Embedding a movie (slideshow) colors are more saturated

Embedding a movie (slideshow) in Acrobat Pro (9 + 11) the colors are changing. They are getting more saturated, a bit darker and have more contrast. The "preview-image" is the same the colors are changing when the movie starts playing. Does anybody has an idea?

Hello Fredelbert,
not yet seems to be a problem of acrobat. If you have a solution let me know.
Best wishes
[ private information removed - see http://forums.adobe.com/docs/DOC-3731 ]

Similar Messages

Label colors are more vibrant when you switch to column view

Mayby I am too picky but I noticed that *label colors are more vibrant when you switch to column view*. I guess label colors should always look the same on matter what view you are on.

ThisisGrey,
You can also by choose a different color profile in System Preferences...>Displays>Color>Display Profile: Uncheck "Show profiles for this display only," and experiment with a different profile. I personally had the most success with using the "Calibrate..." selection and creating a user calibrated profile for my screen.
;~)

Colors are too saturated

The color after power on the computer are saturated. Connect mini-dvi, disconnect mini-dvi, and OK.
Pictures: http://web.mac.com/fernandocarmona/iWeb/mi.mac/Fototeca.html
Sorry, my english is very bad
iMac G5 20" 2,1Ghz Mac OS X (10.4.3)

im having the sam prob i want to know what you did or if anyoen else can help me

Exported JPGs more saturated than appear in LR

I have LR5.3. I've only just noticed this. Not sure if it's been this way for a while or not. When I export from LR and make JPGs as sRGB they are more saturated. Also, when I view in the Web panel the images are more saturated. Is this normal?

U2410, there you go.
The answer to 1-3 is that they are not color managed. I've said this before, and repeat it here: An absolute requirement for using wide gamut displays is full color management. They should really come with a huge sticker across the screen to that effect, so that people didn't buy them without understanding the implications.
Save For Web can be made to behave. Check "Embed Color Profile", and "Convert to sRGB". Then set Preview to "Use Document Profile". None of these are default settings, as SFW assumes a completely non-color managed workflow. This is from a time when web browsers didn't have color management. It's outdated now, when most web browsers do (except Internet Explorer. Avoid that).
The thing is that your display has a native color space close to Adobe RGB. A non-color managed workflow assumes that the display is close to sRGB - as most traditional displays are. So an sRGB file will display roughly correctly on such a display even without color management. That's why sRGB is the "standard" color space for web and why you should always use that in any web context.
But to display correctly on a wide gamut monitor the RGB numbers have to be remapped into the monitor's native color space. That's not Adobe RGB, but something close. This is what the monitor profile will do, but only if the application is color managed and will actually use the monitor profile. Most apps will not and just send the numbers straight through.
So use sRGB for web, embed the profile and use a web browser with color management like Firefox or Safari.
EDIT - just for completeness: There's an added complication re browsers, because if the image does not have an embedded document profile (and much material on the web doesn't), it will normally not be color managed. What happens is that since there is no embedded profile, there is nothing to convert to the monitor profile from. So it's sent straight through unmanaged. Firefox, as the only browser, has an option to deal with this, which is to assign sRGB to untagged material. This allows the color management chain to kickstart back in action and the proper conversion to monitor profile to happen.
This is known as "mode 1", and to get there type about:config (copy/paste that) into the address bar and scroll down to gfx.color_management.mode. Change the value from 2 to 1.

