H.264 encoder (in cs3) produces really bad aliasing from AVI MJpeg source

I have many 640x480 mjpg avi files from a Canon Powershot camera that I put in a 640x360 project. I keep the vids at 100% scale and just leave them cropped top and bottom.
What I find interesting is that when I encode my project out using h.264 (keeping the same 640x360, square pixels, ridiculously high bitrates, etc etc) I great really terrible aliasing. If I use MPEG2 (with basically the same settings, though obviously much lower bitrate), it looks fantastic and quite similar to my original videos.
Can anyone enlighten me as to why this is? Is there some secret setting in h.264 that I'm missing?
My project settings are:
Timebase: 30.00 frames/second
Frame size: 640x360
Pixel Aspect Ratio: Square Pixels (1.0
Fields: No Fields (Progressive Scan)
The AVI files show these properties in Premiere:
Type: AVI Movie
File Size: 50.4 MB
Image Size: 640 x 480
Pixel Depth: 640
Frame Rate: 30.00
Source Audio Format: 11024 Hz - 8 bit - Mono
Project Audio Format: 48000 Hz - 32 bit floating point - Mono
Total Duration: 00:00:28:05
Average Data Rate: 1.8 MB / second
Pixel Aspect Ratio: 1.0

John T Smith wrote:
>Tell me something that helps me for free
I like free as much as the next guy... but it seems, from some of the attitudes I've read in various forums, that some people feel "entitled" to free software
A few Billion ticks of the computer clock ago, I wrote a specialty database application (dBase III compiled by Clipper... way back pre-history in Dos days) and cast it out upon the Shareware waters
As a bonus for registering, I had a version with additional reports... and was amazed at the GALL of people who would write in wanting more reports... and who had never sent in a registration fee
I finally gave up on Shareware... but I'm still amazed at people who want something for nothing
I had to chuckle at the email I received this morning... see below
Hunt has been around a long time, and we've given advice in the same message many times, so I'm sure he knew that I was simply adding a comment to what he said about being wary about giving software advice
But... someone seems to be upset by me saying some people have an "attitude" about wanting free software
"Hello,
Though the content you posted was reported for abuse, it has been approved by our moderators:"

Similar Messages

Really bad performance from my mac

I have a problem with my 20" intel mac, its about three years old and the only modification I have made to it is adding two 1gb sticks to increase the RAM.
My DVD writer started to refuse to write DVDs and then for no reason my mac started to freeze for about two/three seconds about 2 months ago, first it was a little annoying then it started to get worse. Software updates would take ages to download and install, and by that I mean something that should last 20 minutes was taking 3 or 4 hours.
Its got a 160gb hard disk and I was pretty much full at the time so I started to remove some old stuff from my documents, unfortunately I was a little trigger happy and removed a key file for vmware which is where my trouble really began. After reinstalling vmware things got considerably worse, I don't think it was the vmware software that was the cause but searching many websites, after resetting the pram etc nothing seemed to clear up the freezing problem which was now lasting about 2 or 3 minutes at a time every 10 mins or so.
Santa Claus left me a very nice 27 inch brand new mac under the tree which was great but my old mac still needed some TLC. After checking the fans, and internet connection I called apple (I don't have apple care) and again resetting prams, booting from DVD the machine seemed to come back to normal operation. The next day however, the same problems happened again. After a few days I reformatted the hard disk and reinstalled tiger. This took over a day of installing from the DVD which cant be right. Moving my photo's, home made movies and music over my wireless network to the new mac took another 3 days, all the time the disk on the old mac seemed fine, the fan was a little noisy but nothing too bad.
Now anything over 50mb refuses to download in the software updates and its now unuseable. I am pretty much all out of ideas, can anyone on here help or have seen this type of issue before?

I had a look at what changing the disk would involve, the same disks are pretty inexpensive but I dont like the look of the process in particular removing the tin foil etc.
The iBook is the most difficult Mac laptop to service. It is very intense and requires quite a bit of disassembly before you can access the HDD. However, it is quite doable with basic mechanical skills, time, care and a lot of patience. If you are willing to attempt it we can guide you through the process. Or you can have someone do it for you. There is a service I used here in Madison that will do it for $75 plus the cost of the new HDD. If you are interested, let me know.
Thinking of buying a minimax and booting off an external drive instead. Does anyone have any experience of this?
You can boot off a firewire external HDD. You have two options. You can purchase an external 3.5" firewire HDD which gives you higher rotational speeds in addition to larger capacities. These also have their own power supply. The disadvantage is that you need to plug it into household electricty to use it. The other option is to get a 2.5" external firewire enclosure, install a 2.5" drive in it and you can boot the computer from it. These are powered by the firewire bus and don't need an external power supply. They are much more easily portable.
Whichever option you choose, you need a firewire drive as you cannot boot a PowerPC Mac from a USB device. I would strongly urge that whatever drive you choose that you get one with the more reliable Oxford chipset. You can get information about these options at Other World Computing. You can call their tech support for more specific advice. They are very helpful and are a reliable source.
cornelius

H.264 Encoding Questions...???

