I do set the preference (available with CS5 and above when using Transcode Now ) for Encore to transcode movie assets using AME, and I transcode with transcode now prior to doing a build.
I do not have a CUDA card, but my understanding is that AME is using 64 bit.

My old iPhone works better than 3G with Exchange!

So my battery dies after about 4 hours with Exchange Server and Push enabled.
I configured my old, 1st gen iPhone with exchange and push.
I configured my new, 3G iPhone with exchange and push.
Sitting them side by side, I noticed something peculiar:
The 3G iPhone was checking for mail about once every 15 seconds. The old iPhone didn't! When I sent mail to myself (from another account to Exchange), both phones got it at the same time.
What gives? They're both running on the same version 2.0.1.
No wonder my iPhone dies so fast, it's checking 4 times a minute!
Help!
Message was edited by: Sajji
Message was edited by: Sajji

Update for those interested:
I spent roughly 2 hours on the phone with support - which, by the way, was a very nice experience. After going through a variety of different options, it turns out that I simply had a defective phone. It should never be checking with Exchange Server every 10 seconds. The tech, Neil (sp), was very nice and setup an appointment at my nearby Apple store and that was it. Just went there and exchanged it - everything works perfectly now.
Thanks Neil.
Sajji

Premiere CS4 - Encoding with AME ridiculously slow

Hello there.
After having read many threads on various forums, I have not come to a single hint as to why AME is encoding any type of video materal extremely slow. I'm sorry if this question has been asked many times on this forum, but maybe someone has come up with a working solution?
My computer specifications are:
Windows Vista 32bit (yes I know, upgrade is needed)
Intel Quad Core Q9000 @ 2 GHz
4 GB RAM
Nvidia GeForce 9700M GT - 512mb
500GB sATA HDD @ 5400 rpm
This is a notebook. I use Premiere CS4 and AME4 with the most current updates (v4.1)
Here is what I usually do:
I export my project media from Premier to AME with the appropriate format and encoder settings, close Premiere and kill all background tasks. My RAM usage is now at around 1.4 GB (out of 3 GB!).
In this case, I'd use the built-in MPEG2 codec with PAL settings (720x576 - 25i - 8Mbit/sec), the source file is in MPEG4 @ 20Mbit and 10 minutes long. I started the encoding process and it was slowing down from 10 minutes initially to a frustrating render time of 60 minutes. Why?
I have used VirtualDub and TMPGEnc, both achieved, compared to AME, incredibly low render times, a bit higher than double realtime. When I use AME the same way, as encoder for an avi file only and not a Premiere project, it is losing by 6-7 times of the other programs render time.
Second scenario:
I have 20 seconds uncompressed avi material (600Mbit/sec) and like to convert it to MPEG4 with AME. MPEG4 settings are at 50Mbit, I-frames only, 50fps and progressive. I started the encoding again and at first, AME was rushing through 1/4th of the progress bar in 5 seconds, and then slowing down to an overall encoding time of 50 (!) minutes and it ended about 52 minutes later.
During this rendering I had the windows resourcemonitor (of the taskmanager) open and checked the access rate to my hard disk. For the entire duration of 50 minutes, AME read between 50 megabyte and 125 megabyte per second on the hard disk. The file itself was less than 2 GB large - what on earth could it read? Also, my RAM usage came close to 2,8 GB but never reached 3 GB or higher.
Does anyone have an idea or is it just that freeware programs are superior to a costly AME?

I have already run that test about 4 hours prior to writing this thread. Now I'm not at this computer, but from top of my head the results were:
Total 180 (about)
Export Avi 38 (not entirely certain, could be up to 10 higher)
Encode MPEG 90 (not entirely certain, could be 20 lower or higher)
Render Time 7 (the only number I recall correctly)
I'm well aware my hard disk isn't fast - but why should VirtualDub be able to encode a 2gb uncompressed avi clip with a duration of 20 seconds to DivX in about a 1/3rd real time/8fps (using 50mbit, i-frames and 50fps and amazing quality) while AME takes 50 minutes (1/200th realtime) for the same file with the integrated MPEG4 encoder?
Now, I know that those are different codecs, yet their data reduction works on a similar base. From my point of view, there's not much that could explain such a high discrepancy of performance on the hardware side, other than AME just does not like my computer configuration. I know my computer is very capable to perform way better than that, just with about any other program but AME, and that is a royal pain.
Unfortunately, I am unable to install a second HDD in this notebook, because it is full. I do know it could perform better using a secondary HDD, but I have also encoded files with Adobe Premiere CS3, and that performed way better than CS4 on the same computer.

Is CS3 better for working with RAW images than Elements 6?