Colors are displayed not correct

Hi!
I use lightroom 3.4.1 on Windows Vista 64bit with a Iiyama PRO LITE E2407 HDS monitor and a ATI Raedon HD3600. The colors of some images that I imported from my Canon EOS 500d into lightroom are "strange".
If I display the same image with another program, e.g. XNVIEW or windows-live-photo-gallery the colors looks totally different. You can see the differece here:
(http://wipux2.wifo.uni-mannheim.de/~kesnw/download/HPB/Farbwiedergabe_Lightroom_vs_XNView. PNG - larger)
The ugly colors appear on both, RAW images and JPG images.
Where can I influence the colors?
Thanks,
Peter

"The default in Lightroom is ProPhoto RGB color space."
You can set the choice of color space that's passed to CS5 in Edit menu, Preferences, External editing. That can be anything you want. So I'm assuming you've set ProPhoto RGB.You’re the expert here. I just installed the product and the default was ProPhoto RGB. I was just expressing my experience with the default install
"Right click a file and select "Edit In" CS5."
So LR passes the file to CS5 in ProPhoto, if you've set that in the preferences
Once again I just installed Lihtroom with defaults. Unless a user is made aware of the ramifications of default settings they will not necessarily discover it on their own
"Do all your edits in CS5 and then "Save As" JPG."
If you don't alter the colour space in CS5 (Edit menu, Convert to Profile...) then it will still be in ProPhoto, so that's how it will be saved in CS5. So this is not clearly described when using both products.
"Use a broswer or any other 3rd party viewer and you will see the colors are washed out."
Only if your browser color management isn't working. Either you don't have appropriate profile for the monitor, or you're not using a colour-managed program to display the image, in which case the colours look very washed out. If you have a calibrated and profiled monitor, and use a colour-managed program to view the image, then it doesn't matter what is the colour space of the image, colour management will sort it out and it will display correctly. The assumption is that JPG will be used on color profiled display is not consistent with the default save options. Why would a “save as” color space be deferent from the export to JPG file? They are both sRBG files and not consistent or clear to the end-user.
"In CS5 use the "File/Save for Web & Devices" and save a JPG version the colors are more accurate in the JPG"
Yep, because save-for-web converts to sRGB. Normal monitors are approximately sRGB, so even if colour management isn't working (no monitor profile, or using unmanaged software) then when you display an sRGB image on a normal monitor, colours will be approximately (though not necessarily exactly) right. Yes. So the “Save As” option does state sRGB and does not distinguish any color spaces or differences in the menu. So until you post or email the files, a user will ot see the effects of the settings. Have you tried this?
"If you then change the default in Lightroom to sRGB and run through the same sequence you get a better color match in the (step 2) “File/Save As” JPG."
Again, I assume you mean changing the Edit menu, Preferences, External Editing and change the colour space used with CS5. If you set that to sRGB then, without having to do a conversion in CS5, the image is already sRGB, so if you save it then it will still be in sRGB, and it will display correctly on a monitor without a profile or using unmanaged software. Yes, but the “Save As” does not distinguish between sRGB or ProPhoto. For example if I used a 3rd party asset management product to export the file to CS5 and used “Save As” in CS5 it would create a JPG file viewable in a unmanaged monitor/software/display more accurately. I have been a long time Photoshop user, but new to LR. These issues or lack of understanding on my part only occurred after I installed LR 3. I'm assuming Adobe would like to have both LR and CS5 to work seamlessly together or is that a bad assumption?

Export embedded quicktime movies to html slideshow?

I'm trying to make an html slideshow of a keynote presentation that has embedded quicktime movies. The movies just get saved as single png images. Is there a workaround or something obvious I am overlooking?
Since iPhoto lets you do this, I would assume it isn't impossible, but perhaps it just isn't implemented within keynote (which seems kind of backward).

Thanks. I was afraid that was the case, but a former apple VP suggested I ask since there are many apparently undocumented features (and iPhoto/iWeb can do this, so the api exists).
The relevent html code is actually a java script that loads an array of exported png files. Each element of the array is defined like this:
images[2] = "mrnahh.html_files/mrnahh.003.png";
so I tried just telling it to load a mov file instead, but it wasn't so easily fooled. It might be easier for me to make a slideshow of the png files and mov files within iWeb (which really makes messy html and javascripts that are next to impossible to hack.)
Anyway, many thanks. I'll leave this open for now in case someone else knows a simple secret.
The HTML export feature is great, and produces nice clean simple interfaces and web code. I hate to abandon it.