I am now starting to convert different video files to my iTunes for my AppleTV and have some questions...
BTW, I am using VisualHub and using H.264 - high quality setting for encoding on a G5 iMac with 1GB RAM.
1. Approx. how long should it take to encode a 700MB .avi file to .mp4, using H.264?
I am transferring all these TV shows I have that are around 700MB .avi files and they are taking anywhere from 400-600 minutes per file!!! That seems very long to me.
2. Do .VOB files typically take even longer to encode using H.264?
The few .VOB files I have tried are taking 800 or so minutes for a 2-3GB .vob file.
Is there something else I should be doing? Are these times normal?
Any tips or suggestions for encoding?
Thanks in advance.

Don't use VisualHub myself, but do know that h.264 encoding is extremely processor intensive and time consuming. The actual source material probably won't matter too much unless it's high definition or uses a particularly computationally intensive algorithm to decode (and for most decoding is miles faster than encoding).
For example, on my iMac (2.16GHz Intel core 2 duo) converting a 2-3GB '.rec' TV recording from a Topfield PVR (which in essence produces MPEG2 transport streams), via MPEG Streamclip can take 3-4 hours for say a 90-120 minute program, and that's without using 2 pass encoding.
VisualHub is regarded as one of the faster converters, but High Quality setting will take longer than 'Standard' and the 'Go nuts' option will take even longer.
Hopefully (though it may not be what you want to hear) someone with a G5 and VisualHub will reply to confirm the sort of encoding times you're experiencing - I say hopefully as if their times are much faster it points to some other factor than VisualHub.
Elgato make a hardware USB h.264 encoder which is supposed to speed up encoding considerably but it only accelerates specific applicatiosn (eg iMovie) or their own conversion application (so far - the latest MPEG Streamclip release suggests they will add an option to harness it if possible/feasible - it may not be).
There are mixed reports on the Elgato device - biggest gripes being lack of customisable settings and an 800x600 resolution maximum. I've got one on order - for some older stuff recorded off a PVR it'll probably be more than adequate but for newer things software encoding is likely to be better. Time vs quality trade off really.
Best h.264 encoding results for most at the present time will almost certainly be achieved in customisable converter software - there are probably professional high quality h264 hardware converters available but these would be prohibitively costly for most of us.
AC

Very Slow H.264 Encoding in FCP 10.1.2 and Compressor 4.1 on nMP

I have a fully maxed out 12-core nMP and editing with this machine in FCP 10.1.1 has been a delight. I recently completed a 4K project from footage shot with the Sony AX-100 and then output the project from FCP X using File>Share>Master File to ProRes 422. This operation occurred in about the same length of time as the length of the project (18.5 min.). I then brought this 75 GB ProRes .mov file into Compressor 4.1, and set up Compressor to encode to an H.264 file at 70 Mb/sec. This encode to h.264 is only 1/4 complete at 48 min. and it appears that it will take Compressor about 4 hours to encode this 18 min. project to h.264. Furthermore, I noticed that with the share to a master prores file FCP X was using 50-60% of my total CPU resources while the encode to h.264 in Compressor is using barely 16% of the total CPU. Thus it appears to me that while FCP 10.1.1 is optimized for the nMP, certainly Compressor 4.1, at least for h.264 encoding, is not.
My question is basically what am I missing? Is there a better workflow than using Compressor 4.1 for high bit rate h. 264 encoding of 4K? If so, what is the best way to use my nMP to get a high bit rate h.264 4K file for sending to YouTube and other online streaming?
Thanks for sharing any thoughts on this you may have.
Tom

