Images look soft.

Haven't used Finalcut for ages, but decided to give it an other go, but when I play the still images, they turn soft. Am I going crazy?

Nathan's solution is probably corect. If after rendering they still look soft, also check your playback preferences to see that they are set for Use Original or Optimized and Best Quality.
Russ

Similar Messages

Images look soft in webpage

When I insert my images into the webpage template and they turn soft, even when they were very sharp to begin with. This also happens in Pages. Has anyone experienced this? And does anyone know how to prevent this from happening? When I set up a photo gallery this doesn't happen. My site is for my photography business and obviously I want to demonstrate that I can take tack-sharp pictures! Can anyone help?
Here is the link and the photo in particular that bothers me is on the home page bottom left - http://web.mac.com/kristinfranke/iWeb/Lifeartimages/Home.html
Thanks!

The only time I've found this to happen is if I try to enlarge an image by resizing it within iWeb (but not always).
When drag dropping an image into iWeb or via the Image Browser reducing an image works well comoared to enlarging. What i could suggest is use the adhustment tool and in VERY small incerements use the sharpen slider.
If you have Photoshop (full version) use the unsharp mask tool on the image once you have resized it in Photoshop.
http://web.mac.com/uhanna/iWeb/uhanna

Images looks darker in Adobe Camera Raw than in Photoshop

when I open a raw image in adobe camera raw at 16 bit Adobe RGB and don't make any adjustments in acr when I then bring it into Photoshop is looks softer contrast and lighter.

James Bechdel wrote:
I think I solved it. Every place I could change to Adobe RGB I did
Er...I don't really think that solves anything. But you may succeed in temporarily hiding the problem.
You do have PS color management policies at "preserve embedded profiles", right? As long as you do, there's no particular need to synchronize PS / ACR / Lr color settings, any source profile should be honored anywhere.
The reason Adobe RGB works as monitor profile is because it's a known good, not corrupt, profile - not because it's the same as a document profile somewhere. Those two are not supposed to be the same. But for a wide gamut monitor it's close enough to work for diagnostic purposes.
NEC Spectraview is a solid and reliable calibrator. But that doesn't help if the OS doesn't load the profile correctly.
One gotcha with Spectraview (and Eizo Colornavigator) is that it's so easy to switch calibration target and the associated monitor profile. That's fine, but you also need to relaunch any color managed application that happens to use the monitor profile. That profile is loaded by the application at startup, and it will continue to use it even if it's changed at system level.

Camera Raw problem; images appearing soft and without definition on import

Can anyone help? I am having problems with ACR version 4.6 ( I cannot upgrade ACR without upgrading to CS5). When I open a RAW image in ACR, the image appears soft, and with poor definition. As a result, they have failed quality control for upload to the Alamy picture library, despite having been shot with a Nikon D3. I am simply opening them with ACR defualts, then opening to photoshop.
The files open fine in Lightroom and Nikon Capture NX, however I prefer to use ACR for my workflow. Any suggestions? I don't what to shekll out for CS% if the problem is still there.
Thanks, Robin

Have you tried resetting defaults? It sounds like either your Camera Raw default settings have been changed, or sharpening has been set to Previews only.
1. Open an image in Camera Raw, select the Details tab, and check that setting are like defaults: Amount 25, Radius 1.0, Details 25, Masking 0. You can always reset defaults from the little menu icon on the right of the panel title.
2. Check Camera Raw preferences, looking for the item: 'Apply Sharpening to:' and make sure it says 'All images'.
You might want to check other preferences too, especially the 'make defaults specific' settings, which, when used, create multiple default settings depending on camera and ISO.

Images still soft

I have read several threads on this and my images are still soft when posted on iweb. I tried the program Downsize and they still don't look great. Any advice would be appreciated. Take a look if you don't mind.
www.enchanted-images.net
Click on the blog button and it will take you to my iweb app.
thanks, James

To my untrained eye, the images in your blog look perfectly acceptable as web images. Also, you've done a great job avoiding iWeb's jpg-to-png conversion by using the photos at their native resolution, making your pages very fast-loading.
You can probably educate me on this, but here's what I've noticed. Taking jpg compression out of the picture, reducing a photo's size seems to usually result in a sharper looking image.... I mean, there is loss of detail globally but the major contrasting edges look sharper. Add jpg compression back into the equation and the opposite happens. A previously sharp image becomes softer when reduced and further compressed.
Do you think compensating for this perceived effect by using an unsharpen mask function prior to compression might make things better?
Very nice site, by the way!

