Exported version looks terrible compared to what i see in iMovie

trying to export a vid i've got done. it is for youtube. i've got some text in a few spots. when i'm looking at the vid in Movie, it looks great! it looks exactly like it should. the text has a nice solid outline. but when i export, the text on the vid looks horrible and blotchy and in general the footage (some live action stuff) looks at least 50% worse than what i see in iMovie. totally unacceptable, really. there's got to be a better way.
i have tried different options when exporting. but there has to be something i'm missing. what are my options? here is a comparison of what i see in imovie vs what i see when i export:
http://i320.photobucket.com/albums/nn356/Deloreans/imovievsexportcomp.jpg

If this is reproducible, you should report it as a bug at http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family#problem
Exporting at 100% is a workaround to a problem that shouldn't exist.

Similar Messages

Exported gfx looks terrible

This community has always helped me, so I hope it can again because I'm at my wit's end. Working in FCP 7, I have an animated graphic which I didn't create (it was delivered to me). It's an HD project, sequence settings are 1920x1080, square pixels, Apple ProRes (HQ), 29.97fps. I'm trying to export to the following specs: HD 1280x720, square pixels, Apple ProRes (LT), 30fps.
Original file looks like this (very clean, sharp edges):
File in the sequence looks like this (edges a little soft, pixelated):
I was able to export it once, with it coming out just right. Using the the delivery specs provided above, the only setting I remember changing was that I went to custom size for 1280x720 so the edges wouldn't be cut off by the default option:
I need to export it again, at the end of this and several other videos, and it keeps coming out like this (which is how it looks in the seqience):
I've tried several variations of the export settings:
Default ProRes Quicktime settings for 1280x720 and 1920x1080
Quicktime conversion for 1280x720, custom, 1920x1080
de-interlaced and not de-interlaced
30fps and 29.97fps
Working on a brand new Macbook Pro
OS 10.9.2
2.8 Ghz Intel Core i7
16GB 1600 Mhz DDR3
Intel Iris 1024 MB
I hope I've explained this clearly and provided all the relevant information. Please, somebody, help!

I don't know what happened to my images, but I actually got the answer from a post on Creative Cow. I went into the browser, found the gfx clip and changed the field dominance to "none". Thanks for posting though, it reminded me to come bak and psot the answer in case other people have the same problem,

Fixed layout epubs from InDesign in Adobe Digital Editions look terrible...what is going on?

I am preparing a fixed layout v3.0 epub from an INDesign CC 2014 document. The book is 178 pages with embedded imges throughout. The resulting epub when opened in Digital Editions looks ghastly...enormous overlapping type; epub said to have 758 pages when the original has 178 pages. The same file opened in iBooks looks beautiful.
What's wrong with Digital Editions?
Anyone having the same problem? Is there a fix?

welcome to the BT community forum where customers help customers and only BT employees are the forum mods
please delete your phone number as this is a public forum and you may get more sales calls than you want
if you use this residential line for fulltime business purposes then you should have a business line not residential. you can then decide the service level aggtreement you want which would be better that residential which is 3 days
in order for the forum members to help please can you post the adsl stats from your router you may need to 'show detail' to get all stats (if hub enter 192.168.1.254 in your browser and navigate to adsl or if HH4/5 then go to troubleshooting then logs and you are looking for 2 line together when hub last connected to internet and they will show your connection speed and noise margin or if netgear enter 192.168.0.1). Then run btspeedtester (MAC users may have problems). when first test completes then run diagnostic test and post the results ( do not reset the router).
are you connected directly via a filter to the NTE5 master or test socket or to somewhere else? Is the master the only phone socket in your home?
Have you tried the quiet line test? - dial 17070 option 2 - should hear nothing - best done with a corded phone. if cordless phone you may hear a 'dull hum' which is normal
Someone may then be able to offer help/assistance/suggestions to your problem
If you like a post, or want to say thanks for a helpful answer, please click on the Ratings star on the left-hand side of the post.
If someone answers your question correctly please let other members know by clicking on ’Mark as Accepted Solution’.

WorkflowLab Beta 2 What you see in it?

