Imported iMovie video 6 times larger than .mts files on camcorder

I would like to be able to watch all my HD video footage on my iMac, but when imported using iMovie it takes up FAR too much hard drive space.
I am importing video from a Canon Vixia AVCHD camcorder (HF21). The native .mts files on the camera are about 10GB per hour (~ 6 hrs of footage on the 64GB internal memory), but when I import the video using iMovie, they expand by around 6 times, to about 60GB per hour (that is, the .mov video files saved in iMovie Events folders are HUGE, 60GB per hour, or ~ 1GB per minute).
This seems too large to be practical; the first 6 hours of import took up ~360GB of storage - and that was only the first time I'd used the camera and imported footage! So I only get less than 2 full uses and imports of the camera's memory before my 1TB iMac is completely full (not including what is already on there).
I have started "Archive All" to save the video footage in it's raw format, but now the footage is not usable or watchable on the iMac unless I go and import it again with iMovie - where once again it expands to 6 times it's size.
Is there a solution to this? How can I make all my HD footage watchable on the iMac, retaining the full quality raw HD of the video, but not take up more than 1/3 of my 1TB hard drive each time I import from my camcorder?
If I import to iMovie, then export as a smaller file, surely I will lose quality?
I have heard it can be done with Final Cut, is that correct?
Thanks a lot.

Thank you AppleMan1958 for that link to your earlier post. I have spent way to many hours tonight trying to work out why Nanna's Christmas video clips off her new JVC suddenly filled my HD. iMovie warned me that an hour of video at full would take 40GB. Gross underestimate lol.
I have decided I will import as large just to off stuff to DVD or quicktime format for the family then dump the iMovie Event in the trash and do an archive of all the footage to keep it for future editing. I'm lucky to have an external raid as the backing up of externals just starts becoming expensive in redundant backup drives.
I would be very cautious of using DVD's for backup as I have seen them fail too easily after a only a few years.
wardyf18 - My understanding is that importing on the Large setting gives you 960x540 resolution which isn't as good as the 1280x720 supported by older Apple TV's but I havn't noticed much difference in recent testing.
I believe the newest Apple TV will support 1080 on H.264 format but if you are playing MPEG4 it only supports 640x480 anyway. As a lot of my older stuff was converted to MPEG4 for iTunes so I now realise most of what I watch is only 640x480
mvmum - after hours of reading tonight I have come to the realisation that a Mac actually handles the editing of HD video pretty well but ADVHC is just not a good editing codec. Converting a 'group of pictures' codec to a 'full frame' codec is going to give you a large file on any system. Unfortunately a 'full frame' codec appears to definately be the best way to edit and anything that edits a 'group of pictures' codec like ADVHC has other quality problems.
Thanks all for your discussion and advice.

Similar Messages

When opening an image in Photoshop CC, the file appears at a size many times larger than the file I'm opening: a 1mg file opens as 9mg. This started in the past few days. What has happened?

My files have suddenly started opening in Photoshop CC in a much larger size: a 1mg file will open as 9mg, for instance. The more layers I add, the more the multiplication until I'm up so large the program closes down. This never happened before and I don't know if I've changed something by accident or what. HELP!

Let's try something easy. Reset your preferences.
If in Windows, close Photoshop, then double click the PS icon to start it.
Now very quickly hold down the Ctrl-Alt-Shift keys, and you will see a delete settings dialog where you would answer "Yes".
See if that fixes it, if not...we will need more information:
Adobe product and version number
Operating system and version number
The full text of any error message(s)
What you were doing when the problem occurred
Screenshots of the problem
Computer hardware, such as CPU; GPU; amount of RAM; etc.

Exporting a jpg is 3 times larger than CS3

Clearly I'm missing some setting - I'm opening jpgs that had been created with FW CS3 and immediately saving it (for troubleshooting purposes). Optimize Quality is set to 75 | Smoothing 2. The file is fully 3 times larger than it was prior to save. I've exported instead of the straight Save and have the same result. I've lowered the Quality to 60 to make sure I was invoking the compressor ... the file lost 2k.
So a 260x83 bitmap moves from an acceptable 5k to 17k (or 15 with unacceptable compression level)?
Can't be right. Not even Adobe could have mucked up FW this badly.

