Editing large stills in HD

I need to edit a sequence with dramatic pans and zooms of stills that need to be in DVC Pro HD 1080i 60. This means that my images have to be very large in order to not have a pixelated look when closely zoomed in on. No worries there, got the big tiff files.
The problem is while editing in FCP 5, even with a super fast SATA II harddrive connection, moving these massive images, and making transitions and putting filters on the images lags drastically because there so big, though they need to be in order to get those great zooms, pans and so on in HD.
Is there a way to edit these large stills in a smaller project file, or offline, with smaller image sizes, and then convert it to a larger project with the larger images? Any ideas? Thanks,
-Pat

Ok - I'll admit I've never had to use an edl - but that's likely to be your sol'n to this - staying in fcp.
Save out your stills in dv size - make a new dv proj (16:9, I guess just for appearance sake) work in dv & get everything the way you want, filters etc; - and I'll have to let someone else lead you thru' the next bit.
But as I understand it you export out your edl (or is xml the way to go ? dunno) then bring that into your hurky big project. The manual will have this covered I'm sure. never read that bit ....
edit: ah here you go to start.
vol 4 page 54 on
Offline/Online Editing Workflows
The offline/online editing process in Final Cut Pro consists of the following steps:
Step 1: Set up and capture media at low resolution
You can log and capture your footage directly to low-resolution, offline-quality media files. Alternatively, you can log and capture your footage at full resolution, and then use the Media Manager to create low-resolution media files for offline editing. The latter method is useful if you want to have both full-resolution and low-resolution media for two different systems simultaneously.
Step 2: Edit with offline-quality (low-resolution) media files
You edit just as you would with any other footage. Because you are using low- resolution footage, you can fit much more footage on your hard disk, and use a portable PowerBook editing system.
Step 3: Create a sequence for recapturing media at full resolution
When you finish editing your low-resolution sequence, you use the Media Manager to create a copy with full-resolution settings. For this step, you choose the Create Offline option in the Media pop-up menu.
Important: It is important to understand the difference between clips and media files when performing this step. This option only creates a new sequence with new sequence clips at full-resolution, but no new media files are created. Once you have a
sequence with full-resolution settings, you can recapture your media files at full- resolution. Also, the word “offline” in the Create Offline option actually refers to creating clips whose media files are offline, and doesn’t actually relate to the offline/online editing process. For more information, see “Clips Described By Their Properties” on
page 31.

Similar Messages

  • 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

  • Edit one still image in PS and entire timeline needs re-rendering in FCP6

    I've been using FCE 3.5 and FCP5 for quite some time. My projects usually have a large number of still image pct files in them. Before changingg to FCP6 (because I'm working on a 1080p project) when i would need to edit a still image that was already in my time;line, I would open it in Photoshop, make the changes, save it, and when I returned to FCP 5 or FCE3.5, only that portion of the timeline where the item appears would need to be re-rendered. But with FCP6, even if the edited image is only in aa small part of the timeline, the entire timeline is red and needs to be re-rendered. Any idea what is causing this major problem? I never change the dimensions of the file or the type. I might just adjust brightnesss ro do some in-painting, etc.

    Cick anywhere in your timeline. Type Command + 0 {zero} to see your sequence settings. Either report those settings or post a screen shot here.
    MtD

  • How can I edit a still image so that I can float it over the video?

    I would like to edit a still image so that I can float it over the video - How would I save the image in Photoshop so that just the image and not the background can be imported into Final Cut and the footage behind it still shows up?
    Thanks

    You need to either create an Alpha channel or cut out the area of interest and paste it into a transparent Photoshop document. You can save the former as PSD, TIFF or PNG. Save the latter as TIFF with transparency enabled (shows up in TIFF Options at step 2 of the save dialog).

  • Lightroom 4.1 RC2 (1:1 previews, slow editing large files, stops working)

    I am running win7 64 bit with 12GB RAM and installed  Lightroom 4.1 RC2. 1) I am (trying) to edit large panoramic files, and the 1:1 preview images do not seem to be saved from session to session. Images take quite a while to load in Library and even longer in Develop. 2) There seems to be a major memory leak. Upon startup I can edit a couple of panos, but then the machine becomes very slow and basically quits working. 3) I don't see "x64" in the tile bar. Is it running 64 bit?