Russ,
Thanks for responding.
I am encoding only a single project from FCP X in Compressor 4.1 and using only a single instance of Compressor. I don't really see that using multiple instances of Compresor with a single job would be helpful, but perhaps I don't understand something.
The project has now been encoding for 2.5 hr and is slightly less than half complete. The CPU usage is still at 16-17%. Overall this seems like a ridiculously slow encode to h.264 from a ProRes 422 file in Compressor 4.1.
Here are some thoughts on alternatives that I may try. (1) Take the Pro Res 422 file into Adobe's Media Encoder CC and encode it to high bit rate 4K h.264. (2) Take the Pro Res 422 file into Handbrake and encode to high bitrate 4K h.264. Handbrake does seem to make far more use of the nMP's CPU's than Compressor 4.1. Don't know about Media Encoder since I have not tried any h.264 encoding in Media Encoder.
The irony is that my nMP will play then entire 18.5 minute 4K project from the timeline with virtually no dropped frames, but rendering it to h.264 at 4K and high bit rate seems to take forever.
If you have any other thoughts, I would love to hear them. Thanks so much for responding, and I would love to hear from any FCP X experts who are encoding 4K to h.264.
Tom

Encoding with HV20 in PPCS3: Bad quality at 1MB bitrate

Hello,
When I encode my video from my hv20 (1920 x 1080 - 30p) with PPCS3 using H.264 at Bitrate 2MB I get very good results. However when I choose 1MB the video quality is very pixelated and distorted.
When I use my Panasonic HMC-150 I can encode at the same settings including the 1MB Bitrate setting and get excellent results.
Is the difference in encoding quality due to the camera or the h.264?
Any ideas why the quality deteriorates from 2MB to 1MB so badly. I would like to play these videos on the internet so I prefer 1MB due to playable speed.
Thanks,
Simon

Hi Harm,
Actually I am using 29.97 FPS for 592x328. Is that part of the problem?
Is there a rule when scaling down and trying to figure out the dimension size of the video?
15fps? Wouldn't the video be less smooth?
I appreciate the tips.
Simon

AME CS5, Quicktime & H.264 encoding - very poor

Hi all,
I seem to be stumped on an encoding issue - whenever I encode .mov files with the H.264 codec, they always come out looking like, well like a first generation web video - ie like S$*T.
My best guess is that the profile is preset to use 'baseline' - if so, is there a way to change this? I can't find any options to change to change the profile, or levels, or anything with regards to H.264 - there is a "codec settings" button, but that is grayed out.
Am I just a dummy and missing some key setting in the interface?
If I go back to CS3 and export with the same settings, I get great looking video - but of course since the project was edited in CS5, I can't go backwards.....
If I am a dummy, can anyone point me in the direction on how to get good looking .mov videos out of AME CS5?
Thanks,
~Mike

whenever I encode .mov files with the H.264 codec, they always come out looking like, well like a first generation web video - ie like S$*T.
I did a quick test of an H.264 MOV earlier today for someone else; check it out here. This is PAL DV to H.264, at about 2Mbps; I think it looks OK. I can get much better from the MainConcept H.264 encoder, or an external encoder, but it's usable.
My best guess is that the profile is preset to use 'baseline' - if so, is there a way to change this? I can't find any options to change to change the profile, or levels, or anything with regards to H.264 - there is a "codec settings" button, but that is grayed out.
According to MediaInfo, the H.264 MOV generated by Premiere is actually using the Main profile; the Level varies based on frame size and where you limit the bitrate. You don't have a lot of options here because, well, I don't think Apple's/QuickTime's implementation of H.264 gives you many options. It's a pretty rotten encoder, at least in comparison to some of the other choices out there.
If you want more flexibility in creating an H.264 encode, use the H.264 format; it's in the same list as QuickTime. You'll have much more you can choose from and more flexibility when controlling your encode. It still doesn't give you as much control as, say Sorenson Squeeze (MainConcept codec) or x264 (open source H.264 encoder, which gives you even more than MainConcept), but you can get some decent looking encodes. The video will be put in an MP4 container, which will playback in QuickTime.
Do you need an MOV? If so, check out MPEG Streamclip. I'm assuming you're using Windows, so that's where the link goes; there's a Mac version as well, however. Anyway, MPEG Streamclip is my go-to gadget when I absolutely have to send an H.264 MOV. It's still using Apple's encoder, but it looks better, and you have a little more control. Just spit out an uncompressed file from Premiere (has to be an uncompressed AVI or else any kind of MOV) and encode from Streamclip--works a treat.

Do you need to use H.264 encoding?

