IMac 24" with NVidia 7600GT - Crappy image quality

Hi,
I just installed Windows 7 after updating my graphics firmware as described here: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3967. The less I can say is that the quality of the image displayed is far from being decent, weird patterns are appearing, some parts of the image are flickering... in a word, a nightmare.
I made some pictures... Take a look at http://picasaweb.google.com/adam.eljabri/Windows7OnIMac24#
The first one is a screenshot I made on the same machine using the Windows 7 Snipping Tool, everything looks normal.
I installed Bootcamp 3.0, upgraded to 3.1 and even installed the updated drivers I could get for my card through Windows Update... each time with the same results.
Played with resolution (currently running at 1920x1200) and color depth (currently 32bit) but it didn't help.
Anybody else experiencing the same behaviour ?

That's interesting... Seems that putting my iMac to sleep and then waking it up solves the problem!
Not an ideal solution but at least it is a workaround.

Similar Messages

Problems with Elisa Media Center (images quality)

Hi
I decided to install Elisa Media Center on my laptop. Everything works just fine, but only images from photo gallery are very ugly (I mean ragged). Don't know why, but when I play slideshow all of my photos, all of them are really bad looking. Just look.
This is screenshot from Elisa:
And that's how this image looks in original format (quality):

I reinstalled Adobe Premiere Elements 10 and the above mention problem reoccured. With a little detective work I was able to determine that the file causing my problem was "mc_dec_dd_ds.ax". I am not sure what this does to Adobe Premiere Elements 10 since I removed (renamed) the offending file. A strange side affect, renaming the file did cause an increase volume. Strange.

Need help with full screen slideshow image quality

I am looking to display some images with full screen slideshow. The images I add are very large, over 5000 wide. When I publish the site some images retain their quality while others lose it and look like crap. Why would this be and how can I fix it. I tried to resize them to the 2560x1707 that muse does, and then add them. This doesn't change the end result of poor quality.

Go to Assets Panel and locate the image you want to use at original size. Right click the image and chose 'Import Larger Size'.
See if that helps retain quality for that image, since Muse does not resize/interpolate that image for you.
Cheers,
Vikas

Macbook pro with retina difference in image quality of Pc(dell) and mac quality

Ok this is my dilemma. I have had a dell for about 5 years now never calibrated or anything(never even knew what that was).
So there are some photos I upload to my flickr account from my macbook and I looked at the same flickr account on my pc and the images were dull, lacked color.
I went to the apple store and they suggested that maybe i have been looking at the wrong quality all along from my pc lol!
I know flickr should not be the basis on how I view photos but even when I take one photo from the mac and view it on my pc regularly it still looks horrible.
Please help Im scared that when I give people their photos aside from print that the images on their flash drives will come out dull and lacking bold color.
Also I edit with photoshop.

Are you saving images with the correct color profile? Normally for web you would use sRGB. Make sure you are being consistent on Windows and Mac.
You can have a different working color space. For example I use Pro Photo RGB as the working space in both Lightroom and Photoshop, but I usually export in sRGB (web; email) or Adobe RGB (printing)

IMAC 24Inch with NVidia 256 MB graphics card CRASHED NO SCREEN STARTUP HELP

HI there, wondering if anyone has had their nvidia GT graphics card crash then the screen go black?
I got home tonight, my ali imac 24inch, looks like its off, I turn it on, everything boots up but no
screen. Ive shared the screen through my macbook and look at the system info and it says under graphics displays "No information found" What does this mean? Has my graphics card destroyed itself?
It better not have! HELP!!!

Actually you may find that you have more success with an AMD\ATI Radeon video card.
I have experienced that with some motherboards, specifically Pegatron motherboards.
The problem is that you are delving into the DIY gaming PC realm and trying to do it with a prebuilt desktop PC.
Upgrading a prebuilt PC does not always result in a success story. Don't even consider trying to install cutting edge gaming memory modules. That will be a definite disappointment for you.
You may get lucky with an AMD Radeon HD video card.
But...You might just run into the same frustrating scenario you are facing today. I wish I had better news to give you.
****Please click on Accept As Solution if a suggestion solves your problem. It helps others facing the same problem to find a solution easily****
2015 Microsoft MVP - Windows Experience Consumer

IMac 24 with Nvidia 7600...bad video card choice?