Not too certain about this, but the increase in file size might be due to additional meta data in the file - that easily adds ~10kb to the file, so it might explain what you are seeing. But as far as I am aware, the save for web functionality in FW should remove meta data.
Use RIOT (radical image optimization tool) (win) or ImagOptim (mac) to check if this is the case or not, and remove the meta data.

SAP BW Key figures displayed 100 times larger than it should

Dear all,
I'm using Crystal Reports 2008 SP2 und SAP Intetegration Kit X3.1 SP2 to create a report upon a BW Query (7.01). Several key figures are displayed exactly 100 times larger than it should. Only the formatted value is displayed correctly.
Is anyone familiar to this phenomenon?
best regards,
madadm

Solved:
the regional settings of the client machine have to match the servers' .This have been hard times...

Why, when I paste my selection in a new layer, is it 10 times larger than when I copied it?

Why, when I paste my selection in a new layer, is it 10 times larger than when I copied it?

Kevin If you don't understand don't try to take the discussion offline via private message. Other that have the same problem will not benefit if taken offline here is you PM.
Hi,
Thanks for your response to my question. What is the best way to adjust to match resloutions of pictures/photos, etc in PSE 12. I am trying to layer photos and selections from photos but when I cut and paste, sometimes I get this HUGE image that doesn't even come close to fitting on the screen.
Thanks!
Kevin
Kevin
You need to understand pixels better know what is going on when you do things. All pixels are not created equal. Some have better quality the others.
When you have a camera that take captures 3000x2000 px for an image and you have a good lens and exposure setting you wing up with 6,000,000 quality pixels for your image.
If you resample that image for the web to fit within 300x200 pixels you wind up with a 60,000 high quality web size image. Or a high quality image that will fit on your display at its resolution. The images resoultion setting is meanless for displays use their resolutuin they do not support image print DPI resolution setting. And Displays do not hava a 72DPI resolution.
So when your post processing think about Pixels DPI is meaningless except when you use a unit based on DPI like inches. However also remember Displays do no support the images print dpi resolution. The only time 1" on display equal 1" in print is when the images print resolution is the same as the display you are using. All displays do not have the same resolution/ Most desktop displaye are around 100DPI that is changing and Laptop and tablets can have resolution above 300DPI. So what will nor fit on your displat may well fix on a laptop or tablet.
DPI is actual pixel size 100DPI pixels a 1/100" x 1/100" = 10,000 per square inch 300DIP 1/300"x 1/300" 90,000 px per sq inch.
The same number on pixels image on a 300dpi display is 9 time larger on a 100Dpi display. What may not fit one your low resolution display may fit on the same size high resolution display for the display displays more pixels then your display can.
If you resample that 300x200 web size image to back to a 3000x2000 pixel image for print you wind up with 6,0000,000 lower quality pixels.
Though the 300X200 pixels image was a high quality web size image much of the original 6,000,000 image quality was reduced in the 300x200 px image. Much of the detail you had in the original 6,000,000 pixels image was discarded in the process. The new 6,000,000 pixels image was made only from a 60,000pixel image they were not captures using a camera exposure. The camera had the actual real detail in front of it to capture. All the computer had were 300x200 pixels it has to add details for the larger image and it does by interpolating the 300x200px image.
Preserve the pixel you get from your cameras. They are the highest quality pixels you will ever have for your images. Every time you resample an image up or down in number of pixels you loose some image quality. Not one of the original pixels remain intact you wind up with a totally new image created by interpolating the old image. Do not save the new image over the old image and loose your good high quality pixels.

Someone tried to email me a video that is larger than 10.8 MB, and it bounced back to her. I have IMAC G5, Lion, Version 10.7.4 Lion. What do I need do to be able to receive larger videos?

Someone tried to email me a video that is larger than 10.8 MB, and it bounced back to her. I have IMAC G5, Lion, Version 10.7.4

Some ISPs impose email attachment limits and that is quite often 10 mb, some have other maximums. Additionally, not all users have fast connections, so someone may not appreciate getting large attachments. It is usually recommended to upload videos you want to share to an online site to share them with others. In your case, your friend should check with her or his ISP to ask about maximums.
FWIW, you need to update your profile. If you are running Lion, you do not have a G5 - those were PPCs and discontinued in 2006 when Intel iMacs were introduced.

