Final Render Looks Bad?

Here is a pic of my final project rendered.
Render is set to Best, Motion Blur is off, Field Rendering On, Frame Blending is On
and rendered as an Animation.
[IMG]http://i39.tinypic.com/zj8dn8.png[/IMG]

Some things I would try:
1. Toggling filters on and off to see if it makes a difference.
2. Try rendering at Good rather than Best quality.
3. Re-import media in case what's in your project now is corrupt.
4. Double-checking that your stills are not overly big.
5. Try exporting using a different codec - ProRes, for instance.

Similar Messages

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

Why does my 24fps look bad on my TV?

I just got the Panasonic AG-HMC150. I have shot some footage at both 1080p24 and 720p24. I transcode the files to Pro Res in FCP and they look pretty good, I realize the panning isn't as smooth as 60i. I drag one of the files into the FCP timeline and let it automatically "optimize my settings" for the sequence. I have verified that it is 23.98fps and field dominance is none. I have tried selecting "share" and going straight to AVCHD from FCP, and also taking the original MTS file, and Apple Pro Res and dropping into Toast and trying that way. The footage just looks choppy, jiddery and unsmooth. I have seen enough movies in my life to know that when they pan, or have cars drive by, that movies 24fps looks a million times better. My Sony HDTV even accepts and displays 24fps, and when I press info on the TV remote when watching one of these AVCHD discs it in fact says 1080 (or 720) 24p. It just looks bad. Even taking the HDMI output from the camera and hooking up to the TV and playing from the camera looks lousy.
What am I doing wrong? I know a ton of post work goes into Hollywood movies, but why does their 24fps look nice and smooth and mine looks horrible? Do I need to render with pulldown in FCP or something. I can't figure it out. Any advice, suggestions?

I transcode through FCP to apple pro res, the files shows up as 1920x1080 24fps. Field dominance is none. I edit the video and then export as quicktime movie using current settings. The Pro Res file says 23.98 when played in quicktime so I know that's good. I simply then drop the file into Toast (10.0.4) and burn blu-ray disc, selecting DVD as the media. I noticed too I need to change the field dominance under the encoding tab in Toast to progressive, as automatic doesn't work. It only burns the top half of the image. Regardless, when I make these discs and play them on PS3, my TV's info says 1080/24p. Maybe my eyes aren't use to seeing 24fps. Does it sound like I am doing anything wrong in my workflow/encoding process.
Again, good tip on the shutter speed Jerry.

DV clips look bad, good when converted to H.264 in QuickTime and reimported

Still a problem after 7.0.1:
DV camera -> iMovie 08 -> looks bad when playing and exporting/sharing
DV camera -> iMovie 08 -> "reveal in finder" -> clip opened in QuickTime -> looks good -> export as H.264 -> re-import to iMovie 08 -> looks good when playing and exporting/sharing.
In plain words: Importing DV clips from my DV camera into iMovie gives bad results when playing and exporting/sharing. Have tried everything, but the clips look blurry and not sharp at all. The actual DV clip in the events folder looks sharp and clear.
If I take the very same DV clip from the events folder ("reveal in finder"), open it in QuickTime, export it as H.264 and then re-import to iMovie 08, it looks brilliant, retaining the quality the DV clip in the events folder has.
Why can't the DV clips look good in the first place? What is it that iMovie 08 does to these poor clips? Some have suggested re-encoding, re-rendering and so on, but if I do just that in QuickTime and re-import it to iMovie 08, it still looks razor sharp and crystal clear. No reason that iMovie 08 shouldn't handle the DV file in the same manner.
Some have suggested that this is because iMovie 08 internally re-encodes to AIM or H.264, enabling edits with different kinds of formats, but if I do this myself in QuickTime before importing to iMovie 08, the problem isn't there!
If this is difficult to achieve, why not add the option of importing from a DV camera as H.264 and not DV? That would make my day!
(I have posted this to Apple using the feedback menu item in iMovie 08.)
(Background here in these threads:)
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1088568
Sample clips in Apple TV format here:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=5173005

