Image quality using Elements 9.0

When I print through Canon EZ Print to my Pro 9000 II, I get an image which matches my monitor image. When I go through Elements 9.0, the image quality drops off, overall too dark and contrast is lost in the sunny areas of the image.
What do I need to do to get the image that my printer is capable of when using Elements 9.0?

In editor, go to Edit menu>color settings, check "Optimize Colors for Computer Screens".
In the printer driver, check to have printer manage colors.
Have you calibrated your monitor?

Similar Messages

Poor image quality using iMovie 8 or iDVD after importing DV file via FW

Hello,
i am a complete newby and asking for help. I have bought a Panasonic NV-GS320EG-S miniDV Camcorder. First i connected it via S-Video to my Pioneer Plasma which worked fine.
I have connected the camcorder via Firewire to my iMac 20/2,4 GHz, camcorder will launch import window, streaming works but in iMovie the image quality is already rather poor. I can cut files and all but after using Import film and burning it with latest Toast, picture quality is even worse, that means colors are natural but no sharpness, lots of shivering lines as soon as the angle is moving.
I've tried to import directly into iDVD with the direct transfer function for Firewire which works technically as well but the result is mainly the same, when i burn the DVD the picture quality gets far worse than via S-Video connection.
Last thing i tried is importing to iMovie, importing for media browser and reopening file in iDVD which burns the DVD later, all that works technically fine, but the image result remains absolutely poor, my wife meant inacceptable...
Any ideas what that could be??? I've always imported and exported the film with the largest picture mode possible...

I am using the Panasonic HDC-SD5 camcorder which records in AVCHD.
I also have a JVC miniDV camcorder.
The following is available in iMovie 08 help:If the larger sizes are not available, the original project media isn’t large enough to render in that size. The largest media size used in the project determines the final movie sizes you can render.
Tiny: Always 176 by 144 pixels.
Mobile: Always 480 by 272 pixels.
Medium: Varies in size from 640 by 480 pixels (standard aspect ratio) to 640 by 360 pixels (widescreen), depending on the size of the media in your project.
Large: Always 960 by 540 pixels (widescreen). No large size is rendered if your original video isn’t high definition (HD).

Image quality using iMovie 08 vs Final Cut Pro

I read in November's Macworld that if I use a tapeless camcorder, "you won't get the best image quality if you use iMovie '08 because the software converts each movie clip to smaller, more manageable size. To get the highest quality you'll need to be running Final Cut Pro on a Mac Pro with at least 2GB of RAM." Do you all agree with this? And if so, please consider the following. I used a mini DV camcorder to transfer all my tapes to my computer and to an external hard drive. Have I already lost that image quality in doing so using iMovie? If so, can Final Cut Pro import from iMovie and improve that quality by decompressing or will I need to retransfer the tapes using Final Cut Pro or will the difference be too negligible to be noticed and not to bother. Thanks, SWestD

I read in November's Macworld that if I use a tapeless camcorder, "you won't get the best image quality if you use iMovie '08 because the software converts each movie clip to smaller, more manageable size. To get the highest quality you'll need to be running Final Cut Pro on a Mac Pro with at least 2GB of RAM." Do you all agree with this?
It depends on the format. In general, the consumer tapeless cameras shoot some highly compressed variant of the mpeg2 or mpeg4 format (delivery formats). These formats are not designed to be edited but rather to be displayed directly from the camera to the TV. In order to edit the material, you must first convert the files from their delivery format to something editiable. This conversion usually results in LARGER not smaller files. There is the potential for some minimal alteration of the image in the transcoding process. This is the trade-off for shooting with such a compressed format.
And if so, please consider the following. I used a mini DV camcorder to transfer all my tapes to my computer and to an external hard drive. Have I already lost that image quality in doing so using iMovie?
No, capturing DV material from tapes using iMovie is a direct digital transfer. DV/NTSC or DV/PAL video as captured from tape is the muxed (mixed audio and video) DV stream. It is an exact replica of what is on the tape.
If so, can Final Cut Pro import from iMovie and improve that quality by decompressing or will I need to retransfer the tapes using Final Cut Pro or will the difference be too negligible to be noticed and not to bother.
FCE and FCP capture material from tapes slightly differently than iMovie. While iMovie brings the material from the tape unaltered, FCE/FCP uses Quicktime during capture to pull the audio and video into separate streams with in the resulting file. By having the audio demuxed, the programs are able to edit multiple video streams simultaneously while iMovie is limited on one at a time. The video quality is not altered in this demuxing process.
If you choose to shoot with a tapeless camera and edit the material in FCE or FCP, FCP has a wider range of formats that can be handled by the program, but in no way will it deal with them all. Many still need to be converted into an edit friendly format before you bring them into the program.
x