Hi all,
I am trying to find out if it is worth buying CS3 in stead of elements 6. Surprisingly, nobody has been able to tell me what the difference exactly is.
The best I got so far was that elements is a trimmed down version of CS3 but what more can I do with CS3?
As I am in England, CS3 would cost me about $1100, as opposed to $650 in the US, which is a bit much if you don’t know exactly what you get for that amount.
It says something on the adobe features section about BETTER raw processing, but not compared to what. Old version? Other software? Better than nothing?
I will be running it under XP, and the only use will be to optimise images from a digital camera in RAW format, 90%, and a jpeg (10)%, partially for web use, partially for prints.
The most common things are:
Correcting exposure when pics are unevenly lit.
Correcting color temperature.
Removing unwanted parts of a picture e.g. somebody stepping into the picture, advertising signs or copyrighted material.
Altering color of small parts of an image like that of a single flower in a bouquet.
Removing blemishes in portraits.
The photos will always stay single photos, I can not foresee any use for slide shows, animations, video or anything related.
From what I have been able to find out so far, it seems that Elements 6 will do all this and I don’t need to spend the extra $1000, or should I?

I have not used Photoshop Elements since version 2.0. In that version it was very similar to Photoshop as far as how the interface was designed. There were a few key elements that were missing such as the Curve adjustment. It is my understanding that there is a free download available from a third party source that will provide that capability.
As far as Camera Raw is concerned, you only have the adjustments that are on the basic panel and the details panel. That means you don't have all of the hue/saturation/luminance adjustments, or lens correction, or the capability to create presets, or to calibrate ACR specifically for your camera. As I understand it, it is not possible to load multiple images into ACR so that you can apply changes to all of them at once. And I don't believe you have the option of working in ACR in 16-bit mode.
With Photoshop Elements it is not possible to record actions to enable you to do batch processing of your images. What you have is a good quality basic single image photo editor.
I cannot tell you which to purchase. I don't know what you are accustomed to, nor do I fully understand your expectations. There are trial versions of both programs that you can download and try for 30 days to see what you think. They are fully functioning programs for that trial period, which should be ample time for you to determine which program will give you the most value.

Problems creating Blu Ray Discs with AME Presets in CS4

After several weeks wasted (months back) with an ATI 5750 graphics card in Win 7/and CS4 (not working correctly) - I finally resolved by swapping with a NVidia GTS250 card .....but all my troubles are not over yet ....
I'm running Premiere CS4 and have finally just got down to testing creation of a Blu Ray test disc from some AVCHD 1920x1080 HD footage I am editing from my new camera.
My work in CS4 is just testing at present as I used to use CS3 [still have on my dual core machine with Matrox RTX2] - and have successfully created Blu Ray discs from HDV material in CS3 - but using Blu Ray MPEG 2 settings.
New machine Win 7 - 64 bit
Premiere CS4 is at 4-2-0 version
Encore at 4-0-1 version
These are the last updates
I've selected a short test piece (about 2 mins)on Premiere timeline and initially tried Media export using Adobe Media encoder.
I selected H264 BluRay codec in media encoder. Hi quality 1080 25 fps.(PAL)
This creates dual MP4 Video and Audio streams
Encode process goes OK, just slightly slower than real time, (I'm using i7-930 Quad Core and Win 7 64 Bit)
Now - when I come to input the encoded video file into Encore as an Asset - Encore freezes and the whole machine locks up !!!
Audio file imports OK but the Encore software does not like the encoded Video file
I've re-installed Premiere and Encore twice in case of bad install. It wasn't that.
I also found Adobe Media player couldn't play the file created by AME either - but it would play on a Premiere timeline?
So is Adobe Media encoder messing up here ?
So - .....3 hours of testing later ....I stumble on a Support thread from someone on the Forum that they found AME preset has "HIGH" in the Encoding Profile Preset - when it should be MAIN ?.
Not sure what these settings do - but tried changing that parameter and re-encoded the Video file with H264 BluRay setting - all to no avail as when I try importing again the machne just locks up ?
My final search in Premiere help file about creating BluRay discs ONLY talks about using MPEG 2 BluRay setting for creating BluRay discs
It does not specify H264. Why is that?
Can one of the moderators / experts confirm if H264 Blu ray format is supported for BluRay disc creation in CS4 please??
Better still please tell me the exact settings for Adobe Media encoder so it will import into Encore without having to be transcoded again.
H264 should work - yes ?
Final comment
As an alternative method, I tried sending the short timeline in Premiere (using Dynamic Link) to Encore to test that route for making a BluRay disc
Bearing in mind the sequence is only about 2 mins long - when I ty to Transcode using the engine within Encore - the process takes a ridiculously long time and twice it has crashed just before the end of the process......
Can someone explain why the encode process in Encore takes such a long time as I thought it used the Adobe Media encoder engine as well.?
Adobe Media Encoder is much faster used stand alone mode.
Encore seems to not use that ?
Anyway - conclusion is that using Encore to encode the tmeline is a non starter as it takes too long.
why so slow on such a fast machine?....I know HD encoding is demanding but not that demanding with a decent machine.
So the question is ....
How do I encode in the most efficient and fastest way possible (using H264) for Blu Ray authoring into Encore without need for more Transcodes?
Any help or suggestions welcome as I'm now hitting my head against the wall :-)
I have not gone through Adobe Support desk as it is usually a waste of time.{Dear VP of Adobe Customer Service - please do get this sorted out in the near future if you want to retain loyal customers....}
I cannot believe how disappointing CS4 is turning out to be.
After investing in a very fast PC machine etc the whole user experience is somewhat of a let down.
Why so many issues for such a small test??