Canon 60D imported Pictures Look soft in lightroom3.2

The pictures i import into lightroom 3.2 in develop look soft. Im using Canon 60D RAW. Windows 7 32 bit.

Ok so this is what we get from adobe?
We see this claim frequently. The manufacturer's software will often produce better raw development out of the box because it is able to read all of the in-camera settings. Some of those settings are proprietary, and are hidden from Lightroom. To overcome this, Adobe creates the aforementioned profiles available in the Develop module. These profiles are provided to match the in-camera settings as closely as possible. To get the best benefit from Lightroom, you need to take time to look at the different profiles and decide which one you would prefer. Adjust an image that represents your "average" type of work until you have a result that is acceptable. Then save those settings as your default settings. Additionally, it might be necessary for you to create some presets for special situations, and that capability is part of the feature set in Lightroom.
To use the Lightroom effectively, you need to devote a little time to customizing it to your way of shooting. If that seems unacceptable then you will probably continue to find that you are other software does a better job for you.
To answer your question directly, no. You cannot use the Canon software in conjunction with Lightroom. That software will adjust the proprietary settings that Lightroom cannot read. Spend a little time customizing the Lightroom, and you should find that you can get excellent results from it.

Output from Color always looks soft. Why?

Hi,
I'm working with hdv (i know, i know) in a 1080i50 FCP project. i use 'send to color' to transfer my timeline into color, perform a basic grade (i'm essentially color matching the shots) and then use 'send to Final cut' (after rendering the sequence) to get it back into FCP.
Once the footage is back in the final cut environment, it just looks terrible! the image appears soft and interlacing artifacts begin to appear on the graded image.
Does anyone know what would cause this? i get better results from FCP's 3 way color correction filter!
GK

gammakid wrote:
Once the footage is back in the final cut environment, it just looks terrible! the image appears soft and interlacing artifacts begin to appear on the graded image.
Does anyone know what would cause this?
My guess:
Combination of sequence settings not quite matching clip settings.
Or
A distort, resize, or reposition is being applied to each clip (under the Motion Tab) and should be removed
Or
Both
HTH

My images look blurry when I export or publish my site from Muse. Why and how do I fix it?

My images look blurry, jagged, pixelated and low quality when I publish or export my site from Muse. Is there any way to avoid or fix this problem?

The primary cause of blurring images is the less than Photoshop-quality image downsampling algorithm currently used in Muse (that was compounded in early betas due to a bug in the JPEG compression library we were using at that time). Due to work we've done for Beta 7 to improve image encoding performance we now have the infrastructure in place to enable us to take a much better image resampler/resizer (after Beta 7), so this source of blurring will be addressed.
The other source of blurring is unique to opaque images containing line art or otherwise containing hard edges and large areas of solid color. When an image is opaque Muse will encode it as JPEG (if it's altered in Muse is a way that requires re-encoding). For line art this will introduce JPEG compression artifacts that can be noticeable depending on your eye and the specific image involved.
There are (at least) to ways to avoid these JPEG compression artifacts:
Resize your image before placing and avoid applying any effects (rounded corners, drop shadow, etc.) or doing any cropping or resizing in Muse. If the image is unaltered your original JPEG, PNG or GIF will be passed through unaltered.*
Put at least one pixel of transparency in your original image. (It could be a single 99% opaque pixel.) This will force Muse to encode as PNG. PNG compression is lossless and thus doesn't introduce any compression artifacts. However, an average PNG can be 5 times the size of a JPEG for the same image, so there is an impact to webpage download performance.
*For PSD files Muse has to encode the original PSD data into some web-friendly image format. If an image is resized in Photoshop and placed Muse won't resize/resample the image data, but it will encode it as JPEG or PNG depending on whether it contains transparency.

How do I make the images look clear in PDF when converted from MS Word?

Hi
When I convert an MS Word-2010 file (which contains images also) to PDF through Acrobat X Pro, some images which are of bigger size do not look very clear. Is there any workaround for this problem? Please reply. It's quite urgent.
Thanks