    Running Win7 64-bit here as well and installed LR 4.1 RC2 last week.  There is definitely a memory leak of some sort, as I too am experiencing major latency after a few minutes of editing.  When I check memory usage in Task Manager, I'm seeing more than 2GB (of 4GB) of RAM being consumed by LR and my machine is running like molasses.

  • Dragging a large still image from the browser into the viewer crashes FCP

    Okay, I've not seen this problem until just a couple days ago but was wondering if it was just me or if everyone has this problem? I've found a work-around, but let me explain the problem first.
    I'm creating a growing up photo montage. I scanned all of the pictures myself at 300 dpi (as I've always done in the past) and saved them as TIF files. Some pictures as relatively small, i.e. 3.5 mb is size and do just fine, but it appears anytime I drop a picture into the viewer in preparation for the the timeline, it will crash FCP if the image file is any larger than about 5 or 5.5 MB. Now I know there is a limit on the resolution of a still and it shouldn't be any larger than 4000 pixels in either direction, but that is not my problem, the problem appears to occur with large files. I've used large still files before in past projects without any problem, so this is why I'm stumped. I've went as far as trashing my preferences, but that didn't change anything. I've even tested a still image from a past project that was something around 9 MB (or was it 19 mb?) in any case, it also crashed FCP but... I've used that picture before in past projects without any problem. I even created a new test project just in case my project file itself had a problem.
    My work-around is to simply drop the still image from the browser directly into the timeline, thus bypassing the viewer. This works every time without a hitch. I can even double-click on the still now setting in the timeline to load it into the viewer so I can add effects or keyframes or whatever without any problems (thank goodness). So, has anyone else experienced this problem or is it just me?

    Is this image saved in a colorspace mode that is anything other than RGB?
    CMYK & Grayscale images will cause problems.
    Some light reading regarding your choice of 300 dpi: http://www.scantips.com/no72dpi.html
    Unless you plan on panning and zooming your images, the best procedure is to use one of the video preset templates in Photoshop and paste your content into it. Scale and position using the Transform controls. For best results save as a TIFF without compression. Don't forget, always in RGB colorspace.

  • Performance Issues when editing large PDFs

    We are using Adobe 9 and X Professional and are experiencing performance issues when attempting to edit large PDF files.  (Windows 7 OS). When editing PDFs that are 200+ pages, we are seeing pregnated pauses (that feel like lockups), slow open times and slow to print issues. 
    Are there any tips or tricks with regard to working with these large documents that would improve performance?

    You said "edit." If you are talking about actual editing, that should be done in the original and a new PDF created. Acrobat is not a very good editing tool and should only be used for minor, critical edits.
    If you are talking about simply using the PDF, a lot depends on the structure of the PDF. If it is full of graphics, it will be slow. You can improve this performance by using the PDF Optimize to reduce graphic resolution and such. You may very likely have a bloated PDF that is causing the problem and optimizing the structure should help.
    Be sure to work on a copy.

  • Editing large amounts of data

    Hi -
    I am helping to design a new application at my company. We're currently using JBoss 5 & JSF 1.2 and we happen to be using Richfaces 3.3.2. The application is to implement a web based solution to replace a very large spreadsheet that my users have been using to manage their work. The spreadsheet has a large number of columns, about 90. For better or worse, they have gotten used to working with their data in Excel, they love Excel and are all really good using it.
    I am trying to provide them with an efficient interface that allows them to quickly navigate through their data and view and update multiple rows & columns on one screen. I have too many columns to display on one screen. I can try to group them into tabs and create a series of editable datatables, but I think this seems like a klunky interface; they would need to navigate from page to page and from tab to tab - I think this will drive them crazy. I can also export their data to Excel, let them manipulate the data in Excel and import it back in. They would be able to quickly update their data, but this seems like a bit of a hack and a possible validation nightmare when I read the data back in.
    I've seen some ajax based spreadsheet type jsf components, but I don't have any experience with them.
    Has anyone had a similar situation with their JSF app? What was your approach? I'm basically trying to provide them with a JSF solution that's as close to Excel as possible. This may be impractical, I'm not sure.
    Any thoughts or feedback will be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