Picking up on my original post about H264 - as I have a dual boot machine I also have a clean installed Win 7 /64bit partition which I use for general bits of work.
On that I have CyberPowerDVD SW installed which plays all Video files fine including BluRay material etc.
Interestingly when I try to play the file that AME has created from the BluRay H264 preset it says 'It cannot play the file as it is a format it does not recognise...'
This is really weird and would suggest AME is not encoding the file corrrectly??
I have already removed and made a re-install of CS4 on my main [video editing] partition but there were some fragments of CS4 left intact
How do I completely remove everything?
I tried the CS4 clean script but it said it relied on Microsoft CLean Up utility and gave a link
When I loooked on Microsoft web site the link to download it had been removed?
Also Adobe say the CS4 remove script is no longer supported ?
Can anyone advise on the correct tool/procedure to completely remove CS4 from a Win 7/64bit installation so I can then try re-install of CS4 one more time....in case the installation is corrupt in some way
I can't explain why I am having this problem otherwise if other people find AME encodes OK with H264 BluRay preset.

AME render time 2x SLOWER in CS6 than CS4

I just upgrade to CS6. A good portion of my projects are very long continuing professional education videos for streaming on the web. AME4 could render an 8-hour video into baseline, H264 700x290 in about 12 hours. (I know, strange, custom frame size. It's for side-by-side speaker and overhead presentation.) I opened the same CS4 project in CS6. It was resaved for the new version. I also created a new sequence and copied the files over, just to be sure. With EXACTLY the same export settings, render time is about 27 hours!
AME4 was not a 64 bit app, whereas AME6 is. So, my 16 GB of ram should be put to better use, I would think. According to Premiere, ram available for other apps is around 13GB. In task manager performace, processor is at the ceiling but memory use is only 6GB:
System specs are:
Media drive is Western Digital Caviar Black 2 TB SATA III 7200 RPM 64 MB Cache
GPU= AMD RADEON HD 6570 DP 1GB PCI EXPRESS 2.0 X16
How can I get AME6 to access more memory? Why in the world would the render speed more than DOUBLE with a newer version?!? Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!

Yes. A CUDA card is on my wishlist, but my company may be tapped out for a while after new ram and an upgrade to CS6.
I did queue this one. I wasn't aware that this would make a difference. I'll try the direct export method next time.
RE: "encoding times have increased with the newer more feature rich versions" Really? So was I just mislead/misinformed that a 64 bit version of this encoder would be faster? Wow, that sucks. But is there no way for AME to access more than 6GB of my ram? I guess the slowness may be the price you pay for stability. My 8-hr project failed two times in AME4. I have 5 hours left of encoding on AME6. It's my last, best hope for being able to deliver this project on time.

Does any body have any opinions on how much better CS6 is than Cs4?

Does any body have any opinions on how much better CS6 is than Cs4? The reason I ask is I am trying to convince my business partner that CS6 is worth buying

My pattern has been that every other new version made it worth my while. I spent very little time working in CS4, since I went from CS3, to CS4 with an immediate upgrade to CS5. Then from CS5 to CS5.5 with an immediate upgrade to CS6. I have not gone to the cloud, so cannot comment on the features there. I would still evaluate your price for CS6 against the rental expense.
I like Todd Kopriva's page laying out the CS6 new/changes features:
Premiere Pro CS6: what’s new and changed
That page contains other links (e.g. CS5 and CS5.5 changes).
In addition to cc_merchant's points about 64 bit (which were HUGE and for CS6 included Encore going to 64 bit), I found these items from the "new" list as important to me:
adjustment layers (HUGE)
expanded multi-camera editing, with more multicam angles and improved interface (I hated only having 4 angles, although that usually worked)
improved color features, including integration with SpeedGrade and redesigned Three-Way Color Corrector effect
improved workflows with other applications in Adobe Creative Suite, as well as with Final Cut Pro and Avid software
faster Adobe Media Encoder, redesigned to make authoring for multiple outputs and mobile devices easier (batch processing was added with CS4, but it wasn't until CS6, with other enhancements that I really worked it)
enhanced Adobe Encore for creation of DVDs, Blu-ray Discs, and web DVDs (Bluray chapter playlists finally; I have used the flash output, which has gotten better at each step)

PP CS5/5.5 chroma key better than AE CS4?