Good morning.
I'm using VisualHub to convert/encode my movies for my AppleTV. Do you need to use the H.264 encoding option or is it just a personal preference?
Thanks.
Mac Mini Mac OS X (10.4.4) 20" Apple Cinema Display, iBook G4, MacBook Pro

Do you need to use the H.264 encoding option or is it just a personal preference?
I can't speak on VisualHub specifically (though I hear great things about it) but, yes, I'd would say that it's personal preference.
I'm sure you've read this elsewhere, but the benefit to h.264 is that it's a more efficient algorithm compared to MPEG-4. In non-tech speak, that means that it produces smaller files size at the (relatively) same quality. The major downside, of course, is that h.264 takes substantially longer to encode than MPEG-4.
Depending on the your needs – how demanding are you about quality? - and constraints - do you have a lot of stuff to encode, but not enough time? - MPEG-4 should be fine.

Speeding up H.264 encoding

Hello,
I'm looking for your current thoughts on speeding up H.264 encoding. I'm currently using FCE HD 3. Last night I made a 560x315, hour-and-twenty-minute web video for a client--it took over 14 hours to encode. Not the end of the world--usually I do 10-minute videos, but still...
I'm running a new G4 ibook (slow, I know) but am considering a MacBook Pro.
1) Any system settings or RAM issues that might speed things up?
2) Any thoughts on the open source x264 (just downloaded and will test this weekend)?
3) It is really possible to distrubte the work amongst multiple computers (I'm using an Airport network with two other (older) Macs. Worth it?
Also, I've read that H.264 encoding is slower on the MacBook Pro as compared to the G5, apparently due to non-optimized code in Quicktime. Any experiences with this or rumors of when/if the software will be made to run faster? Is there a real hardware solution out there?
Thanks!
--Darin

Thanks for the replies. I went to the Apple store and purchased one, since there's no restocking fee. But playing with it last night, it definitely won't do what I want it to do. So, it's going back.
But, your note on upping processor performance has noticeably helped when I'm scrubbing video on my MB. It's more responsive now. Also, the encoding time improved. I had a sample 720p clip I am have testing against. After upping the processor (choosing "performance" over the default "normal") improved the encoding time from 65 to 48 minutes. That's a nice little boost. Thanks.

H.264 encoding with Episode Pro or Compressor ???

I will be doing some HDDVD soon and was wondering if anyone have used Episode Pro for H.264 encoding. I'm using CinemaCraft for SD encoding and find it much better than compressor but at the moment there's no affordable H.264 encoders other than Episode pro...Any suggestions ??? Thanks

Currently, I have Episode Pro 4.2.2, which is the latest version of Episode Pro. The limitations with it are that there are several small things like with H.264, where it will only do 2 pass encoding, instead of multipass, which if you're a stickler for detail like I am, you will see the difference.
Episode doesn't base it's encoding on QT, though it does make use of the codecs contained in QT. As one of the people at telestream said, they use there own proprietary engine and as a result, for the most part, does very fairly nice job.
If you were to really put to the test Episode Pro against compressor's multipass encoder, you find that all things being setup the same, that compressor would yield a technically superior image, (due to multipass encoding.)
If you are in a hurry and the quality of image is not as important as time, Episode Pro is you're choice. Now in defense of Telestream, they are a company that listens to there end users, unlike some I know, (Auto Desks Cleaner 6.5 comes to mind.) I have emailed there technical team and made suggestion on improvements to Episode Pro and believe it or not, they will be implementing my suggestions within the next 6 to 8 months. My moneys always on the company that listens to there customers.
When I have very critical work, dealing with H.264, compressor when setup correctly gives outstanding results, but now that when I have corresponded with Telestream over the last month, I'm betting that the limitations that Episode currently has, will rapidly disappear in a very short time, they just listen the there customers.
I also have 3 copies of Cleaner 6.5 and it also, (when it works) also uses multipass encoding for H.264 and resulting files look fabulous. The only problem is that I can never keep a batch running for more than a day.
Long story short, for day to day output, were perfection is not a concern, Episode Pro is a very good choice, (I own 3 copies.) For mission critical work, where high quality is a must, I unfortunately have to still use Cleaner 6.5, even though it hasn't seen an update in over a year, (not even bug fixes.) The reason for using Cleaner 6.5 is that, I guess I'm just use to the software and know were all the gotchs are, so I just work around them. Compressor again is a very good choice, but the setup is still not on par with the other encoders, this is why I use Cleaner 6.5, (for critical work) and Episode Pro, (for day to day use) there easier to setup.
Sorry for rambling on so much, I have been dealing with finding the best solution for a long time now, and still there isn't just one app that has it all, YET! I even own a copy of Sorenson 4.5, but don't use it at all.