How to Export 320x240 .mov for Web, but darker and more saturated?

Hi, I am trying to improve my Web .mov movies.
My goal in this thread is to learn a good way to simply set a darker black and bump the saturation.
I don't understand what I am doing wrong because the movies on apple.com always have a good black point and great saturation and my workflow of exporting leaves my movies looking light and washed out from my original.
I recall I have also tried Compressor with similar results.
My monitors are hardware profiled to 2.2/6500.
From FCP 6.05:
File> Export> Using Quicktime Conversion
Settings:
H.264
Frame rate: 10
Key Frames Every 24 frames
Frame Reordering checked
Quality: High
Best Quality MultiPass
Restrict to 500 kbits/sec
Filters:
ColorSync (I am experimenting setting Source and Destination profiles to sRGB because my Sony SD footage and .tif files are not associated with my custom monitor profiles) — otherwise I have not messed around with any filters.
Size:
320x240 QVGA
Sound:
I am only switching to Mono
If anyone has any tips using FCP I would love to hear them...

Real friggin crazy...
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1358418&start=0&tstart=0
Thank you 11th_door for posting this (it moved me forward):
11th_door
Posts: 28
Registered: Jan 11, 2006
Re: h.264 gamma and/or color off
Posted: Mar 14, 2008 4:11 PM in response to: Dave Mauriello
I have been spending the better part of 2 days trying to figure this out. So far I have learned that Quicktime is displaying a gamma shift in the rendered video and that the actual file is okay, it is quicktime that is messing it up. This also goes for anything that uses quicktime, like safari, itunes, and similar players that use the Core Video hardware acceleration. Computers or Players that don't use hardware acceleration will show the same file correctly when played. But of course this is still an issue for anyone viewing your video on another computer with hardware acceleration enabled. To them your video will look faded.
It happens far worse on windows machines where the gamma is set to 2.2 (my mac was set to 2.2 until I found this nasty H.264 bug in quicktime rendering.) In the 2.2 gamma environment the shift in brightness is very pronounced. In the 1.8 mac gamma environment, it is less pronounced but still problematic enough that many of the studios that I know won't use Quicktime or the H.264 codec until this bug is corrected.
This problem is documented all over the web and it has caused major headaches for a lot of people for somewhere around 3 years. So far Apple hasn't done anything to fix it (or can't fix it) even though it is a persistent problem, especially for people who calibrate their monitors or people on PC's.
It's really frustrating and after hours of scouring the net for an acceptable solution, I still haven't found anything that doesn't involve simply not using quicktime or h.264. Here is one (partial) solution I found:
This tip from Mitch Gates:
As you may have noticed, the current implementation of the H.264 compressor for Quicktime has the nasty side-effect of raising the gamma or black levels of the resulting movie file. In order to fix this you must have Quicktime Pro (otherwise the fix will not hold since you can't save the updated .mov). Here are the steps?
Open the QT
Go to "Window/Show Movie Properties"
Select "Video Track", then click the "Visual Settings" tab
At the bottom left, change the transparency to "Blend" then move the slider to 100
Change the transparency to "Straight Alpha"
Close the Movie Properties window, then play or scrub the QT. Your black levels should now look correct
Save over old .mov
This is for PC's. On the mac you change the transparency to "composition."
The problem with this solution however is that doing this disables the settings that allow fast playback (playing the movie before it is completely downloaded.) Another issue with this solution is that, while it fixes the look of the video in Quicktime, VLC player still exhibits the 'washed out' look on the same file. Finally, this "solution" isn't actually a solution at all.
An interesting thing about this is that the video file itself is not really washed out as far as I can tell. There are a few things that point to this. One, exporting the h.264 file and changing the codec to "Animation" or "None" corrects the gamma shift and returns the colors to where they should be, but this increases file size dramatically. Second, I noticed that when I select the h.264 file and choose "get info" the preview thumbnail shows the poster frame with correct colors. Third, when I put the h.264 file online Safari shows it all washed out but FireFox shows it correctly. Strange...
At this point I think the only viable solution is to do this:
MacInTouch Reader
I too have been plagued by this H264 problem for the past 2 years it seems.
I have a suspicion that if we polled the users experiencing this effect that it would result they all use custom or modified Display Profiles in the Display System Preferences.
My temporary (and somewhat silly workaround) has been to change my display profile to the standard "Cinema HD Display" instead of my user-created "Cinema HD Display Calibrated" profile.
It does alter the gamma of my display to a unpleasing value, but after changing it, the H264 export works beautifully. No gamma shift at all.
I have read all the suggestions on trying the quicktime "filter then colorsync" export and always got unsatisfactory results. My silly workaround always produces the best results. I just have to change the dang setting back after I export so my eye don't burn out of my skull.
So it all comes down to a gamma shift on the part of Quicktime's render of H.264. You would think that after so many years of this issue going on Apple would have fixed it since they have documented that they know of the problem. A little baffling.
If you want to research this further, as I will continue to, just type "h.264 gamma" into google and you will find a ton of fellow frustrated users trying to figure this out. Most just switch to Sorenson 3 it seems or "un-calibrate" their displays when doing the render export. None of this is perfect unfortunately and I find myself using "Animation" even though the file size is insanely huge. It is better that having upset clients telling me that the video is washed out.