Hi folks. I've had my iMac 24 incher for a few days now and I went to try one of my favorite game demos, Unreal Tournament 2004 and the performance I got from the video was a lot less than what I thought it would be. I have the game for my Windows machine which is a 3Ghz P4, 2GB RAM, GeForce 6600GT and the performance on that seems way better than my iMac. Why? I thought the video card it in was suppose to be pretty good (GeForce 7600GT 256mb). I changed the settings in UT to the native res of the mac but it didnt' help. Anything I can do about this? Thanks.

He said that he was running the demo. I don't
think
this has been updated to universal binary.
It has been updated. Do a search on versiontracker.
Do you mean this?
http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/22450
Versiontracker screwed up again. This is a patch that updates the retail release of UT 2004 for Mac to version 3369.2. It isn't the demo. The demo weighs in at nearly 600 MB. If you have a link to a download of an actual UB demo of UT 2004, please feel free to share.
20" iMac CD (early '06) Mac OS X (10.4.7)

Considering iMac 24" with nVidia 8800GTS

Hi All,
I'm currently running a PC with the specs below and have been considering a move to a Mac after having played with OSX and being very impressed. It seems to be what an OS should be - a thin veneer over the hardware.
The only thing concerning me is the iMac's game playing ability. Has anyone switched from PC to Mac with similiar specs? What would the difference in performance be? Would the iMac be able to run most current games?
I'm guessing the weak point would be the iMac's video card - a 8800GTS vs the 8800GTX that I have in my PC. Motherboard and processor wise, the Mac is much better. Presumably the two will kind of balance each other out?
Regards
RobP

Thanks Lenn,
I think I will hold off for a while, but my intention will be to make the switch at some point. I've been very impressed with Apple's iPod Touch and their OSX system.
Maybe, at some point in the future apple will consider better graphics cards. The rest of the specification is right up there. With such a card, Apple would have a chance of capturing some of the PC games market.
Regards
RobP

Does imac come with nvidia graphics cards

title says it all

According to the apple specs for the 2012 21.5" and 27" iMacs they contain, the following depding on choices shown there:
AMD Radeon HD 6750M
AMD Radeon HD 6770M
AMD Radeon HD 6770M
AMD Radeon HD 6970M

Sudden Change in Image Quality

I recently started using my I Sight for conferencing and was quite pleased with the results / overall image quality it provided. It was fine with the daylight setting of my office almost the entire day, and in the evening with tungsten lighting in the room, it also was great. Bright in all situations and pretty well balanced. Then one day I logged in to a chat and found in the daylight setting where it once was fine... I was now very dark, and later in the evening where I had always had sufficient lighting... it again was very dark. I also noticed a green cast on the back wall and in the skin tones. What can I do to get my I Sight to go back to the way it was??? I tried to white balance with a piece of paper and the black "X" which did nothing and preferences seem to do nothing. Is there anything? Important to note: the change occured entirely on its own... I did nothing... it just happened?????