Have plan feature H.264 Encoding for Cameras on Mobile?

Have plan feature H.264 Encoding for Cameras on Mobile?
Thank you

Generally speaking H264 is supposed to be about twice as efficient as MPEG2. I think that's probably overstating the case somewhat (i.e. H264 isn't really twice as "good"). However you can certainly cut back somewhat from what you'd use with MPEG2.
Next consideration is the resolution/dimension of the final video. Do you want to go 640x480 (NTSC 4:3 aspect ratio) or something smaller? Since you're starting with video tape I'd suggest something like 480x360 (that should be large enough by a good margin to get all of the quality from a video tape). However, you might even want to drop down to 320x240 since that would be compatible with the video iPod and potentially other mobile, hand-held devices.
Finally, if you go with 640x480 I'd suggest something in the 3Mb to 4Mb per second range (for relatively demanding material, less for so-called "talking heads," and perhaps a bit more for extreme action), that would scale to 1.7Mb to 2.3Mb per second for 480x360, and 750Kb to 1Mb per second for 320x240. If you plan on using Front Row and want to store your video on a remote server (accessed either wirelessly or over ethernet) then you will definitely want to enable the "streaming" option when you encode the video. In fact you may want to use the streaming option in every case (for future compatibility).
If you plan on viewing this video on a computer display or any type of LCD or high-definition device you may also want to consider a de-interlace step for the 640x480 and 480x360 resolutions. You won't need that for the 320x240 video since 240 is exactly one half of the vertical resolution for standard NTSC DV (720x480). However, if you're using PAL you'll need to adjust all of the above resolutions to fit the proper form factors.
As always, the beauty will be in the eye of the beholder. Thus I'd suggest that you try something near the above and adjust accordingly (based upon what you see and like or dislike).

Photoshop CC really bad lagging on new rMBP

I resently bought a new Retina MacBook Pro 13" with a nice fast 2,8 i7 proccesor and a big chunk of 16 Gb ram. After using it on my older iMac I was exited to use it on my new MacBook. But its lagging really bad. It makes it unusable for me. I don't work with large files and we mostly use it for small UI design. I use a Bamboo Wacom and use OpenGL is on. when turned of its a lot faster but this results in masive graphic bugs.
Anyone know how to fix this? Because I'm really thinking of switching to Sketch 3 (http://bohemiancoding.com/sketch)

Well, something is up with your system to make it slow.
Do you have any third party plugins? Have you tried disabling them?
Do you have any utilities that would interfere with other applications (antivirus, firewall, etc.)?
And the "graphics bugs" mean that you have a driver problem which will have to be addressed by Apple.

Firefox behaves REALLY badly at random times and I'm worried about it?

So here's what happens. This happens at random times, unexpectedly. I click on a new link, any link, and suddenly, Firefox blares up, automatically turns to private browsing, and goes to a bunch of random websites.
Then, it lands on ''www.xnxx.com'',(<sub>'''edit''', un-linked -J99</sub> ) which I have identified to be a pornography website. After that, it suddenly picks on a random porn video and crashes before the video plays.
This really worries me, because just before this first happened, I had done a quick scan with both Microsoft Security Essentials and Malwarebytes Anti-Malware Pro, and there was absolutely NO problem.
Not only that, I had gone only to trusted websites.
I'm a high school sophomore, so this could turn out REALLY badly for me if someone sees this happening and thinks that I'm TRYING to watch that stuff.
I have already sent a crash report to Firefox and included the website that I crashed in, which is the porn website. I haven't sent any other details, though.
Could I be getting hacked? I don't think so, because this only happens with Firefox; Chrome, Opera, Maxthon, and IE don't have this problem.
I'm running Firefox 15.0.1 in Windows 7 x64 (why the crash report said Windows NT x86, I have no idea).
PLEASE help me fix this!