The new Beta Version of WorkflowLab is very interesting
Here is the link video of Adobe TV about WorkflowLab:
http://adobe.ly/za4oVO
I'm really excited about this program is a bit similar (no interface) on the goal of software (Office Project). Just is focused towards the development of multimedia.
I guess that as more betas come we will see improvements in workflow (editing options and accurate preferences)
I hope to see the stable version soon

You should get exactly what you see in iPhoto on the printed sheet. Can you describe exactly the workflow you use in printing?
OT
TIP: For insurance against the iPhoto database corruption that many users have experienced I recommend making a backup copy of the Library6.iPhoto (iPhoto.Library for iPhoto 5 and earlier versions) database file and keep it current. If problems crop up where iPhoto suddenly can't see any photos or thinks there are no photos in the library, replacing the working Library6.iPhoto file with the backup will often get the library back. By keeping it current I mean backup after each import and/or any serious editing or work on books, slideshows, calendars, cards, etc. That insures that if a problem pops up and you do need to replace the database file, you'll retain all those efforts. It doesn't take long to make the backup and it's good insurance.
NOTE: this is not the same as routinely backing up your entire iPhoto library folder to protect your photos. It only protects the loss of your organizational efforts that the database file contains.
I've created an Automator workflow application (requires Tiger or later), iPhoto dB File Backup, that will copy the selected Library6.iPhoto file from your iPhoto Library folder to the Pictures folder, replacing any previous version of it. There are versions that are compatible with iPhoto 5, 6, 7 and 8 libraries and Tiger and Leopard. Just put the application in the Dock and click on it whenever you want to backup the dB file. iPhoto does not have to be closed to run the application, just idle. You can download it at Toad's Cellar. Be sure to read the Read Me pdf file.
NOTE: The new rebuild option in iPhoto 09 (v. 8.0.2), Rebuild the iPhoto Library Database from automatic backup" makes this tip obsolete.

Movie looks terrible when exported. Help!

So i just got back into some video work. I used to know how to video edit, but there has been some time between my once educated stage and now.
To get myself going I installed this old program and used a few files that I took from youtube. I converted the files to WMV's and began to cut away. After some considerable manipulation, music added and what not, i decided to export my project.
Here then enlies my probelm; every time I go to export the project the video looks terrible. The quality is degraded, the cuts between scenes are slower, and what is perhaps most annoying, is that anywhere a clip was manipulated ie (slowed down, reversed, whatever) the size of the clip shrinks to about half the size.
I can't figure out what is wrong, but then again I barely know anything about this program. What could be wrong? The project looks great on the time line. It's only when its rendered or exported that it gets all messed up. The clips are from youtube. the music is just an mp3. Is the footage just not high enough quality? Is the program I have too old? Any information regarding a solution to these problems would be greatly appreciated. Sorry if this is a stupid question.

Do you have any other suggestions or advice pertaining to my situation?
Two:
1.) Use G-Spot to tell you what CODEC is used, and possibly use a different conversion program to get the material into Premiere.
2.) Use a program like one from Moyea, or FLV to AVI. The conversion from FLV to another highly compressed CODEC like you probably used for the WMV will destroy any quality that you might have had.
If you had PrPro 1.5, or later, Moyea makes a plug-in to Import and edit FLV within PrPro. You might want to contact them, just to check if your version, known as PrPro 1.0 in most circles, will work with their plug-in. In PrPro 2.0, the Moyea plug-in works fine. However, when starting with FLV's quality is ALWAYS going to be an issue. There is no way around this.
Copyright issues totally aside, you'd be better off working from a ripped DVD of that Disney production. Do consider copyright issues long and hard. Won't go into the legal issues, but they should be considered.
Good luck,
Hunt

PDF exports look terrible - white lines in text

I have been u sing indesign for years and years all of the sudden my pdf exports look terrible. The images are pixelated and the text has white lines
in it.
I used these pdf previews for my clients and I certainly cant use what Im getting from INDD right now. I have no idea what happened to cuase this.
Wish I could show you but any ideas would be great.
The following text has no formatting on it yet there are pixelated white lines? help?
Thanks in advance.

Wow - thank you for all the responses. Yes it still happened with different fonts, different sizes of font etc... So I looked at my export settings and noticed that it was set to High Quality Print - Modified. I Switched it back to High Quality Print and it appear to have cleaned it up quite a bit.
Thank you all for your speedy responses.