Subject : Slideshow looks bad Hello guys I have a project in my Final Cut just about done. I want to add my slideshow as part of the project and burn it to DVD. In my slideshow, there are some stills from the movie clips and some downloaded from the i

Subject : Slideshow looks bad
Hello guys
I have a project in my Final Cut just about done. I want to add my slideshow as part ofthe project and burn it to DVD. Inmy slideshow, there are some stills from the movie clips and some downloadedfrom the internet but they all look blur when playback and even worse if Iapply Ken Burn to it. Pleasesome one can tell my how to do it right or it can’t be done because thedownload quality and stills from the clip are not suitable or slideshow. Thank you
PSC

Thank you Ross.
The entire DVD containing Quick Time movies (Final CutExpress project) and slideshow was done in iPhoto. The Final Cut project was rendered prior to export to QT, the slideshow was sent to iDVD withoutrendering. The slideshow with most of the pictures from my still camera incombination with stills from movie clips and some downloaded from the Internet.After burning, the movie playback is perfect but the slideshow is not. The slideshow containing 3 differentkinds of pictures; those from my still camera looks OK; the stills from themovie clips and from the Internet are not. I don’t have much knowledge in this game, but I think NTSCwith frame size 720x480, and the downloaded picture Item Property shows most ofthem are between 400 to 500 x 300 to 600, may be both of them are not suitablefor TV screen while the stills from my still camera looks OK because they are2048x1536. Please enlightenme. Once again, thank you so much,I really appreciate the time you offered.
psc

How to move materials from one sloc to another sloc materials are more tha

Hi,
Can any one help me on this issue How to move materials from one sloc to another sloc materials are more than 1000
and from existing sloc to new sloc which is Hum managened i need help onthis issue thanks

hi
use T-code: MB1B Transfer Posting
Movement type:
311 Transfer posting storage location to storage location in one step
The quantity is transferred from unrestricted-use stock of the issuing storage location to unrestricted use in the receiving storage location.
Possible special stock indicators: E, K, M, Q
313 Stock transfer storage location to storage location in two steps - removal from storage
The quantity is transferred from unrestricted-use stock of the issuing storage location to stock in transfer in the receiving storage location.
Possible special stock indicators: None