In my experience (not necessarily the best), I find it best to rescale image copies with a graphics package before importing into WORD or whatever. Resize and then set the resolution to about 600 dpi before you import. The issue of using the clipboard appears to be an issue with WORD 2007 and such. I clipped a 300 dpi image into my technical word processor and then back to a graphic editor and all was preserved. I did the same with WORD 2007 and everything got messed up and the resultant image looked terrible. In fact, in WORD I got the same result if I imported the picture or clipped it from my graphics package. So it appears there are some strange issues with WORD itself.
I am not trying to make any claims here, but just making an observation. The original image was at 300dpi. WORD also changed the 8-bit B&W photo to a 24-bit photo and reduced the number of pixels from 774 per width to 252 per width about a factor of 3 reduction in pixel resolution when clipped. When I expanded the image size in WORD, then the clip size increased also. When I do the same expansion of the image size in my word processor and then clip back to IrfanView, the original image is retained. My only conclusion is that OFFICE 2007 plays around with graphics and it does not seem to make any difference if you clip the image into WORD or import it, WORD still messes around with it. My guess this is just a general MS thing.
Some folks a year or 2 ago got me to looking at nice sunsets in PPT. There were all sorts of issues with creating the PDF (AA8) from the PPT to get a reasonable result. The image obtained from the MS converter seemed to keep the picture nice. The images obtained from PDF Maker and printing to the Adobe PDF printer gave slightly different results and tended to break the image into smaller parts that often left little lines in the picture if you zoomed in. Folks were blaming this on Acrobat and yet using the same version of Acrobat with OFFICE 2003 the sunset came out great.
This post is a bit jumbled, but the jist is that a lot of the graphics issues with WORD files seem to go back to WORD itself and possibly with hooks MS put into OFFICE (OK, no proof on that and probably impossible to prove) to mess up Acrobat conversions. It would be interesting to see if the same result for the PDF is obtained from other converters, or if it is just something that OFFICE 2007 does "nicely" for Acrobat.
Sorry for going off the deep end, but I just have a major annoyance with OFFICE starting with 2007, particularly for things like this. They couldn't get equations right either, just one more thing that they messed up. As far as I am concerned, a lot of the issues stem from MS and not Acrobat.
Just for the heck of it, I ran the PPT picture through Open Office and used both the PDF export and the print to the Adobe PDF printer. Both retained the full image. However, when clipping from OOP to Irfanview, the resolution was 96dpi. The result seemed to be dependent on the zoom. So there are definitely some issues with copy and paste, at least with how some packages handle it.

How can I make my images look good when exporting to PDF document?

Hello! I'm struggling here with a PDF Brochure that I need to create (intended for web only, not print).
There are two images that look horrible and pixelated when I create my PDF file. I have tried everything, making the images bigger and smaller, using 72 dpi images and 300 dpi ones. Everything results the same way... It looks perfect in my InDesign file, but in the PDF it looks all damaged. Here are two screen shots, one of how it looks in the PDF and one of how it looks in InDesign.
Could you please tell me what I need to do to guarantee that the image looks good quality in the PDF? (My document is 40cmx20cm, I don't not if using cm is affecting the document).
To export to PDF I'm using the option: Adobe PDF pressets --> Smallest file size.
If you can help me I would really appreciate it!
Thank you,
Nataly.

beer and no prepress schrieb:
If it's for the web, why not export to JPEG? Why PDF?
Terrible idea. In a JPG the text will not be alive, you loose all interactivity.
And making JPGs with InDesign is not what the program is meant to make.

Images look less saturated in Photoshop CC 2014

I import my RAW images into Lightroom 5 and make some basic adjustments. Then I edit the image in Photoshop with the Lightroom adjustments. I clean up the images and crop to the size I like and then I use the Perfect Effects 9 plugin to do some more edits. I finish my edits in Perfect Effects 9 and save them which brings me back into Photoshop CC as a new layer. In Photoshop the image looks less saturated than it did in Perfect Effects 9. I then save the Photoshop file and exit. When I look at the PSD file in Lightroom 5 browse window, it looks the same as it does in Perfect Effects 9. Why does it look less saturated in Photoshop CC 2014?
Here are my colour settings:
Lightroom 5:
External Editing:
     Edit in Adobe Photoshop CC 2014:
     File Format = TIFF
     Color Space = AdobeRGB(1998)
     Bit Depth = 16
     Resolution = 240
     Compression = zip
Additional External Editor:
    Preset = Perfect Effects 9 Suite
    File Format = PSD
    Color Space = AdobeRGB(1998)
    Bit Depth = 16
    Resolution = 300
Perfect Effects 9:
General:
     Working Color Space = sRGB IEC61966-2.1
Files:
     Copy Options:
     File Format = PSD
     Color Space = sRGB IEC61966-2.1
Plug-ins:
     Lightroom:
     File Type = PSD
     Color Space = Adobe RGB 1998
Photoshop CC 2014:
    Color Settings: Custom
    Working Spaces:
    RGB = sRGB IEC61966-2.1
    CMYK = U.S. Web Coated (SWOP) v2
    Gray = Dot Gain 20%
    Spot = Dot Gain 20%
What color settings do I need to use so that the images have the same saturation look in all three programs? How do you know which image in which program is showing as the correct saturation?