Animated Graphs looking terrible after exporting

Hello Anyone,
I've created an graph in Numbers and brought it across to Keynote and applied an animation effect. Then I exported as a Quicktime Movie using a few different Codecs. All look fine and crystal clear when played in Quicktime. But when I import it into FCP it appears okay in the viewer but terrible when in the Canvas even after rendering. I've tried exporting in various formats from FCP, but I'm still unable to get a satifactory result without it looking terrible. Surely there is a way?????

OK...now for the second part...are you looking at this, and judging the quality of the image based on what you see in the Canvas? That is one of the worse places to judge the quality of the image.
Shane's Stock Answer #2: Blurry playback
ONLY JUDGE THE QUALITY OF YOUR MATERIAL ON AN EXTERNAL NTSC MONITOR, OR AT LEAST A TV.
The canvas shows you what happens after the codec you are working with has been applied. The viewer shows you the material in its native format.
1. Disable overlays on the canvas
2. Make sure you've rendered everything (no green bars at the top of the timeline
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=24787
Video playback requires large amounts of data and many computations. In order to maintain frame rate and be viewable at a normal size, only about one-fourth of the DV data is used in displaying the movie to the screen. However, the DV footage is still at full quality, and is best viewed thru a TV or NTSC monitor routed thru your camera or deck.
Shane

Everything I export is gigantic and looks terrible with FCE

I have tried exporting a project every way I can think of. Started with a 64MB .m4v i exported from iMovie, have tried custom size, basically every quicktime export option available. Every single movie is 4-5 times the size of the original, grainy, and generally just looks terrible.
I used to use FCPro, now using FCE, and wondering if this is just a limitation of the software or has to do with the source file. Also, FCE won't let me import .m4v files or .mov files. Really frustrated with this program. If I could just figure out how to export a decent looking movie that's a reasonable size I'd be fine with it.

I did a DV export and that file now looks like crap. This is way harder than it should be.
Can't import the files I need into FCE (.mp4 or .mov)
Can't import from iMovie since source files won't import
Can't use iMovie export .m4v cause it won't work with FCE
Can't use iMovie export DV cause it looks terrible.
That's a whole lot of can'ts for what's supposed to be a powerful video editing program.

Exporting: Dark areas look terrible. Solutions?

Hi all,
I'm shooting 1080p video with a Canon 60D and trying to put together some nice little films with iMovie 11. Unfortunately, on export, the dark areas always come out looking absolutely awful. They're pixelated and they almost seem to glimmer. It looks terrible. Blacks are obviously the worst but other darker shades suffer from the same problem. Don't notice it at all in bright shots.
Does anyone know of an export setting to fix this? If iMovie 11 is incapable of exporting videos with nice looking dark areas, what software should I consider? It really kind of bothers me.
Cheers!

im06, fce or fcp will output better image quality - in that order, PC too.
https://discussions.apple.com/message/11929284#11929284
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/2651821?start=0&tstart=0
The stuttering while panning problem we had has been solved with workarounds. Always test yourself.

I tested my new Canon 5D Mark iii with my 85 1.2 L lens. The images look terrible! What gives?

I just purchased a new Canon 5D Mark iii body. It is replacing my 1Ds Mark ii. I tested it with my 85 1.2 L series lens. I took the RAW images into Capture One 7 to look at them. I was highly disturbed at what I saw. The quality was no where near my Canon 1Ds Mark ii. The images seemed somewhat soft even after applying a consderable amount of sharpening. They also looked flat and lifeless, even after pumping the contrast and adding Clarity. All in all they looked terrible! I must have something wrong, as I have read countless times that the new chip gives incredible results.
When first attempting to set up my camera I set it to Adobe RGB and for RAW images only. I noticed that you seemed forced into deciding on a specific "Picture Style". I left it on the default settting of "Standard". Should that effect my RAW files, or is that bypassed altogether when shooting RAW? I noticed that in "Standard" mode that some in camera sharpening was applied to the files. Is that my problem? Should that be turned down to zero, as I would normally do all my sharpening afterward either in Capture One 7 or other software. I shot all my test images with fast shutter speeds so that is not the issue. This lens is in perfect condition and has always produced incredibly sharp contrasty images. What on earth could be wrong? Any suggestions? I am a professional shooter for the last 20 years, so this is really perplexing me! Help!!!

