JPEG in DV50 sequence quality issues in FCP5

I had been working on graphics in DV50 in 4.5. the graphics were JPEGs that were 150 by 786 and I would crop them and place them over video and other layers of graphics. The type was sharp and there was no problems. When I did the same thin in FCP5 the graphics got blurred.
Here are the things I noticed. The settings for sequence and files were the same. The only way I could get the graphics to look right in FCP5 was to make the field dominance none. My base layer is DV50 and my seq settings are all set to Lower.
Why might this be and how do I deal with this now?
Why did this work so well in 4.5 but not in 5?
Thank you

ok I found an answer to this one but now I would like to know why in the most recent version of FCP I would use a lower quality setting.
First let me explain that to fix the problem I was having I had to go to the seq settings video processing and change the motion filtering to fastest as opposed to Normal or Best. Why would this be?
Thanks

Similar Messages

Jpeg export size and quality issues

aloha,
I use a lot of photos in articles on the web and size them to about 250 x 166 pixels. I just tested Aperture, Photoshop CS2, Fireworks 8, and Graphic Converter at levels of low, med, high or 30, 60, 80 or 4, 6, 9.
The best quality in terms of sharpness, clarity and color was PS CS2, with Aperture second. But Photoshop's files were 12, 24 and 36 k respectively, where the Aperture files were 72, 74 and 88k. In fact even at quality 0, the Aperture-generated jpeg was 64k. Fireworks were 4, 8 and 16k but surprisingly poor quality. Graphic converter was 116, 120, and 124k, with decent quality.
It appears that Adobe's engine is more adept at re-sizing and compressing (not entirely surprising). It leaves me with a bit of a workflow issue, since opening the files from Aperture into CS2 leaves me with a gigantic .tiff in Aperture I don't need.
Full size jpegs could be exported from Aperture to a folder, then opened in Photoshop, resized, and saved for the web. I can automate the Photoshop part of it, but would need some help automating the whole process.
Any information and suggestions folks have would be appreciated! I am curious as to why there is a floor on the Aperture jpeg sizes. Maybe I need to turn some option off? I'd love to keep my workflow within a single program.....
mahalo,
paul

What we need are the clip properties & sequence settings in Final Cut Express. Your screenshot is from a Finder window.
It would appear you have a clip with nonstandard frame size (1366x768) in an H.264 file. FCE cannot edit this material. FCE is limited to specific codecs and frame sizes. You need to convert your clip to QuickTime/Apple Intermediate Codec. If it's highdef widescreen then convert it to QT/AIC 1920x1080i. Try using MPEG Streamclip to convert the source clip.
You also need to be using a matching Easy Setup in Final Cut Express. If your source media file is QT/AIC 1920x1080i then you should select the AVCHD Apple Intermediate Codec 1920x1080i60 Easy Setup in FCE -AND- then create a new sequence before importing your clip into FCE and placing it in your sequence (timeline)

Quality issues with IDVD solved

Hi All
RE. Best looking IDVD playback.
May this help all those stuggling with quality issues with perfect looking Qtime files encoded by IDVD coming out looking crap.
Simply this: instead of exporting your media from your FCP timeline in H.264 - instead select Motion JPEG A. This is found under your setting options in your Qtime movie/settings export window.
Your files will export much, much faster than Apple's default setting of H.264, you will also get very smooth playback wihtout any jaggies or nasty artifacts. Files are a larger but, hey, it just looks great.
Let me know if this works for you - it took me ages to figure this out!
Best regards
PostGuy40
Imac 2.16Ghz intel dual core Mac OS X (10.4.8) 17"

Good info. I'll keep this in mind next time.