Move New Windows Inside Recording Area & More

Hi All
I have a few questions for all those kind people who
contribute their time and experience here.
I am exploring Captivate and have trouble with my new windows
or dialogs jumping outside the recording area. I am creating movies
using 'Custom Size and when I open new dialogs, they are opening up
outside of the recorded area. I have the 'New Windows Inside
Recording Area ' recording option checked, but it still happens. Is
there something I am missing, another setting perhaps or a
combination of things I am doing or not doing to prevent this?
Another problem I am having occurs when I am recording a CAD
application. When I open new dialogs and then close them, I get
this display problem that shows where the dialog just appeared. The
problem is that my application is blank where the dialog box was -
I cannot see any of the icons of commands. It only ever happens
when I am recording, not when I am generally using the program. Is
this a known phenomenon, maybe a video card acceleration or OpenGL
issue perhaps?
Thanks in advance - I look forward to hearing from anyone who
can help me solve these issues.
Cheers,
spritc.

Hi there "spritc.",
To your first problem, that of those pesky windows opening
outside the selected recording area, if you use "Application"
instead of "Custom", I think you'll find you have better luck.
To your second problem, yes, I think you figured it out, you
have a problem with video. Try disabling hardware acceleration and
see if that won't help with the "shadow of where it was" issue.
That option is in "Control Panel > Display > Settings (tab)
> Advanced" on most systems.
Now, a lesson in Captivate (or you can call it a "rant" by an
old-timer if you wish).
Many new users have been so "sold" on Captivate's "automatic"
features that they have forgotten what its real purpose is, and
that sometimes there is more than one way to accomplish it. It was
created to fill a need to capture background changes in
applications, then add objects to those changed backgrounds to
accomplish the true goal of electronic learning through
demonstration and/or simulation. Notice that nowhere in that
statement did I use the word "fast", nor "automatic", nor
"effortless", nor did I add "without the effort of thought".
"spritc.", this is not directed at you nor meant to demean
you in any way. The statement above is a result of my own
frustration with a lack of reality in advertising and promotion of
the product - not just Captivate but all products. With that said,
here is how you do what you want to do:
About Windows: Be aware that all "Windows" applications
share some helpful features. One is that when an application is
opened, it should open in a window of the same dimensions, and at
the same position as the position and dimensions it occupied when
it was last closed. That includes - or is supposed to - additional
supporting pop-ups and dialog boxes (windows) for the application.
Another feature of Windows applications is that if the main
application window is placed too closely to - say - the right edge
of the screen (or the bottom, or the top) and is too close for an
attached drop-list to appear to the right, it will automatically
appear instead - on the left, or above its normal position. In
other words, Windows compensates for bad positioning by adjusting
its location of appearance on the screen. So much for issues
created by and corrected by the Windows OS.
About Captivate: When in "Record" mode, Captivate does take
a snapshot each time it detects a change in the background (caused
by what we call an "event"), thus automatically creating a series
of snapshots that we know as a demonstration or simulation, as the
case may be. But there is a key on the keyboard that is much
ignored, but of greatest value - it is named the "PrtScr" key, and
(by default - it can be changed to another key) pressing it will
cause Captivate to "snap" a background image, in addition to those
snapped automatically by the detection of an "event". Captivate
also gives you a feature that is nearly unknown among new users ...
it is called the "other option". That is (to give you a simple
example), while the Recording Options dialog gives you the
(default) action of automatically recording keystrokes, the act of
un-ticking this box gives you the
other option of
not automatically recording keystrokes. There are many
"automatic" functions that are the default selections during the
recording of a Captivate movie, and each gives you the option of
turning it off.
Now, let's put these two groups of knowledge together. Before
recording, know what you are going to "click" to create a
background change image. Then do a "walkthrough" without Captivate
running. Each dialog box that pops up should be adjusted for size
and position during this walkthrough so that when Captivate's
actual image-recording begins, each dialog will appear where you
want it. Also, each menu item that opens outside the recording area
should be tested to see where it will appear; if the "File" menu
item you want is falling off the bottom of the recording area, try
positioning the main application window lower on-screen . . . this
should force the "File" menu items to appear to "drop up", instead
of "dropping down", allowing the wanted item to appear properly
within the recording area. Finally (for this excerpt), you should
always have one eye on that "PrtScr" key mentioned above. There may
be times when using that magic key to force the capture of a
background, is the only way to grab an image of a "missed event" -
for instance, the appearance of a tooltip.
In conclusion, don't blindly buy what the advertising people
are selling. Be prepared to use your imagination and even some
preparation work in making your movies. There are very few things
that Captivate can't do in its line of work, but somethimes you
have to do the "thinking" for it.
Have a really great day!!