    Speaking out of experience: trying to move users that are used to one very specific system to a web interface is a big risk and possibly a dead end.
    I had the same problem when I had to create a replacement application for an old system built for Dos; the replacement was a web application with web forms and whatever - all very simple and it functioned. The end-users couldn't work with it however because they were used to moving between fields with the cursor keys and such; using the mouse and the tab key was too confusing (it didn't help that all these people were seniors...). I could get close with some insane javascript hacking, but the entire project was basically a big cash drain because the user interface was exactly the opposite of what the users were used to.
    Now my story takes place before Ajax was even known, so perhaps with some Ajax magic and prebuilt rich components you could hack something together that works for the users. But I see only one way to get there: mock ups. Don't start creating the full system until you have something mocked up that the users feel they can comfortably work with.
    I know I didn't answer your question directly because you still don't know WHAT to put in your first mock up, but I hope my previous experiences can guard you from some future troubles.

  • [BUG] Performance Issue When Editing Large FIles

    Are other people experiencing this on the latest JDevelopers (11.1.1.4.0 and the version before it) ?
    People in the office have been experiencing extremely slow performance happening seemingly at random while editing Java files. We have been using JDev for almost 10 years and this has only become an issue for us recently. Typically we only use the Java editing and the database functionality in JDev.
    I have always felt that the issue has been related to network traffic created by Clearcase and have never really paid attention, but a few days ago after upgrading to the latest version of JDev, for the first time I started having slowdowns that are affecting my speed of work and decided to look into it,
    The main symptom is the editor hanging for an unknown reason in the middle of typing a line (even in a comment) or immediately after hitting the carriage return. All PCs in the office have 2Gig or more RAM and are well within recommended spec.
    I've been experimenting for a few days to try and determine what exactly is at the root of the slowness. Among the things I have tried:
    o cutting Clearcase out of the equation; not using it for the project filesystem; not connectiing to it in JDev
    o Not using any features other than Java editing in JDev (no database connections)
    o never using split panes for side by side editing
    o downloading the light version of JDev
    o Increasing speed of all pop-ups/dynamic helpers to maximum in the options
    o disabling as many helpers and automations as possible in the options
    None of these have helped. Momentary freezes of 3-5 seconds while editing are common. My basic test case is simply to move the cursor from one line to another and to type a simple one-line comment that takes up most of the line. I get the freeze most usually right after typing the "//" to open the comment - it happens almost 100% of the time.
    I have however noticed a link to the file size/complexity.
    If I perform my tests on a small/medium sized file of about 1000 lines (20-30 methods) performance is always excellent.
    If I perform my test on one of our larger files 10000 lines ( more than 100 methods) the freezes while editing almost always occur.
    It looks like there is some processor intensive stuff going on (which cannot be turned off via the options panel) which is taking control of the code editor and not completing in a reasonable amount of time on large Java files. I have a suspicion that it's somehow related to the gutter on the right hand side which show little red and yellow marks for run-time reports of compile errors and warnings and haven't found any way to disable it so I can check.

    Just a small follow-up....
    It looks like the problem is happening on only a single Java file in our product! Unfortunately it happens to be the largest and most often updated file in the project.
    I'm still poking around to figure out why JDev is choking consistently on this one particular file and not on any of the others. The size/complexity is not much bigger than the next largest which can be edited without problems. The problem file is a little unusual in that it contains a large number of static functions and members.
    Nice little mystery to solve.

  • Beginners guide screwed|Is impossible to edit large pages on the wiki

    When you're trying to edit a large page on the wiki you get this message:
    WARNING: This page is 40 kilobytes long; some browsers may have problems editing pages approaching or longer than 32kb. Please consider breaking the page into smaller sections.
    Firefox can handle the 40kb but not the 107kb of the Begginers Guide for example.
    And when you do a change, if you dont preview it you get a shiny blank page instead of the document.
    I was trying to add one line to the Oficcial installation guide and ended up breaking it into two parts (i move the apendix to another page) to be able to recover it's contents.
    Some other person form #archlinux that was helping me with this issue also accidentally override the text from the Beginners guide, and we can't roll back it. So, any WikiAdmin can roll back the changes on the Beginners guide? and tell us (the normal users) how to edit long pages.
    Thanks
    Last edited by __void__ (2009-01-21 16:34:47)