On looking at your System Details aside I note that you include a Crash ID.
That particular crash is probably related to use of Norton software. You may find that you can use the Norton security software without crashes if you disable the '''Norton Security Safe '''feature (Please confirm - or otherwise - that you are using that ). Note I am not suggesting you turn of the security software, just the utility/toolbar.
For forum cross referencing purposes
* Report for your CrashID [https://crash-stats.mozilla.com/report/index/6658b458-9955-4c98-8054-118f12121007 6658b458-9955-4c98-8054-118f12121007]
** Crash Signature:'' coffplgn.dll@0x3b4e2''
** Related Bugs ? (none specifically listed). <br /> Apparently this one may be related'' Bug 783369 - Norton Confidential 2012 crashes (couictlr.dll, coffplgn.dll) ''

App for Windows 8 are really bad

The apps Microsoft made for Skype are really bad.
Any chance for a update so you have some chance of getting to things like call and chat and make it more clear who are online.
Out of a lot of bad apps for windows 8 this take the cake!!

Is there a reason "Elaine" (http://community.skype.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/88058) had to edit/moderate EVERY one of the posts here?
This thread started some time ago, so please correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like the word "sucks" was replaced with "are really bad" in the last 12 hours.
The only reason I bring this up is because this is censorship and let me tell you Elaine that it is NOT helping Microsoft/Skype's case here!
If something SUCKS it means it IS REALLY BAD. The word "sucks" is VERY well known throughout the english speaking world to mean this. Any moderation on the grounds that the moderation was done "In deference to international sensibilities" is ridiculous! This stinks of corporate censorship!
Rather than censor everyone's comments, how about you (the company) just fix the issues and let us know they are fixed OR if fixing them isn't going to happen in the near future at least let us know that you're working on it!
I have not seen even one official comment by Skype or Microsoft staff regarding this issue! NOT ONE! That implies to me that there is something seriously wrong and its almost definitley not going to be fixed any time soon!
Perhaps after all these years of being a happy customer it is time to start looking at moving away from Skype to another service...

Media Encoder in CS3?

Is there a shortcut for media encoder in CS3?

I can't pull up CS3 at the moment, but I think the option under "Export" was "Adobe Media Encoder" which was separate from "Movie" for example.
A shortcut that directly sent you from a sequence to the export settings for cs3-ame-whatever it was called, would have been nice. After all, you had to keep doing that over and over, after each one was exported.
That was a huge feature addition: batching exports in CS4!

Mail handles .Mac really badly-what's up?

Since I put my .Mac email account into my Mail application, it has worked really badly and I am considering just deleting off the .Mac account and not using it anymore as it is so annoying. Essentially, having the .Mac account in Mail slows everything else (my other email accounts) down to a ridiculous level. When I check "All", and sometimes when I send even one email, the Activity Viewer shows me that Mail is struggling to open .Mac mailboxes and stuff like that, and while it is struggling to do various things with .Mac, including synchronizing, the other email accounts are held up in the queue (ho hum... very boring). To prevent this, I went into the .Mac account and unchecked the "Include when automatically checking for new mail", but this has no effect whatsoever, probably because I usually check for new mail manually anyway.
I have two Macs at present, an older G4 flat panel iMac (1.25 Ghz), and a brand new dual core intel MacBook (2Ghz) and the problem is exactly the same on both Macs. Anyone having similar problems or knows a fix to this? Would love to hear!

There is a setting under the Advanced tab for the
account preferences to not keep all messages and
their attachments available for offline viewing but I
don't use this setting and don't experience the same
problems.
To clarify, do you mean that you "do not" keep all messages (etc.) available for offline viewing, or that you "do" keep all messages (etc.) available? At present, I have this option to "keep all messages and attachments available for off-line viewing" checked positive, by default I presume.
After first creating the account if there
are a number of server stored mailboxes and messages
available on the server, the mailbox and message
synchronization process takes longer than normal and
the time it takes for subsequent synchronization
should not be a real long process unless a number of
changes have been make with server stored mailboxes.
Odd thing is that I only have one saved message in the .Mac account, and that is a tiny weeny one (about 10K) with no attachments or anything! By the way, since I have just been going through everything all over again, I notice that what really seems to be holding things up (I've now changed synchronization to "manual" on both computers) is when I "Get Mail" and Mail is trying to open the .Mac mailbox - this goes on interminably (as I can see in Activity Viewer).
Try using the Rebuild Mailbox function on all server
stored mailboxes. All messages will disappear
temporarily and the mailbox will be resynchronized
with the server.
Sorry for being dense, but I've been all over my Mail application and all over my .Mac settings and I can't find this "Rebuild Mailbox" function. Could you please tell me exactly where I can find this Rebuild Mailbox function?
Mac OS X (10.4.9)

H.264 encoder (in cs3) produces really bad aliasing from AVI MJpeg source

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for