Why is menu size so much larger than the files?

I am somewhat perplexed - I'm making a single-layer dvd and have a simple single screen theme (no animation) - it has one drop zone. The movie has 28 chapters so there are five of them, but so far I've added only one montage of photos to each menu page - it's a "mobile" quality in media browser and ave only 10 - 20 MB, then one song. On average these movie clips are 1:00 to 2:00 min long and the music is cut to that length. So, all told, it's probably less than 110 MB in files - but when I look at the project properties, the menus are 3301 MB!!!
The movie itself is only 1.1 GB so what is going on?
It's preventing me from doing the project and I've got no idea why it's making the menu size so much larger than the file sizes?
Can you please help me figure out what to do?
Alexa

The 2 min clips were natively 2 min - I had each one separate and actually converted to media browser in "mobile" size (b/c the drop zone was 4 x 6 in size in the theme). They were tiny - in most cases I was shortening the audio (e.g. the song was 4 minutes and I was setting the loop to only 1:30 b/c that's how long the video clip was on the menu).
BUT, to resolve the question (I always like to post the answer) - I ended up duplicating the project to try to reimport the video. It was a fresh iDVD project and I happened to click on the project tree of screens - and, lo and behold, the ENTIRE menu was duplicated for some reason (and the movie, actually). I went back to the original and it was the same! I have no idea how that would happen do you? It only had one main menu screen - and then an entire duplicate menu - which I wouldn't even know how to access if I didn't see it in the project menu tree?
The only think of is that at one point I added a title menu link to the scene selection - it gave me a warning that my menu was more than 12 minutes, did I want to fix or ignore and fix later - which confused me b/c it was under 12 min, then but I clicked ignore. Does that create an alternate title menu and send people back to something else?
Anyway, I deleted the entire extra scene selection menus (5 of them) and it was back to under 4 GB.
So, I was able to burn, but still wondering about creating the "title menu" link on scene selections? It drives me crazy that it doesn't automatically do that so I like to add "main menu" links.
Thanks for your help!
Alexa

On final Cut express I try to import a video but it says error: unknown file. What should I do?, On final Cut express I try to import a video but it says error: unknown file. What should I do?

I try to import a video but it says error: unknown file. What should I do?

Where are you importing from, a camera, a file?????
Please provide some type of specific info regards the import.
FYI: FCE works with only DV, HDV and AVCHD codecs.
Al

Imported video files are 7-8 times larger than the original!!!

I really like iMovie but the thing is iMovie imports my video files (taken in my AVCHD Sony Handycam HDR-CX11E) with an approximatly 7 times larger file size than the original file size of the movie. And still I have chosen the option "Large - 960 x 540". I really don't know if there is any solution to this "problem". I would be thankful for anyone who could give me a solution.
Regards

The best way to find out is to try it. Take a small but representative sample, do some edits, export as H264, then reimport, do some edits, export again.
I expect some degradation, but here mostly the problem may be the quality (or lack thereof) of the analog originals.
Also, let me clarify: QT movie per se means nothing in terms of quality or compression. The QT is a container format. Inside it can be a high quality, high bitrate ProRes 4444 or a highly compressed H264, or a number of other things.
In FCP X, when you export a Master File, you get to decide in the settings which codec to use (e.g. Prores vs H264), but the output file will still be a QT file.

FLV are 5 times larger than original wmv

Is anyone experiencing there FLV files to be 5 time larger in
file size than the original wmv file? I made sure the dimensions
are the same, audio the same, video settings match and all. I can't
figure out why its so dramatically larger.

It rather depends whether you have effects that interact with the photos.
If you do, it may be better to embed just prior to saving as pdf.
My policy is to keep images linked for as long as possible.
Remember too that the photos will be converted to the colour mode of the Illie file as soon as they are embedded.
InDesign works differently in that you never need to embed or alter the colour mode of RGB images in a CMYK file,

"tp import all" runs 24 times faster than "tp import TR " for long queue?