    __void__ wrote:
    When you're trying to edit a large page on the wiki you get this message:
    WARNING: This page is 40 kilobytes long; some browsers may have problems editing pages approaching or longer than 32kb. Please consider breaking the page into smaller sections.
    Firefox can handle the 40kb but not the 107kb of the Begginers Guide for example.
    And when you do a change, if you dont preview it you get a shiny blank page instead of the document.
    I was trying to add one line to the Oficcial installation guide and ended up breaking it into two parts (i move the apendix to another page) to be able to recover it's contents.
    Some other person form #archlinux that was helping me with this issue also accidentally override the text from the Beginners guide, and we can't roll back it. So, any WikiAdmin can roll back the changes on the Beginners guide? and tell us (the normal users) how to edit long pages.
    Thanks
    Some other person here, sorry about that accidental Beginner's guide trash up
    Mr.Elendig wrote:For future reference, don't edit the whole page at once, just edit a section of it. When you are logged in, every section have a 'edit' button/link.
    Got it!
    Last edited by zaggynl (2009-01-22 09:35:03)

  • How can I edit large amount of data using Acrobat X Pro

    Hello all,
    I need to edit a catalog that contains large amount of data - mainly the product price. Currently I can only export the document into excel file and then paste the new price onto the catalog using Acrobat X Pro one by one, which is extremely time-consuming. I am sure there's a better way to make this faster while keeping the accuracy of the data. Thanks a lot in advance if any one's able to help! 

    Hi Chauhan,
    Yes I am able to edit text/image via tool box, but the thing is the catalog contains more than 20,000 price data and all I can do is deleteing the orginal price info from catalog and replace it with the revised data from excel. Repeating this process over 20,000 times would be a waste of time and manpower... Not sure if I make my situation clear enough? Pls just ask away, I really hope to sort it out, Thanks! 

  • PSE 10 will not edit large picture files after it accepts them. After editing it either changes jpeg to psd or greys out the file.  What must I do?

    PSE 10 allows large picture files into the organizer and editor but after editing, saving, and closing, the jpeg returns to the organizer either with a psd file extension or as a greyed out broken photo icon . Why does it cause users to waste time editing files that are too large. How do I solve the problem?

    See:
    Photoshop Elements Help | Maximum image size limits in Photoshop Elements

  • Adobe premiere CC freezes when editing large files

    Hello
    Recently i had a project editing a one shot movie. Its a 11min movie, shot ot Canon 5D mark II ( 3.7 gb  MOV file )
    When i imported it in Premiere, i had so much problems. Anything i did, program freezed for 30s aprox. Im not talking about some major plugins or effects, its simple cut, or movie file 5s forward, or scale it a bit.
    Just saving takes ages.
    Im running on:
    System: Win 8 65bit
    Processor: Inter I7-2600K 3.4Ghz ( 8 cores )
    Graphic: Nvidia GeForce GTX 650 Ti
    Memory: 16 GB
    If anyone had a problem similar to this, or has a solution, please reply.
    Best regards,
    Srdjan

    Did you do the NEW ITEM process to be sure your sequence and video match?
    There is a link on page #5 in The PPro/Encore tutorial list http://forums.adobe.com/message/2276578
    Your file is not large... people here edit 2 hours or more... how many and what size hard drives do you have?

  • Editing multiple stills in the viewer?

    I have an animation comprised of a few thousand still png files with transparent backgrounds, overlaid on top of a gradient within FCE. I need to be able to edit all of these uniformly, in the same way, using the "motion" tab in the viewer, without having to go through them one by one. Is there any way to mass edit that number of frames, or give them the same setting, so they appear in the right place on screen?
    I tried putting them all into a separate sequence and using that sequence overlaid on top of the gradient, which lets me edit only one file, but when it renders there's some bad artifacts around the png files and it looks blurry.
    Any ideas?

    That was the trick I needed, thank you!!!

  • Video card recommendation for PPro and large stills

    I'll be using PPro CS5 to create a video mixing video and stills, some quite large for zooming purposes. From what I read here my video card should be at least 1.5 meg VRAM? Is more VRAM automatically a hotter, more power hungry card? Can I go to 3 meg with a card that won't fry eggs?

    Hotter, not really, more power hungry, yes. If you make it a custom to fry eggs @ around 50 degrees C or less when idle or below 65 C when under load, then you will probably succeed. However, not many people try that. Even overclocked by around 20% the load temps stay below 65 degrees C, at least in my case, but that is with the hotter and less efficient 480 with only 1.5 GB VRAM.
    The 3 GB 580 is nice.

Maybe you are looking for