Hi Corey,
Picture styles are ONLY applied to JPEG images or video. They are never applied to RAW. Canon will "tag" the meta-data of the image indicating picture style choices so that desktop processing software that understands those choices can apply it after-the-fact. But the point of "RAW" is that the camera will not perform any change to the image which would result in a loss of original data.
As for the soft focus... the good news there is probably nothing wrong with your camera or your lens. It probably just needs a slight focus calibration adjustment (you don't even need to send it in for this.)
The camera sensor is analogous to a movie screen. If the image is blurry... it's not the movie screen... it's the movie projector (or the focus). However... keeping with that analogy... suppose we focused the image perfectly... but then moved the project a foot closer to the screen. The result would be a slightly out-of-focus image even though there is actually nothing wrong with the projector.
The phase detect focus sensors are on the floor of your camera. When the reflex mirror is down, some light is bounced down into those sensors to focus the image. The distance to the AF sensors vs. the distance to the real sensor is supposed to be calibrated to match... but it's actually possible for the AF sensors to think the image is focused when it's really slightly out of focus on the sensor. For this reason, your camera has auto-focus micro-adjustment capability -- in other words this is something you can test and tune yourself. The REASON you might do it yourself is because it turns out it can be different for every lens (even two EF 85mm f/1.2L lenses in a row might have slightly different focus). This adjustment is only available on the mid-range and pro bodies -- it's part of the reason you buy a premium body. The camera can actually remember the AF adjustment for each lens uniquely.
See this article: http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2008/12/this-lens-is-soft-and-other-myths
Or this article: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/are_your_pictures_out_of_focus.shtml
BTW, to test the lens, I'd suggest getting a focus calibration target. You want controlled conditions when you do this -- don't shoot typical everday subjects because it wont be precise enough.
I use a DataColor Spyder "LensCal". The LensAlign products are also popular.
Tim Campbell
5D II, 5D III, 60Da

I made a beautiful invitation for my sons graduation in pages it has 1 photo on the front and 5 photos on the back. When I try to export it to my work pc the text is not supported and it looks terrible. Help!

I made a beautiful invitation for my sons graduation in pages it has 1 photo on the front and 5 photos on the back. When I try to export it to my work pc the text is not supported and it looks terrible. Help!

How did you transfer it to the PC?
Not good to export as a Word .doc/x, better to:
Menu > Export > PDF
Peter

Phonebook Contact Photos Look Terrible - what's wrong?

I have a T-Mobile Blackberry 8900 Curve (which I LOVE!) Just yesterday I updated the device software (v.4.6.1.231 using the new Desktop Software for MAC!) and I've noticed that all of my phonebook contact photos (for caller ID) are now compressed or look blurry/out of focus. When I pull the photos up in my Media file they look great-- but when someone calls or I place a call, the photo looks terrible! This has never been an issue before. Any ideas/suggestions?
Thank you!

Deselect "sync photos", which will take off all of your pictures during the following sync. Activate the option again and put them back onto your phone, that should solve your problem.

Edit in photoshop looks terrible

i thought i would try the "seamless" editing between LR and photoshop. go to photo, edit in photoshop....CS2 opens up...i can edit, dogde, burn, whatever...how great! then click save....and there are my changes in LR. in a perfect world, this would be great. but, the RAW file looks TERRIBLE when opened in photoshop. it looks like a washed out bluish cast with a bit of negative effect on it. it just looks bad. then when you save and view it in LR, it looks the same...terrible. i spoke with a couple people and they said this was a bug in the beta version. looks like an issue still. so now i have to take the long way around and export to tiff, then work on the photos, then export to jpg. ridiculous. i still like the software but they really should have focused on the big things instead of the small stupid things...like the 5 star rating system for photos.