After a test upgrade to ECC 6.0, I processed 1200 individual transports in 12 hours. When I rebuilt the queue of 1200 transports and processed "tp import all", it completed in 30 minutes.
Should I expect "tp import all" to process 24 times faster than individual imports?
800 transports were client independent (code) and 400 transports were client-specific (configuration).
What run times have you seen?
What problems with "tp import all" have you seen?
Best regards,
Gary Sherwood

Hi Gary
You don't know the 800 transports which are wating for the import, what could be render your system in case of import all. so, that's why , i will prefer to you import individual request instead of import all.
offcourse, Import all are faster than the individual because it prepare all steps once to start import,
Regards
Anwer Waseem

Why can't I import audio content from a Pana LX5 MTS file?

Hi,
Awesome as the new video capability is in CS6 (the ability to add image filters is to die for!), I have encountered a problem.
I can import the video component from a Panasonic LX5 .MTS AVCHD Lite video file. But the audio isn't included and I can't bring the audio content into an audio track by importing separately.
When I import H264 .MOV, taken with my Canon 7D, audio is included in the video import and I can also import audio from another, similar file to an audio track.
Is there some special trick involved with AVCHD Lite format video? Has anyone else succeeded in importing audio from an .MTS file?
Kind regards,
Joachim Smith
Nykoping
Sweden

You aren't the only person: also fails for me, Windows 7 64-bit. Audio doesn't play in CS6 Bridge either, although audio plays in Windows Media, so I assume system has correct codec installed.
I think this might be a bug, here is a .mts file for others (or Adobe) to test with: http://www.newae.com/00012.MTS

How can an imovie video be turned into an FLV file?

How can I turn one of my current iMovie videos into an FLV file?

If your movie is less than 10 minutes, you can use iMovie to Share it to YouTube then use iSkysofts free downloader to download the flv file to your Mac.
http://www.iskysoft.com/free-mac-video-downloader.html
If it's longer than 10 minutes, you'll need to find converter software.
I don't do much with Flash myself so I'm not sure what to recommend. Google should help.
Matt

File iMovie Library.imovielibrary is larger than possible for the drive it's on.

I've use iMovie '09 for a while and just switched to 10.0.2. The system created iMovie Library.imovielibrary on the attached drive I use for video files. This file is huge, in fact it should not fit on the drive it's on. That is, the space available before it was created has around 100Gb and the file size shown in finder is over 300Gb. What's going on?

It will create a new copy of all the files on the other drive because hard links only work within a single drive (partition). To establish the hard links on the new drive you would have to copy the iMovie 9 folders then update them again in iMovie10 into a library on the new drive (after removing an empty file called something like "Updated to iMovie 10" from the projects and events folders that are put there by iMovie 10 to prevent updating twice.)
Geoff.

Why is my Time Machine backup so much larger than the files being backed up?

Mac Mini Server 10.7.1 on a 2011 Mac Mini Server
Here are the drives on my system:
Here are the items excluded from backup:
Note that Server HD and Archive are the only non-excluded disks and the estimated backup size is 563.2 GB (this corresponds with the actual usage on those drives.
However, when I run time machine, it keeps going until by 2TB backup drive is nearly full! And that's with only a single backup instance and nothing else on the drive:
What's going on here??? If I don't backup the other external drive, the backup size doesn't blow up like this.

Just to clarify, the reason why Time Machine backups are generally small is that TM makes extensive use of hard links. symbolic links are small files that point to a different file system entry, while hard links point directly to the original file data on disk (hard links are unintuitive - they are like having multiple doors into a room, except that you can place the doors anywhere you like and still get to the room). So even though there may be dozens of backups of a disk, most of the backed-up items will only have one data source on disk, with only items that have changed needing new representations.
I suspect that when you try to backup a time machine backup, it is converting the hard links into separate on-disk representations - basically taking every pointer to a given piece of on-disk data and creating a new file from it. I'm not sure if that would be a linear or geometric size increase (it sounds like the latter), but either way it's going to get ugly fairly fast.

Imported iMovie video 6 times larger than .mts files on camcorder

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for