Image Quality issue with script

So I recently wrote a simple script to output an image at a bunch of different resolutions. However, I am running into an image quality issue that I don't run into when I do the same thing manually.
Here is an example image showcasing the image: http://terminalvelocity.ca/temp/notworking.jpg
As you can see along the top of the model's forhead there is destinct color fragmentation. Which seems very strange.
Here is the script, it is pretty simple, it asks for a few simple config options. (the above image was created using default settings). It then figures out the correct ratios and loops through doing each resize, saving the image, then reverting the history so each iteration uses the original image data and not the resized version:
doc = app.activeDocument;
openFilePath = Folder.selectDialog ("Where do you want the images to be saved?");
maxSize = Number(prompt("What would you like to be the maximum length of the long edge? (Image is never upsized) (pixels)", 2800));
minSize = Number(prompt("What would you like to be the minimum length of the long edge? (pixels)", 100));
gap = Number(prompt("How much smaller should each image be? (pixels)", 100));
quality = Number(prompt("What quality would you like the JPG exported as (0-12)", 10));
var size;
var primary;
var secondary;
if(doc.width > doc.height){
          primary = doc.width;
          secondary = doc.height;
}else{
          primary = doc.height;
          secondary = doc.width;
var ratio = secondary/primary;
var size = [];
for(var i = maxSize;i>minSize;i-=gap){
          var p = i
          var s = i * ratio;
          size.push([p,s]);
var w;
var h;
var n;
for(var i in size){
          if(doc.width > doc.height){
                    w = n = size[i][0];
                    h = size[i][1];
          }else{
                    w = size[i][1];
                    n= h = size[i][0];
          if(doc.width >= w && doc.height >= h){
                    doc.resizeImage(w,h,null,ResampleMethod.BICUBICSHARPER);
                    jpgFile = new File(openFilePath+"/"+n+".jpeg" )
                    jpgSaveOptions = new JPEGSaveOptions()
                    jpgSaveOptions.embedColorProfile = false
                    jpgSaveOptions.formatOptions =
                    FormatOptions.STANDARDBASELINE
                    jpgSaveOptions.matte = MatteType.NONE
                    jpgSaveOptions.quality = quality
                    app.activeDocument.saveAs(jpgFile, jpgSaveOptions, true,Extension.LOWERCASE);
                    doc.activeHistoryState = doc.historyStates[doc.historyStates.length-2];
In comparison, here is an example of an image of the exact same resolution that does not exhibit this issue at all:
The steps taken to save this image were as follows: http://photography.terminalvelocity.ca/content/images/2012/avery_konrad_6/horizontal/1500. jpg
Image > Resize > Bicubic Sharper (1500px);
Save For Web
     Jpeg
     Quality 75
     Optimzed: true
     Progressive: false
     Blur: 0
     Convert to sRGB: true
Anyway, as you can see, The manually exported image does not have any of the quality issues that are present within the scripted image. I am pretty new to photoshop scriping so am assuming it has something to do with me missing some sort of option in the save settings. Any help would be swell.
Also note, this doesn't occur on all images, I usually don't see an issue when using the script, however, something about the tones of this particular photo make it really obvious.
I am using the latest version of Photoshop CS6 (creative cloud) on Max OSX
thanks so much!