iMovie '08 stores rendered projects in H.264 form. This happens when you render to the Media Browser. The rendered file(s) (you can have several different sizes) are in the iMovie '08 project package. The original flies in your Events folders stay in whatever format they were in.
Yes, the movies exported to the Media Browser use the H.264 format, the same as iMovie HD 5/6 did when we exported using the presets Email, Web, Web Streaming and CD-ROM. They were all H.264 too. Apple is obviously putting the (powerful) H.264 to good use to prepare movies for Web pages and other purposes.
As you know, the Full Quality export in 5/6 was to the project's native format, which varied according to the type of project. For DV projects, that was DV video. Everything was converted to DV when imported into the project, and to preserve the original quality we could export to a Full Quality DV movie.
There is nothing like that in iMovie 7, at least that I've seen. As you said, nothing is converted to a "native format" when imported to the project. (Still images are added to the project's single Apple Photo - JPEG "Still Images" movie, which is a nice twist.)
So I think of iMovie 7 as having no "native" format, but a nicely-designed path for using H.264 as the delivery format. The Media Browser — a virtual library of movies with no shared place — is a nice invention.
When I export slideshow movies in DV format out of FotoMagico I always select 'Best' and it DOES make a difference in iDVD.
I think of iMovie 7's problem with DV as more profoundly flawed. Exporting ANY DV video that's in the project to DV or ANY OTHER format is messed up. It's the handling of the DV inside iMovie that's messed up, not just the export to DV.
My guess is — and it's only a guess — that FotoMagico's Best setting adjusts the content of the image delivered for iDVD. Put another way, it prepares an image that works best with iDVD's own encoding algorithms.
One long-standing diappointment I've had with iLife is that Apple has never coordinated the image it prepares for iDVD with what(ever) iDVD does best. It's as if the programmers never talk to each other. iMovie engineers have never asked the iDVD engineers how best to deliver the image to deliver the best quality on the DVD.
Given Apple's emphasis on H.264, one would think that iDVD would be written to embrace any H.264 video and deliver great quality on the DVD. It doesn't. And with iLife '08 it doesn't even embrace iMovie's own DV exports!
I suppose Blu-Ray will change all that, but for now we're stuck with a version of iLife that can't deliver a quality DVD of our home movies.
Karl

Resizing image and looks bad afterward

So image manipulation in java is not my bag. I wrote a program to help save me time with my photography, the idea was that I could point it at a directory and then it would read all the files in that folder that are jpgs and resize them to blog ready sizes. This works really well cept the final images that are produced are not of same quality as say when I used GIMP to resize to the same size/aspect ratio the quality is much different. It looks like its a problem with setting my type perhaps to an only 8bit file? Maybe I am wrong, also goofed with the compression stuff (found code online) to turn the compression to 0 (i.e. no compression)...still no avail. Some code I am using:
    public static BufferedImage scaleImage(BufferedImage image, int imageType,
                 int newWidth, int newHeight) {
             // Make sure the aspect ratio is maintained, so the image is not distorted
             double aspectRatio = (double) image.getWidth() / (double) image.getHeight();
              if(newWidth==-1)
                   newWidth=(int)(newHeight * aspectRatio);
              if(newHeight==-1)
                   newHeight = (int)(newWidth / aspectRatio);
             // Draw the scaled image
             BufferedImage newImage = new BufferedImage(newWidth, newHeight,
                     imageType);
             Graphics2D graphics2D = newImage.createGraphics();
                //I admit little clue as to what im doing with the rendering hints.
             Map map = new HashMap();
             map.put(RenderingHints.KEY_INTERPOLATION,
             RenderingHints.VALUE_INTERPOLATION_BILINEAR);
             map.put(RenderingHints.KEY_RENDERING, RenderingHints.VALUE_RENDER_QUALITY);
             map.put(RenderingHints.KEY_ANTIALIASING, RenderingHints.VALUE_ANTIALIAS_ON);
             RenderingHints hints = new RenderingHints(map);
             graphics2D.setRenderingHints(hints);
             graphics2D.drawImage(image, 0, 0, newWidth, newHeight, null);
             return newImage;
    then the call to it looks like:
public BufferedImage processLandScapeImage(BufferedImage img)
              int width = Integer.valueOf(theHeight.getText()).intValue(); //my desired width
              return scaleImage(img, BufferedImage.TYPE_INT_RGB, width, -1);
         }So this is close, the files dont look bad but alas... they still aren't the same quality. Should I post a sample of what I get with GIMP and what I get with my little program?
Thanks to anyone who has some pointers...
-Shane