I am running a late 2007 13" MacBook and when I check status of storage it is showing 88Gb of files but on Finder in Movies I cannot find more than 12-15 Gb where are the rest of the files?

I am running a late 2007 13" MacBook and when I check status of storage it is showing 88Gb of files but on Finder in Movies I cannot find more than 12-15 Gb where are the rest of the files?
I thought a screen dump of the sttus may help picture what I am looking at.

Mike,
That article did seem to confirm that it is not as straight forward as it might seem. Since then I have deleted some of the TV episodes I downloaded on iTunes and the available storage has increased, so I can only assume that when reviewing in finder the files for iTunes are not shown and it would appear one has to go into iTunes to delete them.
I guess I may need to set up an external hard drive to store TV series etc as long as it is easy to transfer between the external drive and the MAC and subsequently my iPad as well, but that is for another discussion.

Elements 11: After selection tool defines move area, error message reads "No pixels are more than 50% selected". How to remedy?

Elements 11: After selection tool defines move area, error message reads "No pixels are more than 50% selected". How to remedy?

Are you certain that you are on the correct layer?
As a test, try this:
Select the object with one of the selection tools, e.g. lasso, selection brush.tool. You should see "marching ants" once the selection is complete
Place the selection on its own layer (Layer>new>layer via copy or CTRL+J). This will place the object on a separate layer.
With this layer active, use the move tool to move/position it
Does that work?

Photoshop CS4 Save for Web JPEG Colors are Off

Ok, I've scoured the web to see about finding a solution for this and tried every possible option and still I'm coming up empty handed. I have a website that I'm developing for a painter and have an image converted to sRGB, and the colors are where I want them to be. I use Save for Web, and every iteration suggested online for the, embed and don't embed, convert to sRGB and dont' covert, use document color profile, use windows, yada yada. Here's a recent example:
when i preview the image with Firefox, here's the difference:
The photoshop version is on the left and is the color that I want/need. The image on the right is firefox and saturated. If I save for web with embedded profile, safari is accurate, whereas firefox is saturated, so it's obviously discarding the icc and using some color space that I can't see in my file. I did notice that if I have my Custom, Proof and select Monitor RGB, then I can see what firefox will ultimately display and also what Safari will display if i have Embed ICC Profile unchecked in the save for web dialogue box.
I know that CS2 and CS3 were easier and less squirrely with color managing web files, but I think CS4 has some juju under the hood. Am I the only one out there frustrated, or like other web developers just accept the inaccuracy and move on? Since this is fine art, I'm doing my best to dial the color in, but it's been all afternoon beating on this.
Any ideas, I'm ready to install CS3 and see if my life will be easier, but I'm wondering if having Photoshop CS3 and CS4 will cause any issues.