I'm on windows find the bicubicsharper does not work well it the image being resized has been highly sharpened all ready. Because of my Photoshop preferences I had to make minor modification to your script. I'm also a bit colorblind so i don't see many color issues so I include a screen capture if what windows does with your image and script.
var orig_ruler_units = app.preferences.rulerUnits;
app.preferences.rulerUnits = Units.PIXELS;          // Set the ruler units to PIXELS
doc = app.activeDocument;
openFilePath = Folder.selectDialog ("Where do you want the images to be saved?");
maxSize = Number(prompt("What would you like to be the maximum length of the long edge? (Image is never upsized) (pixels)", 2800));
minSize = Number(prompt("What would you like to be the minimum length of the long edge? (pixels)", 100));
gap = Number(prompt("How much smaller should each image be? (pixels)", 100));
quality = Number(prompt("What quality would you like the JPG exported as (0-12)", 10));
var size;
var primary;
var secondary;
if(doc.width > doc.height){
          primary = doc.width;
          secondary = doc.height;
}else{
          primary = doc.height;
          secondary = doc.width;
var ratio = secondary/primary;
var size = [];
for(var i = maxSize;i>minSize;i-=gap){
          var p = i
          var s = i * ratio;
          size.push([p,s]);
var w;
var h;
var n;
for(var i in size){
          if(doc.width > doc.height){
                    w = n = size[i][0];
                    h = size[i][1];
          }else{
                    w = size[i][1];
                    n= h = size[i][0];
          if(doc.width.value >= w && doc.height.value >= h){
                    doc.resizeImage(w,h,null,ResampleMethod.BICUBICSHARPER);
                    jpgFile = new File(openFilePath+"/"+n+".jpeg" )
                    jpgSaveOptions = new JPEGSaveOptions()
                    jpgSaveOptions.embedColorProfile = false
                    jpgSaveOptions.formatOptions =
                    FormatOptions.STANDARDBASELINE
                    jpgSaveOptions.matte = MatteType.NONE
                    jpgSaveOptions.quality = quality
                    app.activeDocument.saveAs(jpgFile, jpgSaveOptions, true,Extension.LOWERCASE);
                    doc.activeHistoryState = doc.historyStates[doc.historyStates.length-2];
app.preferences.rulerUnits = orig_ruler_units;          // Reset units to original settings

Jpeg export is low quality

For some reason, when i export a jpeg, it seems low quality, even if i go up to 12 quality (and make the image 3 times the size of the original)
here's an example, an image that was TAKEN as a jpeg originally, imported to aperture, and then exported after some editing.
the one on the right is the exported jpeg, and it seems ..not sharp at all
http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c44/funk11963/Picture1.png
I'm not the only one with this issue, check out this post where other people have the same problem.
http://www.apertureprofessional.com/showthread.php?t=15206&highlight=resolutiononexport

FUNK1196 wrote:
For some reason, when i export a jpeg, it seems low quality, even if i go up to 12 quality (and make the image 3 times the size of the original)
here's an example, an image that was TAKEN as a jpeg originally, imported to aperture, and then exported after some editing.
the one on the right is the exported jpeg, and it seems ..not sharp at all
http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c44/funk11963/Picture1.png
You've got a couple of problems here:
1. JPEG is not a very good format for editing then re-saving as a JPEG. It's a lossy compression, and one of the cruelest ironies is that compression artifacts compress poorly. It can get especially bad if you open an edited JPEG and re-save it to a third JPEG. Obviously, at the higher quality settings, you lose less in each step, but you'll still lose something.
The best strategy is to shoot your pictures using Camera raw, which should be either uncompressed or compresses with a lossless scheme, or in an uncompressed format like TIFF. Then, edit them and do all your work with the TIFFs or the raw files. Once you're happy with your edits, then the last step is to export a JPEG. If you want to make a new version of the picture, just go back to the original, make a new version (either from the master or your previously edited version), edit that, and re-export when you're done.
2. Exporting at a size larger than the original will always result in some image degradation. Think about it this way: if you printed your JPEG on a sheet of rubber and stretched it to three times its size, your picture would get blurrier the more the sheet stretched. The same kind of thing happens in your computer. You're always better off to work on a picture at a bigger size than you'll eventually need it, then make it smaller when you're done editing.
I'm not the only one with this issue, check out this post where other people have the same problem.
http://www.apertureprofessional.com/showthread.php?t=15206&highlight=resolutiononexport
What they're talking about in those posts is different. They're talking about a resolution setting for printing. For example, suppose you have a picture that's 1500 by 1500 pixels. If you print that at 300 pixels per inch, you can print that picture 5 inches by 5 inches. If you change the resolution to 150 pixels per inch, the same 1500x1500 pixel picture will print out 10 inches by 10 inches. But if you look at the picture at 100% zoom level on screen it should look the same, since the screen has a fixed resolution.
This article might explain it a bit better:
http://www.ransen.com/Articles/DPI/Default.htm
charlie