Hello Scott,
Welcome to Apple Discussions.
Thanks for the thorough explanation of your problem. Well done.
It seems you have already tried the relevant suggestions from the Improving Your iSight Picture FAQ.
If you have ever installed iChatUSBCam or iGlasses, someone may have changed your color and brightness settings. Either of these apps allow manual adjustment of the settings that iSight and iChat AV normally adjust automatically.
If iGlasses or iChatUSBCam settings are not your problem, try to remember any other hardware or software you have changed since your iSight worked correctly. Perhaps you have changed or added something that is causing your strange symptoms. Be sure to include changes in conference backgrounds, room lighting, and decor in addition to possible changes in your computer system. Can these changes be removed, adjusted, or uninstalled?
Once you have ruled out the above, you can check your iSight using the tests and trouble shooting suggestions in the How To Ensure Your iSight Is Functional FAQ. if your iSight fails ALL tests see your Apple VAR or Service Technician to have it checked. It may be damaged. If you do not have local access to qualified Apple Service Technicians, see the iSight Service info links in the Where to Find Help for iSight? FAQ,
By the way, your our system info shows that you are using Mac OS X (10.4). I suggest you apply the Mac OS X Update 10.4.2 Combo ASAP. The 10.4.2 Combo corrects several issues with previous versions of Tiger. I suggest using an update method like How I Update My Mac OS X.
EZ Jim

Image quality Canon Legria HFM46 in Imovie '11

Just bought the Canon HFM46, a CMOS camera with solid reviews.
Image quality is truly superb when connected to a TV via HDMI.
Very different, however, when I try to edit my clips with Imovie '11.
I do not encounter the notorious jello-artefact, but rather see horizontal (rolling shutter ?) lines that deteriorate the image with the slightest movement of the subject.
I am taping in FXP mode with a 50i frame rate. Will now try with 25 frame rate.
Any advice / shortcuts to resolve this issue ?
Thank you.

Found elsewhere on the forum that my problem is related to interlacing and that it can be resolved in 3 ways (See italic text below). I tested method 2 and 3: i.e. importing a clip (shot in FXP and 50i mode), at the large setting (960 x 540), alternatively, optimizing an existing clip, with exactly the same effect. Both work, yet I visibly lost image quality. Let's hope Apple brings a solution. Does anybody know whether Final Cut can manage this, better than Imovie does ?
Thank you
Solutions:
1) shoot 25p and use iMakeFullHD software to tell iM that the video REALLY is 1080p25.
2) shoot 50i and import at 960x540 which makes 540p.
3) shoot 50i and optimize, which makes your 1080i50 become 1080p25.
Only (#1) preserves the full 1920x1080 quality.

Poor image quality display with low resolution on websites

I have just upgraded to the new Firefox browser 32.0.3
Since upgrading I have noticed a severe degradation in image viewing on websites. Images on websites are poor quality and pixelated, as if I were surfing on a slow connection.
We have fibre optic broadband with DL speeds generally of around 70mbps so that can't be the problem! I have also tested on other browsers and the images appear fine and clear.
I am currently on an iMac 27" with OS 10.9.5
Help would be appreciated!
Thanks

Hello wildfirepro, any luck if you disable graphics hardware acceleration ?
You might need to restart Firefox in order for this to take effect, so save all work first (e.g., mail you are composing, online documents you're editing, etc.).
Then perform these steps:
#Open Firefox ''Preferences'' window as follows:
#* Click the menu button [[Image:New Fx Menu]] and select ''Preferences'' on your Mac.
#In the Firefox Preferences window, click the ''Advanced'' tab, then select ''General''.
#In the settings list, you should find the ''Use hardware acceleration when available'' checkbox. Uncheck this checkbox.
#Now, restart Firefox and see if the problems persist.
Additionally, please check for updates for your graphics driver by following the steps mentioned in the following Knowledge base articles:
* [[Troubleshoot extensions, themes and hardware acceleration issues to solve common Firefox problems]]
* [[Upgrade your graphics drivers to use hardware acceleration and WebGL]]
Thanks.

Firefox mage quality and resolution was superb when I used XP and Vista. Now that I have Windows 7, however (with the Firefox 3.6.3 version), the image quality and resolution is poor. Please help me!

I am using the Firefox 3.6.3 version with my new Windows 7 operating system. When I used all the previous Firefox versions in my XP and Vista operating systems, image quality and resolution was excellent! However, now that I have upgraded to Windows 7 and Firefox 3.6.3, the image quality and resolution is poor (unacceptable for downloading purposes).
== This happened ==
Every time Firefox opened
== I first activated my new computer and installed the Firefox 3.6.3.