there was no tone in my first post, what you were reading was insane frustration. i spent 5 hours on this and it still isn't working. sorry if you took it personal. the photos look faded when i right click, choose edit in CS2, and view them in CS2. if i open any other photos in CS2 they look mint. let me say they don't look night and day but they are very faded and the color saturation is not there. what settings in CS2? where do i look for these? i thought everything was perfect since it always is when i just use CS2. 2 of my other guys have the same issue, as well as another photo studio we are in touch with who dont' work with us. 4 people with the same issue is odd i think you would agree. i don't think we will get much resolved via this since i can't show you the photos. and when i do select edit in CS2, i get the box that comes up with the 3 bullet points...half the time i only am able to select the 3rd, since the first and 2nd are greyed out and yes i have the full version. bought right from adobe. what setting do you check off in CS2 to make it look great? then when i click SAVE in CS2, it brings it back to LR with my edits which is great, but it's the faded non-saturated version. i really really really wish i could give you more info but i can't. i'm not new to adobe, just LR. i have been using After FX, premiere, PS, encore, audition for years.

Rating in exported versions

I live with "portable library" which is exported JPEG up to 1024 pt- so I can hold
above 8000 pictures eaten just something like 3 GB.
I do not know if is possible by exporting versions to extra file ( out of Aperture)
to have available for import again into Aperture in PB 12".
This is extra job rewrite ratings. I am exporting just From 3* to 5*.
If publisher wants to sent an offer - is simple prepare selection.
Another qustion I have : selecting "smart albums" by keywords i cannot search
within album by anorther keyword.For example album" deer" and I want lo find pictures from winter every picture has season described.
Thank you

linus,
just to be able to compare our observatiions on EXIF - what is your Aperture version? And how did you export, with "File > Export" (the original or an edited version), and which format - tiff, jpeg?
Exporting an edited version of a Canon raw image as jpeg, and reimporting to Aperture will preserve all EXIF tags, that are visible in Aperture, at least, that is what I am seeing in Aperture 3.4.5. The only changed tag is the "Software" tag.
After reimporting an exported jpeg I am seeing these EXF-tags in Aperture, exactly the same as before, including Camera Make and Camera Model:
Looking at the exported image file with Preview's Inspector, I am seeing the lens in the EXIF section of the Inspectore panel, and the Camera Make in the "TIFF" section of the Inspector panel.
Regards
Léonie

FLV quality looks better than F4V, what am I doing wrong?

Hi,
I exported a small clip as a on2vp6 flv, a h.264 f4v, and a h.264 mp4 file with the adobe media encoder cs4. Each file is the same clip, exported with pretty much the same settings. Resolution: 640x480, 0.5mbps target bit rate, 29.97 fps.
Everything I read says that for a given file and a given bitrate, h.264 should provide better video quality when compared to a h.263 flv file. I would like to know what I am doing wrong, because the h.264 files look worse than the flv file. I have provided download links for a short demo clip in each format.
fl7756n_29_640x480_500kbpsbr.f4v
http://www.filefactory.com/file/af5gc7b/n/fl7756n_29_640x480_500kbpsbr_f4v
fl7756n_29_640x480_500kbpsbr.flv
http://www.filefactory.com/file/af5gc7e/n/fl7756n_29_640x480_500kbpsbr_flv
fl7756n_29_640x480_500kbpsbr.mp4
http://www.filefactory.com/file/af5gc71/n/fl7756n_29_640x480_500kbpsbr_mp4
Why does the clip look better in h.263? It seems that everything I encode at low bitrates looks better in h.263 which leads me to believe I am doing something wrong.

Okay, that is true, they are different codecs. But even adobe says:
Q: How does H.264 compare with the current video formats supported in Flash Player?
A: Flash Player supports the Sorenson Spark video codec (based on H.263) and On2 VP6. H.263 is the predecessor of H.264 and was designed for teleconferencing applications, at 64k rates. H.264 delivers even higher quality at lower bitrates. H.264 will deliver the same or better quality when to compared to the same encoding profile in On2. Factors you should consider when choosing a format include the complexity of the content, the desired reach, ability to archive, and licensing considerations.
at
http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/Flash_Player:9:Update:H.264#Q:_What_is_H.264.3F
Are there any tricks to getting the h.264 to look "better" than the h.263? Like, the h.264 version of the video doesn't even look close to as good, and I think that the f4v version looks worse than the mp4, which I don't really understand since they are both h.264 files. The footage is from a canon XL2 and the original source is ntsc 720x480. Is there anything special I should be doing for encoding in h.264 instead of h.263. The video is going to be only for the web.

Exported version looks terrible compared to what i see in iMovie

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for