If you don't care about the original source BufferedImage, then you should be able to draw the image onto itself in an incremental fashion. That would avoid the use of intermediate images and consequently not throw the OOM.
Also note that the code in that article has a slight hiccup. If you specify you want higher quality and targetWidth > w || targetHeight > h, then you'll get an infinite loop. So it needs to be structured slightly different (indeed, the intermediate images should probably be flushed since they're being draw to and from at least once).
I didn't realize such a task was so non-trivial.If you're not worried about the speed, then I guess the trivial good-result way would be to use Image#getScaledInstance with the area average parameter. It's not so much that it's too slow for normal consumption (it isn't), it's just that the Graphics way is so much faster.
GIMP probably uses a more sophisticated resampling technique like Lanczos or something.

Imported Illustrator type looks bad in Premiere.

I'm making title cards in Adobe Illustrator CS 4 and importing them into Premiere CS 4. When I render the movie, the type looks like crap. Is there something I can do in Illustrator or Premiere to improve the quality?
Thanks in advance for the help.
Jody Radzik

I use AI quite a bit for the creation of all sorts of Shapes in PS to be used in Pr. In PS, I always use these in an image set up to match my Pr Project, i.e. NTSC 720x480 PAR 0.9. These always look very good, when I Import them as .PSD's into Pr.
Exactly what workflow have you used between AI, PS and Pr? What are your Pr Project settings, and what are your image dimensions in PS? Can you attach an example of what is looking bad with your PS image containing AI material? Hint: you'll need to do a Save_As JPEG, but do keep the compression down (higher quality # in PS), and then use the little "camera" icon in the middle of the forum editing screen, NOT the Attach Files dialog box at the bottom.
Good luck,
Hunt

SD DVD looks bad

Hi,
A few things.....trying to create SD DVD from HD footage.
The movie looks great on the Mac using a HDTV (720) for moniter.
1. DVD - some audio out of sync.
2. DVD looks bad....color is lighter...image all grainy.
It must be some simple settings.....
please help.

Compressor has made compression simpler but the one setting fits all approach will never be an absolute.
Export a QT reference movie from FC(not self-contained or with QT conversion)
Use one of the DVD presets in compressor based on the length of your program. Make sure you are creating an AC3 file of your audio and not an aiff.
I have found Compressor to be consistently inconsistent when it tries to do HD-SD conversion for DSP. It can work well and then not so well.
If you stil don't get the desired results you could try adjusting the frame control settings found in the inspector window of the MPG-2 setting. I would try better first as best tends to take 10 times longer to render.

Disappearing layers in Final render

I have a layer of video that keeps diappearing from my final render. It doesn't disappear completly. Looks to be down to about 1% opacity. Only happens in my final quicktime render. Plays and looks fine in my comp and ram previews. All my other comps which are pretty much duplicates except swapping out 2 layers work just fine as well.
First image is my ram preview with the camera pushing past her. How it is supposed to look. Second is what actually renders out. It hits that frame right as the camera moves and she disappears. Layer order and z-position is not the issue. Any help is much appreciated.

Are you sure that you are previewing the Active Camera in the Comp?
If so then a screenshot of the entire timeline would be of much more use than these frame grabs.

Video looks bad

Ok, I am currently using FC: Express, but I don't see an express forums anywhere so I though I'd post it here. I would like to know how I can keep the original quality video I am done editing it in FC. Ususally when I am done and export it, the quality looks bad, really bad.
All I am doing right now is adding a title/credit created from Live Type and adding music to the FC project I have. The original .avi file I have is crystal cleaer at 1576x986 resolution.
Any help would be great

Hey,
The Final Cut Express forums are here: http://discussions.apple.com/forum.jspa?forumID=936
Because there's so many variables at play in your question, and I've not got much experience, I can't really answer your main question, though.
Matt
Yoga Maya Films - www.yogamayafilms.com
The Film Producer's Podcast - www.yogamayafilms.com/podcast