Hi everyone.
I think I read somewhere a while back that the chroma key in PP CS5/5.5 is better than AE CS4's Keylight. In fact, the PP effect may be an improved Keylight , but I can't recall this for certain.
Can anyone verify this?
Thx.
Paul

I've keyed with the same camera for a couple of years now, and it's got a pretty narrow band in which greens are easily keyed. DVCPRO HD is not well-reputed for its handling of greens, or at least as a result of it's use with an older 1/3" sensor. I've gotten the best results with the exposure on the screen at about 50-60IRE, but that's just in my scenarios. Most of my material is recorded to P2 cards (though I did one long shoot with OnLo and a green screen), but the footage encoding is the same--it's all DVCPRO HD. I've got some stuff that I did recently that keyed like buttah with Ultra--I literally had a solid key in 20 seconds with just picking the background color and tweaking a couple parameters.
So, since "brightly lit" and "lower lit" are subjective terms, it's hard to give you any specific recommendations other than to try to stick in a particular exposure range. All I know is that when your green screen footage is evenly lit and at mid-range exposure, Ultra does a pretty good job with minimal effort.

Free dvd maker is better than encore cs4

Hi Forum,
OS: Win Vista Ultimate 64bit
Encore CS4
Windows DVD Maker
I have shot some footage and have they in dvd pal format.
I was able to create a motion menu, slide show and advd with encore cs4. i could play the dvd on pcs and normal dvd player on the tv.
But: Slide Show and all Movies are flickering. Menu also.
Than i tryed Windows DVD Maker (Free when you have Ultimate Vista).
I used there absolutely the same videos and photos. Result: Slide show and video quality was perfect and without flickering problems.
I spent a lot of money and o can not believe that this free tool dvd maker is better than encore cs4.
so please help me to solve this problem.
I really don't know what i could try.
Thank you and see you soon.

Hi,
Could somebody tell me which settings i should set on premiere cs4 to export in a good format to import to encore cs4?
Maybe i could solve my problem on using the right settings on exporting a video from premiere cs4.
Thank you

Is there a way that i can downgrade my iOS 7.1 on my iPhone 4 to iOS 6xx? battery life not good, and performance isn't better than iOS 6.. Please apple i am really disappointed with iOS 7 on my iPhone 4

Is there a way that i can downgrade my iOS 7.1 on my iPhone 4 to iOS 6xx? battery life not good, and performance isn't better than iOS 6.. Please apple i am really disappointed with iOS 7 on my iPhone 4, it can runs great on iPhone above 4 such as 5/5s/etc.. iPhone 4 just good with iOS 6...

No.

How do I make Indesign CS3 the default rather than Indesign CS4?

Indesign 6.0.2 is driving me crazy, that spinning ball spins for every character I type. It takes 5 minutes to write one word. I want to use CS3 instead, which works great with dynamic spelling, which I have turned off in CS4, but don't want to dump CS4. How do I make CS3 the default? When I open CS3 and save, it saves it as CS4 so to open it I can't click on it I have to open CS3 first. Illustrator in CS4 works great.

bdquilts wrote:
Indesign 6.0.2 is driving me crazy, that spinning ball spins for every character I type. It takes 5 minutes to write one word. I want to use CS3 instead, which works great with dynamic spelling, which I have turned off in CS4, but don't want to dump CS4. How do I make CS3 the default? When I open CS3 and save, it saves it as CS4 so to open it I can't click on it I have to open CS3 first. Illustrator in CS4 works great.
The only way to make a mac recognize CS3 as default would be to completely remove CS4.
In OSX new version trumps older versions. you can however have both apps open drop files you know are cs3 on the CS3 dock Icon or an Alias on your desktop. CS3 does not save as CS4 its just that the OS makes all ID files look like the newest version.

Is the MP4 export in Premiere CS6 better than in CS3 ?

I am thinking of upgrading from CS3 to CS6 Premiere Pro.
The CS3 exporting MP4 is not that good, and I actually find Sony Vegas does a better job. Is the Premiere Pro export in CS6 better than in CS3?
Also, are there any issues importing CS3 projects into CS6 ?

I upgraded from CS3 to CS6.
The H.264 (MP4) exports are so much better it is amazing. There used to be tutorials on how to get good YouTube videos. Now we just export to a YouTube (or Vimeo) preset in HD and it shows up darn near perfect.
I can import CS3 projects into CS6 without a problem.

CS3 WMV encoding better than CS4 with AME?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for