Bizarre Lightroom image quality issue

I have a weird image quality issue with Lightroom, when opening RAW files (haven't tried it with any other file format, admittedly).
Here's an example of how the image appears in Lightroom. As an experiment, I exported the image as a TIFF and opened it in Gimp to see if it was just down to a display issue, but the exported TIFF showed the same quality issues as Lightroom. Aside from exporting as a TIFF (and then saving as a Jpeg), this image is SOOC:
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/swisstony10/4912360565/" title="IMG_4134 by swisstony10, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4093/4912360565_5891c0160f.jpg" width="333" height="500" alt="IMG_4134" /></a>
If I open the same image in Canon's own DPP software, this image quality issue does not occur, so I know that it's not an issue with the memory card, the camera, or my laptop's monitor. The SOOC image from DPP (exported as a Jpeg) looks like this:
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/swisstony10/4912362053/" title="IMG_4134b by swisstony10, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4116/4912362053_1ca92078c9.jpg" width="333" height="500" alt="IMG_4134b" /></a>
Has anybody else experienced this, and if so, is there a fix? (there had better be - I'm not going to be overly chuffed if my expensive Adobe software is being outperformed by the free stuff.. )
Russ.

This is proving to be an extremely helpful forum!
Thanks for the advice on embedding my calibrated colour space - I don't very often send files anywhere other than my own home network (where all the monitors are calibrated), and when I do upload any to Flickr, it's never caused a problem in the past (and if I get anything printed by a lab, I use their ICC profile). I'll definitely keep that all in mind though..
Here's the original RAW file of the image I used as the example https://www.yousendit.com/download/aHlUa3ZONmNFd2Z2Wmc9PQ - I hope that helps someone to shed some light on what's going wrong. From what you've said though, it does look as if this is just an extreme example of something that Lightroom isn't very good at doing.
As I said in my original post, it'll be a bit disappointing if that's the case though, because a fair amount of the pictures I take tend to be of bands playing in what are, let's face it, diabolical conditions for photography. (At the festival I was attending at the weekend for example, all of the photographers - even the seasoned pros - were moaning about how awful the lighting was in the Big Top, and how much it sucked to try and get a decent picture there, as opposed to the main stage where everybody wasn't completely backlit by either red or purple lights. I appreciate that Lightroom is a much more powerful tool than Canon's DPP - the noise reduction controls on their own completely rock - but I must admit I'm a bit surprised that it can't handle highlights terribly well...

Nef Quality Issue

(moved from Photoshop forum)
I really want to use Photoshop ACR to import my Nef files, but I seem to be running in to a quality issue.
When I look at the photo i've imported in to Photoshop CS4 with the version of ACR (5.3) against Capture NX 2, it doesnt look anywhere near as sharp.
If you look at the attached file you can see what I mean - on the left is the preview in photoshop CS4 (ACR Window) & on the right is NX 2.
I would add that NX 2 isnt doing any sharpening or amending - i've turned it all off. In addition I also add that when I look at the file using View NX it looks as sharp as it does in NX 2, & that doesnt do any sharpening either.
I would say that even at the highest level of Sharpening in ACR, it doesnt look as good as NX 2. I did try the demo of Bibble & that was better - but I find it hard to believe that ACR is worse than either of these two & I'm sure I must be doing something wrong.
In ACR I have it set to as shot in basic (and it doesnt alter if I take the Preview off), so it doesnt look like it's a setting that's degrading the quality.
This means i'm forced to use NX 2 to export to Tiff, & then open in Photoshop, which is a pain.
btw - I have to say the NX 2 interface sucks! Hence my reasoning to use ACR, which I am so used to.
Any help would be appreciated.