Preview & Final Render Choppy at transitions...

i searched for this on the forums, but couldn't find anything. i know it's probably a simple problem, but i can't figure it out:
whenever i overlap 2 or more clips to make a transitional fade (or even if i have 2 stacked clips on) the RAM preview is choppy at that part, and so is the final render when played back in both quicktime and WMP (i'm sure it's choppy in every player, those are the only 2 i've tried).
the video in both RAM preview and final render is smooth up until a transition, then it's choppy and crawls through it, then smooth again.
am i not checking some small box somewhere? anyone else have this problem and fix it?
TECH SPECS:
AE CS4
30fps
intel 2.49 GHz, 3 GB RAM
Windows XP Pro

Well, most MPG in digital photo cameras is some sort of MPEG-4, often deviating considerably from standardized specs, so anything is possible. In your case, a look in the manual might offer some insights. I'm beggining to think that the clips are actually recorded at a lower frame rate (e.g. 24fps) and then use some sort of pulldown to look like 30fps. that#s not noticable when just viewing them, but gets you when editing. they may require to have the pulldown removed by interpreting them as 24fps pa. likewise, 30fps and 29.97fps are different things in AE's world, so that should be checked as well. Those discrepancies could also well explain your audio issues. The scaling should be unrealted, as AE works on fully reconstructed frames, not the source stream. It just cannot reconstruct the frames correctly in the transition areas, that's why it looks so weird.
Mylenium

Fonts look bad in OSX jagged text

Hello
I thought apple gave us font smoothing in OSX! My fonts look terrible in QuarkXpress6.0. Is this what I have to look forward to? I miss my ATM.
I did the "font smoothing thing" in appearence-no change.
Also will all my older fonts from when I used OS 7 +8, will these still work in OSX? and by Quark XPress?
Please enlighten me!
all fonts look bad; Goudy old style, bellvue etc. (postscript type 1)
imac G5 Mac OS X (10.4.4) 21" screen

if I zoom out in Quark to view document at say 125% the 45 pt type really looks bad
Hmm. I'm unable to duplicate your problem. I've pasted some random text into Quark, sized it to 45 pt and set the zoom to 125%. No matter if I go up or down, the fonts look very smooth with both Goudy Old Style and News Gothic (I have the Adobe version, not MT, which is from MonoType). Well, if I look real close, I can see a little bit of jaggies around curves. But nothing very noticable.
Is your 21" monitor a CRT or LCD? LCD always produce the best image when used at their native resolution. A CRT's best display varies depending on whether it has a shadow mask or aperture grill tube. If your monitor has an independent control for sharpening, it may be too high.
I have some fonts installed that I don't know where they came from ex: News Gothic MT (Microsoft I think) Will these view and print okay in any program?
As long as it's a standard Mac suitcase style TrueType font, or a complete and proper Type 1 PostScript font, it should just as well as any other.
I keep all my fonts in classic folder and manage w/font book (thats another story) It seems that my classic apps, Illustrator, see most of the fonts all the time eventhough I turned many off in fontbook. Also illustrator doesn't see ALL the fonts.
That's a handful. When it comes to Classic, the rules are a little different. Fonts you manually place into the OS 9 Fonts folder, or are put there by the OS when activating them from Font Book with OS 9 as the choice to be activated for, fonts are then available to both Classic and OS X.
If you deactivate them in Font Book, the fonts will become unavailable to OS X apps. However, any Classic apps will continue to see them until you shut down all OS 9 applications and Classic. In other words, once you open fonts for Classic, they can't be closed to Classic without shutting the entire environment down. Confused yet?
As far as Illustrator not seeing all the fonts, that relates to this part of your question:
Please explain the limitations of classic apps and fonts.
Classic can use any fonts that were in existence for the Mac before OS X. All of your older Mac TrueType and Type 1 PostScript fonts will work in OS X and Classic. Fonts that will work as is in OS X that you couldn't use before on a Mac are PC TrueType fonts. If you have copied any of the OS X .dfonts into the OS 9 Fonts folder, those will not work. A .dfont is a variation of a TrueType font, with the data in the data fork rather than the resource fork as they are with the older Mac TrueType fonts. Neither OS 9 or any Classic apps can read these fonts. Those are likely the ones not showing up in Illustrator.
It sounds like you do a lot of work with fonts. While Apple has improved Font Book quite a bit in Tiger, it's still very much a consumer font manager for those who handle fonts only occasionally. You'd be much better off using a font manager such as Suitcase X1 or Font Agent Pro.