All my images are pixelated in firefox 3.6.3
http://www.dcgdcreative.com
Not only on my site but on most sites I view.
The issue is not solved by resetting the zoom text view (ctrl+0)
The issue is not resolved by starting in safemode with add-ons disabled
The problem seems to only affect .jpeg files and only on Windows 7 on my desktop; as I have viewed several sites using windows XP with my laptop, no issues.
I had the same issue with IE8 and was able to fix the problem with by setting up the compatibility view for all sites. Issue fixed no problems at all. But nothing similar for firefox?
Whats the deal?

I want to make a copy of slide show create from my own photographs and with a an audio track behind them. I have carefully followed the iDVD tutorials and burnt the result to a disc but image quality is very poor. What is wrong?

I want to make a DVD of a slide-show with an audio track behind the photographs. I have carefully followed the iDVD video tutorials but the result is far from satisfactory. The quality of the images on the resulting DVD are blurred and indistict although the original photographs are of a very high quality. Where am I going wrong? Would I have better results from a different program than the inbuilt iDVD and if so so what programs have others found to be better? I should be grateful for some expert guidance.

Hey Falcopebo,
Thanks for using Apple Support Communities.
Looks like you have image quality issues when using iDVD to burn.
iDVD 7.0: Burned DVD has interlacing, pixelation, or image quality issues
http://support.apple.com/kb/ht4078
A standard DVD made by iDVD is made to the standard DVD resolution of 720 X 480, which is smaller than most HDTVs and monitors. When expanded to fit the entire screen or monitor, the image will distort slightly due to upscaling to fit the screen or monitor.
Have a nice day,
Mario

NOT happy with image quality of Lightroom 1.1

Sure, LR now launches faster and the interface looks a bit nicer. And the more capable sharpening controls and the clarity slider which mimics contrast enhancement with USM are nice additions, but has anyone else notice what happened to the image quality?
First, while formerly LR and ACR struck a great balance between detail and noise suppressionerring on the side of maintaining detail even at the expense of slightly higher noise levelsit appears the goal for the redesign has been to minimize the appearance of noise at all costs. It just so happens that yesterday afternoon, I'd shot some available light candids (up to ISO 800) of the staff at a local health care facility and was intent on using them as a trial run on Lightroom 1.1. Well, the difference in image quality jumped right out at me: there was no granular noise at all remaining, even in the ISO 800 shots, but neither was there any fine detail. I use a Canon 5D, and while I'm accustomed to slightly higher levels of chroma noise, images up to ISO 1600 in even the worse lighting are always full of fine detail. Fine structures like strands of hair and eye lashes have now lost their delicacy, and have instead become coarse, unnaturally painterly analogs. Looking into shadow areas, I can see the results of what seems to be luminance noise smearing at work, obliterating noise and detail along with it. I never used Raw Shooter because I'm a Mac user (2x2GHz G5 w/2GB RAM and 250GB HD), but if this is the result of incorporating Pixmantic's technology, the result is not a positive one from my standpoint. The images I shot yesterday are to be cropped to 4:5 proportions, then printed 20" x 25", at which size the processing artifacts and lack of fine detail in these LR1.1 conversions becomes even more apparent. I've even tried turning off all image processing options: Clarity, Sharpening and NR (neither of which I ever use in RAW conversion, anyway)... It simply seems this noise smearing is part of the baseline RAW processing, and it really, really bites. Am I missing something? Is there some way to actually turn off this processing that looks uncomfortably like the "watercolor" noise reduction that Kodak and Panasonic use for their compact digicams. Yuck!
Secondly, is there a way to get back the suppression of hot and stuck pixels that LR used to perform? Now, my high ISO files are riddled with them, the same as they would be when converted with Aperture or Canon's DPP. Default suppression of hot and stuck pixels was a major advantage of LR/ACR, and contributed in no small bit to my adoption of LR as my standard tool for RAW conversion due to the amount of high ISO, low light photography I do. What's even worse, is that the random-color speckles are now smudged into the image along with all the other noise data that's being smoothed out, resulting in images that looks more like impressionist paintings than photographs.
I thought about reinstalling LR1.0 and just continuing to use that, but if LR1.1 is an indication of the direction Adobe is going to take in the development of the software, I really don't see the point of continuing to use the softwareparticularly when I had a few existing problems with LR1.0 that were never resolved, such as crashing during the import of photos from a memory card and progressively slower preview rendering as the size of my library increased. So, I'm probably going to go back to using Aperture, which is itself not free of IQ foibles, but certainly looks much more attractive now in comparison to LR1.1.
Anybody notice the same things with IQ? Anybody got any suggestions of how to get more natural-looking conversions before I remove LR and go back to Aperture?