Am I losing image quality using Lightroom or Aperture

So, I have been going back and forth on this almost endlessly for over a year now.
I shoot RAW with a D3 and a D3X, for action and studio. But every now and then, I open up one of my RAW files in Nikon ViewNX, oe Capture NX. When I do this and look at definition and sharpness of the image as compared to the same image, viewed in either Aperture or Lightroom, Nikon View wins every time. I notice it most in loose hairs, or distant branches or leaves, The Nikon SW just seems to be sharper and more defined.
I always compare at 100% in each program.
It's driving me nuts! Both Aperture and Lightroom are infinately better to use than the Nikon SW, but, having invested so much in Cameras and lenses to get the highest fidelity, I am reluctant to switch.
I am using the latest version of each application.
PS. when I generate TIFs from the RAWs in the Nikon SW and load them into aperture or lightroom, they do have the same fidelity.
Anyone seen this? is it just a rendering issue on the screen? Will the output look the same? or is it the proprietary RAW files from Nikon that are holding back some critical info that imporved the image?
Would really appreciate your feedback/input
Nick

is it just a rendering issue on the screen?
Yes. In addition to what Sean notes, Lightroom uses a bicubic scaler in its zoomed out views. This means that you get far less moiré artefacts when zoomed out, but will make the image appear less sharp when zoomed out. Capture and ViewNX use a nearest neighbor scaling which appears sharper (but actually isn't) when zoomed out. You should look at 1:1 (100%) to actually compare the programs. Be aware that Nikon applies a LOT of sharpening by default and that the default sharpening in Lightroom is pretty mild. They also by default apply excessive (in my opinion) noise reduction. You can get far higher quality and more detail out of Lightroom than the default rendering in Capture/View but you'll have to work a little on it. The starting points for sharpening are very conservative.
Will the output look the same?
Try it. In my experience, if you work a little, Lightroom is quite a bit better. Once in a while I like the color rendition from Capture NX better (even when using the camera-matching profiles) but those are rare conditions.
is it the proprietary RAW files from Nikon that are holding back some critical info that imporved the image?
No that is a silly myth that Nikon likes to perpetuate. There is no secret info in the file that somehow allows you to get more detail or something. Just try it and you'll see. You can only judge the detail in the rendering at 1:1.

Adobe Premiere Elements 11 - HOW DO I KEEP THE IMAGE QUALITY WHEN I RENDER?

I'm using Adobe Premiere Elements 11, on a Windows 8 PC and when I "render" still pictures, some videos and simple effects -- they lose quality and get grainy --
HOW DO I KEEP THE IMAGE QUALITY WHEN I RENDER?

Molnar are you receiving that error during the download or install process? Also which operating system are you using?

Poor image quality elements 12 slideshow preview

As I can't find any reference to my original post I thought I'd re-do it. I created a slideshow in elements 12 and found the image quality to fall far short of high definition. The source folder for the images used is contained in Windows Pictures. The pictures were taken with a Canon t4i camera with the image quality being excellent. For whatever reason the quality of the slideshow images are poor. Any help would be appreciated.

Don't purchase a video editing app to work with just still images. They are meant to be used with DV and really don't do a still image any justice.
The final source format should determine the software used. You are suggesting a DVD distribution of your work.
iPhoto is meant to be used on still images (not iMovie, in my opinion).
You don't really want to convert a single frame into multiple frames if you don't need to.
You may want to try the Photo JPEG, Motion JPEG or Animation codecs from iMovie and see if they improve the visual appearance of your work.
Since you want to use a DVD as the distribution method then iDVD may not be the best option either. It is meant for set top boxes using a poor 720X480 dimension in MPEG-2 video format.
You may want to consider a bit different approach and use a "data" DVD and use QuickTime Player as the playback engine. These will only play on a computer but your could use the higher dimensions to your advantage and also the visual quality of computer displays to showcase your work.
Since HD DVD players are not yet ready for mass use it may be a better way to distribute your work.
There is no 720X480 dimension limit (only the limit set by the viewer on the display size when viewed on a computer monitor).
Your "still" images would remain "still" except for transitions.
Heck. You could probably put the whole file onto a CD and save even more in production costs.

Please help! Elements 11 image quality poor compared to LR

Hello, I just started using elements and am very irritated because the image quality is very poor compared to when i am viewing in LR. Its not the conversion - i have tried pulling directly from the camear. It looks great in Camera Raw 7.1 but the second i pull it into editor, it lines get jagged. Adobe help is telling me this is normal. Surely not?? Something about a halo around pixels? Image on left is Elements 11, right is Lightroom and Zoomed in so you can see how sharp it is. PLEASE help. im so frustrated!

In the pse 11 editor are you looking at the image at 100% view (actual pixels)?
(Other viewing percents can be misleading in the pse 11 editor)
Double click on the zoom tool in the tol box to get 100% view.
Also you should be on camera raw 7.4 available from Help>Updates within the pse 11 editor.
Is that lightroom 4.4?