Bill I see no obvious difference between the two images you posted, but if I had to make a guess then I would say that the rightmost image may be the Nikon processed one. Too close to call though. If mine were that close I couldn't possibly have an issue.
However, mine aren't anywhere near that close. Hopefully you will see why I consider this to be an issue.
The colour differences I am not concerened about, but the difference in the level of detail, I am.
Have a look at the examples at these links.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/30207556@N03/3865233390/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/30207556@N03/3864450905/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/30207556@N03/3865233750/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/30207556@N03/3865374872/
All are 100% crops of the same image.
The first in each sequence I imported into lightroom with my standard settings.
The second with the D3 Camera Standard profile
The third is exported directly from View NX with no.
All sharpening turned set to 0 in both programmes.
All images increased in exposure by 0.3
None are colour corrected after import or altered in any other way, so there will be differences in colour which I am not concerned with.
The first sequence (Unsharpened) shows a portion of an image, showing the Grooms father during a church reading.
Notice the texture of the jacket.
The second sequence (Unsharpened-2) is a different view of the same image and shows the carved eagle.
Notice the increased detail in the carving.
The third sequence (Basic-Sharpened) is a sharpened version of the same shot.
View NX set to 2 sharpen out of 10.
LR set to 50 0.8 35.
I have tried it with the sharpening in LR at various settings and cannot equal the sharpness of the NEF files processed through either Nikon software or through Capture One.
Yes, all of the View or capture images have more pronounced grain than the Lightroom ACR images, but that can be reduced without losing the detail advantage.
For the sake of completeness I have downloaded ACR 5.4 and re-done the test using camera raw instead ( ACR v VNX).
I haven't included any Capture One samples, but to all intents they are the same as the View NX samples.
I am open to the idea that there is something I am or am not doing, as I love the workflow through Lightroom and if I can match the detail levels I get via the other programmes then all will be well with the world.
Your thoughts?
All the best.

Lightroom 3 Slide Show Quality Issues Anyone?

I am experiencing slideshow quality issues with LR 3.2 using Canon 5D MKII 21 Mp RAW files. My Canon Digital Rebel 6 Mp RAW files produced high-quality slideshow PDFs using LR1 and LR2. The 5DMKII RAW files produce soft PDF imaging, regardless of preview rendering or slide show export settings in LR3, and I HAVE TRIED EVERYTHING! I then went back and tried doing a LR3.2 slideshow PDF with my Digital Rebel 6Mp files and they are much higher resolution, regardless of the settings in LR 3.2 – The exact opposite of my 5DMKII slideshows. Go figure, the 6Mp images are superior in LR 3 slideshow than the 21Mp 5DMKII images!
I developed a simple work around that improves the quality of slideshow PDFs when using larger Mpixel file images:
1)      Select the images you want use for your slideshow and export them to JPEG, sRGB, 80-100% Quality, Resize to fit: 1536 x 1024 Resolution, NO Output Sharpening
2)      Import the 1536 x 1024 JPEG files and place them into a collection, sort their order, and add caption or title information if needed.
3)      Open the collection in Slideshow Module and select a template you like, or create your own custom template.
4)      Play the slideshow and let it create previews when prompted. Adjust slideshow template settings until happy with the layout.
5)      When finished with the slide show template, save as it as a ‘New Template’ for future use.
6)      Next select ‘Export PDF Slideshow,’ Quality 80-100, Width 1600, Height 1200, and Save.
7)      View the slideshow ‘Full Screen’ in PDF reader. It should have much higher resolution than normal slideshow export when using > 8 Mp files.
It takes a few extra steps, but not much additional time to create slideshows using this method.
Adobe must be aware of this problem, and probably does not apply sharpening to files >8Mp for PDF slideshow export to correct for over sharpening of Portrait images. This is just a guess! If you export RAW images to full size JPEGs and use these JPEG files to create a PDF slideshow, the Portrait images will look over-sharpened in Adobe reader! Using my work around process, the landscape and portrait images appear fairly uniform in sharpness, even though the portrait images are 2/3 the resolution of the portrait images ( 1024 x 683 versus 1536 x 1024). This is one of the issues Adobe needs to correct with the Slideshow Module PDF Export program module.
That must be hard to do! Let’s see, who is the developer of Acrobat and PDF format…Oh I forgot it’s ADOBE! As a 45-year veteran of the computer technology industry I've seen worse things, but this is very disappointing when you consider Lightroom is now a “mature” version 3 generation program! Yes, Separate slideshow programs are available, but why should you need to use one if all you want is “basic” slideshow capability!