>> your logic
That's my rant and I'm sticking to it.
The OP wrote he doesn't want or need to discuss the pros and cons of embedding profiles in Web images, but for the sake of anyone else reading this:
1) Embedded ICC Profiles increase file sizes (about 4K per image).
a) I may have over 100 thumbnails and dozens of photos on one page,
b) Plus, I may have an image sliced into many pieces.
c) That additional 4k per image, per slice, will add up fast and may kill dial-up traffic.
2) Very few computers use color-managed web browsers or calibrated monitors anyway, and
3) Problems with matching/blending image's edges or background color with a filled box or page color.
d) If I tag the image — on Mac colormanaged browsers — the color will mismatch the box/page color on managed browsers because the tagged image is being Converted to MonitorRGB, and the untagged page or box color is having MonitorRGB Applied.
e) This matching or blending a pixel-based graphic to page color is a pretty big deal to do correctly in professional web publishing.
f) If I publish untagged sRGB images/graphics, the box/page color will match the images and blend correctly in all browsers.
I WILL QUALIFY my general recommendation about embedding profiles in pixel-based web images for the following reasons:
1) You are posting fine-art images, creative portfolios, and are not worried about adding 4K additional data per image, per slice.
2) You are not worried about having Mac visitors seeing graphic blends or photos mismatched to a background color.
3) You understand only properly-profiled monitors and color-managed web browsers will benefit from your embedded profile — and it is likely 99% of web surfers don't have either — however, if you are targeting the one percent who do, then there is your number one best reason for tagging web photos with embedded profiles.

Screen images more saturated than prints

Screen depiction of images more saturated than prints. I'd like to get the print images more in line with the screen images. Their brightness is pretty well matched. Same with contrast.
I'm using
MacBook Pro 2.16 intel core 2 duo
Aperture
proofing to Canon PR1 (paper I'm using)
Color Synch Profile Canon PR 1
Gamma 1.0
Pentax k10d
Canon Pixma ip6600d
Color Option None
Color Vivid yes
Color LCD Display setting in display system setting.

It sounds like you are doing everything correctly -- so the culprit may well be your printer, which depending on the number of inks etc may not have a full enough gamut to support what you see on screen. Maybe it's time to move to the Canon 9000?

IPhone: Using embedded QT movies that either Loop or Loop Back and Forth

Hi to everyone,
I'm working on a very simple iPhone app:
it has several buttons that launch different QuickTime movies embedded in the application, that will either Loop or Loop Back and Forth.
The desired looping behaviour is already set within QuickTime itself (those settings are available in QuickTime's View menu).
So far it doesn't seem to work, as the iPhone's SDK doesn't seem to recognize these QuickTime settings of Loop or Loop Back and Forth.
I've been trying to find advanced documentation on the matter, with no luck.
Does anyone knows if it's possible to create an iPhone application that has embedded QuickTime movies that either Loop or Loop Back and Forth?
If it is possible to do so, can you please post some code (or links) explaining how to proceed?
If the feature is not currently supported, does anyone knows if it will eventually be supported by Apple (maybe in a future SDK revision)?
While I don't know the entire context the SDK engineering team has to contend with, it seems to me it should be rather simple for Apple's iPhone SDK to simply accept the settings already put in place inside a QuickTime movie.
Many thanks in advance for any feedback on this!

Well, my programmers have come back to me and the news is not good.
The QTMovieLoopsAttribute is not supported in the SDK's QT Kit.
I'll now call it SDK's *QuickTime Kit Lite*, if you don't mind.
*QuickTime Kit Lite*, the key audio/video toolbox available for development of applications on the iPhone through the SDK, provides a single option:
a Play / Stop button.
The only other thing available (I think) is the option to hide the play/stop controller. That's it.
Apparently, there are several unofficial, private frameworks that give access to lower-level QuickTime functions and that may provide a way to actually loop videos, but chances are that an app using these unofficial frameworks would get rejected by Apple upon submission for the store.
I'm still waiting for more info and the final word from my programmers, but from the looks of it, this is going to be a show-stopper shortcoming of QT Kit Lite, as far as my project is concerned.
I'm probably going to have to fold my project and wait (hope) for an eventual upgrade to the SDK's QT Kit.
By the way, does anyone knows if there is a way to communicate with Apple and request new features for inclusion in future revisions of the SDK?
Upgrading the QuickTime Kit librairies to include the video Loop and Loop Back and Forth Attributes would be my first (and only) request.
many thanks to all!

Embedding a movie (slideshow) colors are more saturated

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for