Is the GPU used for final render?

Hi,
I started using Speedgrade on my Mac Pro, and I really like it.
I'm getting great playback of my 3K r3d files - realtime at 1/2 res with my ATI 5770,
but when I'm doing my final render from the output tab it will only render 0.7 fps in both online and offline quality.
So I was thinking about getting a GTX 580, but will Speedgrade use the GPU for final renders or only for playback? If it's only for playback it wouldn't make sense for me to buy one.
I'm also struggling with getting my project from Premiere to Speedgrade,
I can export an EDL, but this will only contain one video track - and I usually use multiple.
Is there any way to export a sequence with more than one video track?
Thanks

Hey azton,
Speedgrade is using GPU for playback and CPU for rendering.
Regarding Rendering Speed:
what kind of input resolution do you use? - this is crucial to improve render time. If you want to render out Proxies for example, its recommend using input-res below FULL, generally speaking of 1/4 ... 1/2 etc Res.
By changing InputRes only you wil already notice a speed-up, activating OFFLINE quality should give a additional boost.
What is your Output format? DPX? QT? Your Output Resolution?
Rendering from a 3K image + Colorcorrection/Masks/Secondary + Resizing to XXX OuputRes + Codec (h264, DNxHD) wont be ultra fast though.
EDL:
multiple videotracks are not supported in the CMX3600 EDL standard. You have to deal the EDL as a traditional FINAL/MASTER edit.
hope that helps,
D-A

Custom white balance looks bad/off when set on the 5d Mark iii

I got my Mark iii in June and every time I set a custom white balance it doesn't look right. I have used both a purchased grey card and a white piece of paper, both look bad. When I set it on my Rebel Xs it looks perfect, no adjustments needed in post processing, but not the case with the Mark iii. Shouldn't it be the other way around, considering the price tag on the iii ?

Canon "tags" RAW images with meta-data regarding white balance (and other info) but does not actually alter the image. Depending on what you use to process the images on the computer, it can read those tags and decide to apply it's interpretation. But those white balance adjustments would be applied by your computer software (assuming they are being applied -- not all software does this) -- and not by the camera.
I use Aperture (Apple's pro photography software), which has a camera profile for each camera. The profiles can compensate if, for example, one camera is naturally "cooler" than another.
Tim Campbell
5D II, 5D III, 60Da

Graphics look bad on pause at end of chapters

I've created a presentation in Keynote that I've exported as a QT movie and imported into DVDSP. Since the presentation will be manually advanced via remote control, I've set infinite pauses at the start of each chapter. My problem is that when the pause occurs, the still graphics look really bad. I realize this probably has more to do with the DVD player itself but I was wondering if anyone has found a work-around for this issue. Thanks in advance.
Mac OS X (10.4.4)

Thanks EJP. I need to keep the transition effects though from Keynote so still images won't work. One thing that is kind of weird though it that the still frame at the end of a track looks fine. Its only the pauses at the chapter markers that the video looks bad.

H.264 Looks Bad on DVD

I have some vidoes that I got from the internet that are in H.264. When I watch it on the computer and preview it in iDVD it looks great, but when I watch it on the DVD it looks terrible. I have already tried converting it to dv and MPEG-4. Does anybody have any suggestions?

When I was editing, I pulled the DV footage into an HDV sequence. I exported the file in Apple ProRes 422. Once I did that, I brought it into Compressor and compressed it using DVD: Best Quality 150 minutes (since it was going to run slightly over 120 min.). Specifically, it compressed to mpeg-2 and dolby digital professional 2.0. Both sources were the same frame rate.
What's puzzling me is that it looked bad on my tv but just fine on my friends HD tv. Hope some of this info helps in troubleshooting my issue.
Thanks.

Final Render Looks Bad?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for