After much trial and error I discovered using the 'Widescreen' template provided in the slideshow module provides very sharp imaging for PDF export. I haven't tried video export, but I would assume it is similar. I cannot explain why this is, because even when I change the guides from 0px to say 60px (i.e. no longer widescreen fill) the images are sharper than using any other template.
Try using 'Widescreen' template. Then try adjusting the guides using 'Widescreen’ template, and save as a new user template. I have no idea why it makes a difference, but it does!

HP Officejet Pro L7590 - print quality issue

We've had a lot of problems with this unit since day one. It simply wouldn't work with our XP computers. Thankfully it does work with our new Windows 7 computer.
The problem I'm having is that I have to clean the printheads at least once, if not twice, before every print job if it hasn't printed anything recently (even an hour or two).
Although we've had the printer for a while, it has hardly been used because it wouldn't work with our previous computers (and I gave up trading emails with HP support because the situation just got worse each time we tried something, not better). The myPrintMileage function says we've printed just over 300 pages (and I can pretty much guarantee that at least 250 of those have been diagnostic pages trying to get it working, not actual print jobs).
The only advice I can find on the troubleshooting page is to replace the printhead/s. Is that really the case? We have already had to replace ink cartridges before we ever got the printer working. If we now have to replace one or both printheads this machine is proving very costly to run. I would be very disappointed to find we had had to replace all four ink cartridges and both printheads before we ever got the machine working properly.
I'd appreciate any feedback you can offer on this please.

I've included a link below to help you troubleshoot rpint quality issues...
http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/document?docname=bpu03037&tmp_task=solveCategory&lc=en&dlc=en&cc=...
This document provides some system settings that may help fix the issue.
Dave M.
Say Thanks by clicking the Kudos Star in the post that helped you.
Please mark the post that solves your problem as Accepted Solution.
I am an HP employee.

SAP ERP Quality Issue: Notification Creation Problem

Hello,
I'm testing the SAP mobile app ERP Quality Issue.
I've done the needed customizing in backend.
If I try to create a notification from the mobile app I've got this message:
Your Quality Issue cannot be created!
In iPad log I can see this error:
QualityIssue
31/05/12 10:43:45
Exception during parsing! - Collection Value is not a valid DateTime /Volumes/sapmnt/dewdfms0003/fa/src/MobileSuite/LWM_qualityissue_iOS/onDevice/LWM_qualityissue_iOS/1.0_REL/Mobile Quality Issue/Classes/../Connectivity.m:510
I don't understand why the app talks about DateTime if there are no datetime fields in the screen!
Does anyone have the same problem?
Thanks
Piero

Hello, Piero!
Have you solved this problem?
We have the same problem right now
and we are trying to find solution.
Could you please share your experience, have you succeed?
Thank you!
Best regards,
Konstantin Tomilov

Iphone 6 call quality issue....

Hi, yesterday i saw software update in my iphone 6 and i thought it will solve the call quality issue , but unfortunately it was not for that.
Dear iphone support , the call quality in iphone 6 is really bad, I was using iphone 4S and that had great voice quality. iphone 6 voice during call is not clear , it has noise .
When I told my friends about the problem , they told me that I might have bought the refurbish phone. But I bought it from Dubai in 750 USD and I do not think it would be the case.

Since my iPhone 6 has great Call Quality,
My tip would be to take it to an Apple shop. All apple Products have world wide warranty.
If it is really they should be able to fix it.
Hope this helps,

Print quality issues

Hello
We are having print quality issue when printing PDF's to our Canon iR C2880/C3380 UFR II. This was the most recent print driver from canons website which was download about 6 weeks ago. version 2.9. At one time we were having other pring quality issues and we changed from the post script driver to the ufr ii which solved the problem at the time.
This past saturday we upgrade the operating systems on the systems in question and they are now running windows 7 64 bit with service pack 1 installed. image 1 is the orignal pdf that was printed with a 3rd party pdf printer(PDF Xchange view version 2.5) image 2 is the same document that was printed using acrobat reader 10.1.2
the options for the print were pretty much identical between the program. Print as image was not selected. 1 thing to note with the acrobat when print as image was selected there was a slight improvement in the print quality.
Any help would greatly be appreciated.
image 1
image2