Jeff,
I mean no disrespect. But I would like to see samples of 1.1 compared to 1.0 of the same image (ISO 400, and/or 800), because I do not want to convert my library to a catalog until I know whether or not I like the image quality. Why is it so hard to get one good sample. That is all I am asking. I would just rather not jump through hoops to go back to 1.0 if I do not like 1.1....That is all
And yes, after well over 400 printed articles I can tell what an image will look like in print when I view it 1:1.... I can tell if the eyelashes or pores on someones face, the detail in a rug, or wood grain will be detailed on the off set printed page if I look at the image at 1:1 and see smudging...this means to me that the most detail possible is NOT going to translate to the page. If however I CAN see detail in those types of areas, clearly (ie no smudging), than I know that I will see those fine details on the page. If these fine details were not important than we would all still be shooting with 3 and 4 mp cameras. Those fine details that are only visible to our eyes at a 1:1 preview on screen, are important on the printed page.
Oh, and I am not chest thumping. You can check my history here, I do not have a history of that type of activity. I am simply asking to see samples before I update....
I am very discriminating Pro, not some over testing, too much time on my hands, complaining , over paid amateur who only has time to complain that their test chart is out of focus. Or that they can measure toooo much noise at ISO what ever, instead of actually making photos. I actually make my living taking photos. And my clients have come to expect a certain level of quality from me. They comment all the time how much higher quality my images are than some of the other photogs they use. And I am still shooting a D60, where as these others are shooting 5d's and D2X's.
Jeff, I am not against you or Adobe. Matter of fact, I LOVE LR. It has changed my work flow in a very positive direction. I think it is wonderful. I just want one sample.... I am asking nicely: Please with sugar on top :)
If you can't give me a sample, than please at least reassure me that it will be easy to go back to 1.0 for the time being. Is it as easy as uninstalling 1.1, reinstalling 1.0 and recovering my DB from a current backup? If so, than fine, I will go this route........... If not, than I am hoping for a sample.
Thank you very kindly Jeff for engaging in this lively conversation. I do appreciate your comments and participation on this forum. And please note that none of this is said with attitude or malice. I know that some times a writers intent or emotional state is easy to misinterpret in a forum like this. So please know that I am calm and not angry, just curious about image quality.
Ok. I will shut up now. Thanks again

Has anyone had issues with poor image quality when using lightroom to process raw images from Canon 7dmk2

Hi everyone..
..I have been having image quality issues when using Lightroom to process raw files from a 7d mk2... They are all soft with poor clarity.....tonight in despair I tried processing them using canon's software and they are totally different..."much better"
anyone else had similar problems....Andy

I have a 7D2 and have not had what I interpret as poor image quality that has anything to do with the camera.
Can you post a screenshot of what you’re seeing and what specifically you don’t like? Maybe there is something you can do differently or at least there may be an explanation for what you’re seeing.
And if you have a raw image that you wouldn’t mind sharing in a public forum, upload to http://www.dropbox.com/ then post a public share link to it in a reply, here.
In other words post a screenshot of what you see in LR, another of what you see using DPP, and a link to the raw file you’re processing.

IMac 24" with NVidia 7600GT - Crappy image quality

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for