No, just keep it at sRGB. As long as you have the "preserve" policy, the working space actually isn't all that important. The embedded document profile will always override it (as it should).
I had to read this a couple of times to follow the trail properly. Leaving Perfect Effects (which I don't know at all) out of it - does the very same file iteration, with the same edits, look different between Photoshop and Lightroom? Did I get that right?
In that case you have a bad monitor profile. This can sometimes throw off one application but not the other. Recalibrate, or if you don't have a calibrator go into Windows color management and set sRGB IEC61966-2.1 as default display profile. When done relaunch all applications so that they can pick up the new profile at startup.

Image looks grainy in Photoshop CC but not in CS5

All of my images look grainy int he dark areas in CC, but not in CS5. Is there a display setting that I'm missing? Side note, the saved images look fine. They only look bad in the CC UI.
Screen shot of CC
Screen shot of CS5
Photshop CC and CS5 64-bit on Windows 7

morganj_8 wrote:
Oh and lastly, I really didn't appreciate how UTTERLY rude and completely unhelpful "station_two" was. It seems he/she prefers to get on here and find ways to criticize and nitpick vs. actually try to help or find solutions for people. I wonder if that level of disdain could ever be necessary towards a total stranger who is just asking for help? I hope their life improves and they don't feel the need to take it out others through tech support message boards. Props to sharmstr for being so cool about it all.
Well if that's how you are going to be!!!! Station is OK, but this is an old thread, and there was a full moon back then.
So is it a display problem rather than a performance one? I think it was mentioned that the artefacts a not there on saved documents. It is also one of those issues that would be fixed by resetting preferences, because the cache levels would go back to four. It actually says right there on Preferences > Performance in the History & Cache section 'Set cache levels to two or higher for optimum performance' .
There is so much good information right there among the oficial help pages
http://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/photoshop-cs6-gpu-faq1.html
Which makes it very disappointing that Tech Support couldn't track it down. I suspect they work more from Expert Systems than their own knowledge, so they have a bit of work to do there.

I just bought an Epson Stylus Pro 3880 and the printed images look yellow. I calibrate my MacBook Pro monitor with a ColorMunki Display. I want to make sure my Lightroom print settings are correct.

I just bought an Epson Stylus Pro 3880 and the printed images look yellow. I calibrate my MacBook Pro monitor with a ColorMunki Display. I want to make sure my Lightroom print settings are correct.

This what I have been trying...... Maybe my eyes are screwed up or don't understand the process....
What I have been trying to do is squint and make the apple disappear by moving the sliders around in each step. Is that correct?

Help! Why do my images look overly sharp and appear to download?

I recently updated CC and now my images look overly sharp when I'm batching or working at a smaller size. When zoomed in at 50% they look fine. Is there any way to fix this? It's very difficult to work with everything looking so warped at a smaller scale. Also, when I open a file after batching and running an action it appears to "download" line by line instead of just opening. What is going on?

When I am batching multiple images and running actions, I don't want to view them at 100% they are huge files. 24 megapixels, on average 60.5M and 3925x5945 at 300 dpi. That's REALLY zoomed in. I was not having this issue with CC until I updated it and now everything looks warped at a smaller scale. I want to know why it changed and how to change it back.

Image looks different in different browsers?

I had set up a webpage and was having one little problem with
it that I could not fix. For some reason, one image (the header of
my page) looked blurry in Firefox but nice and crisp in Internet
Explorer. If I played with the settings in Photoshop and resaved
out as jpg to make the image look crisp and nice in Firefox, it
looked mangled and choppy in IE.
After much testing and asking in other forums, I finally
found a setting in DreamWeaver. Right mouse clicking the
placeholder for the image in the table in DreamWeaver, I selected
"Optimize" which brought up a window for the image and I checked
"Progressive Browser Display".
Uploaded my hmtl index file to my host and voila, the image
looks nice in both Firefox and IE.
So the question is, do I need to worry that somehow that
setting has done something unforeseen but negative?
Any experience with this setting and anything to be worried
about? This was driving me INSANE and it's the only thing I could
find that fixed it.

hi Nancy thanks for your reply. question for you: as far as
the end result, does it matter whether it is done in photoshop or
dreamweaver? also, is there any reason to worry that using this
setting in dreamweaver will cause problems? I can't for the life of
me figure out why checking this off makes Fireforx display the
image correctly while leaving it unchecked makes the image in
firefox blurry.
TIA

Images look soft.

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for