Hi, nd a warm welcome to the forums!
Off the bat, it looks like maybe bad RAM/ROM in the Printer, or corrupt Font.
Can you have another Computer jook to it and print for a test?
Can you try Printing from Adobe Reader...
http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html
Can you in Preview, Save As a picture format for a test?

Has Apple addressed poor sound quality issues with new 160GB iPod classic?

I just bought a new 160GB iPod classic, replacing a perfectly good 80GB iPod Video (5.5), thinking that the newer one would be superior to my 3 year old model. I discovered that the sound of the new unit was flat and muddy compared to the older model. I found that the 5th gen iPod video was more "spacial", if that's an appropriate word to use; the bass was more present and more clearly defined, as was the rest of the sonic spectrum. I searched several forums to research this issue and while there were numerous references to this issue, all of the posts I found referred to the original iPod classics (80GB and 160GB) and not the later 120GB classics nor the new 160GB classics like the one I bought. Has Apple done anything to address this issue since the first classics were released or are the new ones still suffering from the same sound quality issues as the original classics?

Based on your observations here, they apparently have not changed the sound quality since the original 160GB classic. I noticed a clear narrowing of the sound stage (ambiance) between the 5.5G 80Gb and my 6G 160GB. You're describing the same characteristic. I don't own the newest 160GB version and came here today to see if it might have improved the sound quality back to the 5.5 spaciousness. Note that the 5.5G has a higher signal to noise ratio than the 6G, making it difficult for me to enjoy it through efficient balanced armature in ear monitors like the Shure SE530s or Ulimate Ears Triple.Fi 10s.

Hp Color Laser Jet 5550dn Print Quality Issues

Good Afternoon,
I have a Hp Color Laser Jet 5550dn that has some print quality issue. I've attached a black and white scan, but the color is a light blue to blue that form the blotches. On the back of the page there are blue and pink streaks.
I can print more sample pages or print them in color, but anyone have any idea what could be going on here?

We are encountering a similar problem. The streaking is coming fromt the Cyan cartridge and has continued for over a year now, despite numerous cartridge changes and replacing the transfrer case. It is progressively getting worse and I have yet to find a solution to this problem online. Any help or guidance would be appreciated.

Did Apple fix the video quality issue in iMovie '09?

I am a casual video editor and iMovie 08 had the perfect user experience / functionality for what I want to do.
However, the known video quality issue (throwing away interlaced scan lines) made the result unacceptable since I archive our family video on DVDs. I have been forced to use iMovie HD for that reason. I have tried tricks such as converting the original DV files to AIF and deinterlace prior to import into iMovie08 but that did not seem to work either.
So does anyone know if Apple fixed the video quality issue in iMovie '09.
MESSAGE TO APPLE IF YOU ARE LISTENING:
Please fix the video quality in iMovie09 if not already. Yes, the quality is ok for YouTube or Internet video but for those of us who want simple editing to archive our family video we cannot accept poor video quality. Dropping an interlace field effectively halves the vertical resolution. Thank you.

Please explain this in more detail when you say Adaptive Deinterlacer. Are you talking about another program? If so, what program and what are the specific steps.
Also, sounds like you are recommending imovie09. By saying to do the above, are you saying imovie09 still causes you too loose significant quality like imovie08? Are you saying you can use imovie08 or imovie09 with these steps to get high quality video or just imovie09? I guess I just need more specifics on how you do what you are describing and how imovie09 fits into this versus imovie08. I joined this whole discussion trying to figure out if upgrading imovie09 made a difference regarding the whole quality issue. I know it has more features, but I am more concerned about he quality of the video right now. Thanks.

JPEG in DV50 sequence quality issues in FCP5

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for