Flash in Premiere Elements Image Quality issue

Hello,
I've decided now that I am going to create animated films in Flash and then edit them in Premiere Elements. the problem is, is that when I export it from Flash to Premiere Elements the Image quality is detiereoreted (i.e fuzzy, blurry, out of focus, general ugly to look at). I first realised that I couldnt use an swf file in Premiere and isntead I should use an AVI. So I did. Problem is I'm still having the same problem. the Image quality is still terrible and doesn't equal up to the origonal image quality. And then tried Uncompressing it and all that did is make the video clip jump over about 80 frames and still the image quality is terrible. Is their one little thing that I'm doing wrong or Am I altogether not getting this right.
Programs I'm using:
Macromedia Flash MX 2004
Adobe Premiere Elements 3.0
Adobe Premiere Elements 7.0 (currently not working)

The MS DV CODEC should be installed on your system already. Whether Flash can Export to it could still be an issue. I'll have to check my version of Flash (think that it's Studio 8, but I've had it around from version 2) to see what all of the options are.
I've been handed many Flash animations that were Exported as .MOV with the Animation CODEC, and these have edited fine.
Other than the huge file sizes, AVI [Uncompressed] should work fine too. You might have resource issues, but that would depend on your system, more than on your NLE. I've used these with no issues many times.
Another likely candidate would be the free Lagarith Lossless CODEC. I use it for intermediate transfer and it edits fine in PrPro. I would assume that it would be the same in PrE, but cannot verify this.
On Monday, I'll be on my workstation with Flash and will tell you the exact version, plus the Export options available.
Good luck,
Hunt

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?

Image quality poor when using "fit in window" view

Hello,
i´m getting familiar with PS CS3 Demo and what buffles me is the poor quality of the downsized view of large images. I loaded a 8 MP JPEG image from a digital camera and it looks good in 100%, but when i choose to view the whole image to fit the window (33,33% in my case), the resulting "downsampled" image is very jaggy and pixelated. I use a freeware image viewer called Xnview that gives me a far superior view when viewing large images downsized - i can even choose to select a "HQ" mode so those images get resampled to look better. It it normal that PS does not offer such a thing (or did i not see it?) and delivers such poor visual quality or is there something wrong with my PC?
Thanks for your help.

Though 6.735, 12.5, 25 and 50% views usually are OK too. "Image quality" is great, though sometimes deceivingly so. I guess I don't understand sampling enough to tell you why 33% looks bad (rounding errors, I suppose). But 66% makes sense. You're trying to stuff 3 pixels into the space of 2.
Dave, what are the advantages to these nearest neighbor views instead of bicubic (or even bi-linear). Just speed?
J

How do I make a 20 X 30 print with layers of 16 X 20, 12 X 18, 11 X 14, 8 X 12, 8 X 10, 5 X 7 and 4 X 6 of the same image to display the different sizes available to someone? Using Elements 13 with Windows 8.1

How do I make a 20 X 30 print with layers of 16 X 20, 12 X 18, 11 X 14, 8 X 12, 8 X 10, 5 X 7 and 4 X 6 of the same image to display the different sizes available to someone? Using Elements 13 with Windows 8.1
A senior citizen needs some help.
Thanks

Saving each image as different size - is it an option for you? I would save images with their name as: 20x30.png, 16x20.png etc etc.
Or explain whether you want these in a webpage in which case only one image is necessary and different sizes are displayed with good CSS code. this is question for Dreamweaver forum if this is what you want.

I'm thinking of using Final Cut Pro to straighten slightly crooked footage and then re-import back to iMovie to complete the video. Does this have any impact on image quality?

I'm thinking of using Final Cut Pro to straighten slightly crooked footage and then re-import back to iMovie to complete the video. Does this have any impact on image quality?

As your rotate the image, you will begin to see black edges. So, as Tom implies, the image must be scaled up to hide those voids. If you shot 4k ad are editing in a HD timeline, no problem, lots of room to spare. If you shot 1080 and are editing in a 1080 timeline, you will run into issues at a certain point. However, if your 1080 project is going to be transcoded to 720 or ye olde DVD you won't notice any deterioration at all.

Poor Image Quality when Printing PDF from Office 07 using Acrobat 9 Pro Ext

Hi there,
Hoping to figure out why my images (jpegs, gifs, pngs, etc) seem to print in very poor quality when printing from Powerpoint and Word 2007?
When I actually print out the pdf onto paper, the images seem fine. The image quality is also good in Word and Excel
I did not have this problem using Office 2003 products.
Is this a common problem? I realize that the problem maybe Office related but any help or information appreciated.
Thanks

If the images' file format is PNG or TIFF you could play with the compression settings available in Acrobat's Preferences.
Edit > Preferences > select the Category "Convert to PDF".
In the"Converting To PDF" pane, select PNG or TIFF.
Then, click on the Edit Settings" button.
For either image format you could try one of the Lossless compression routines.
Be well...

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.

How to burn images to cd using elements 12

Using Elements 12, how do we burn images to cd?

Hi,
Can you please tell us your operating system and why you want to burn them to CD.
For example, on a Windows system, if you just want to save a copy of the images to CD then you could use the organizer. Select the images you want to copy, go to the File menu and select Copy/Move to Removable Drive. Do NOT check the Move option as this would the remove the images from the hard drive.
Brian

Image quality using Elements 9.0

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for