Lower quality when viewing in Preview

I have this issue on a BP with 10.5.4 and also a G4 with 10.4.11., and that is that images in Preview are not the same as viewed in any other app, which all look the same. I'm not talking about the look of colors or symptoms of having mismatched profiles, because the colors and shades are the same. But there's a subtle, though definite, slightly lower quality look when using Preview. I've been through the limited preference options and nothing makes it right.
It's almost as if there's a very slight noise, or unsharp mask artifact, or resolution mismatch (toggling the "respect DPI doesn't make it disappear) though it doesn't appear it other apps.
What's the deal? : )
Thanks.

I'm disappointed that Mail on the mac has not added options to control Marking as Read When Viewing in the Preview Pane. I'm using Mail 3.6 (latest as of July 2009) on 10.5.7, and this is still not supported. I have just finished switching to a new mac from a PowerBook G4 867 which I purchased in 2002, and I moved Entourage v.X (not even 2004 or 2008) app and mailboxes over to my new macbook pro. Then I used Mail 3.6 to Import Mailboxes from Entourage. I also imported contacts to Address Book and calendar items to iCal, etc. Finally I can leave Entourage behind --> Not necessarily.
Entourage v.X and Windows Outlook have had this feature for at least five years. Why has this feature been skipped in Mail all this time?
Previewing a message is not the same as Reading the message. Situation one: I like to use the up/down arrows to scroll quickly through messages, and consider which are the most important. Oops, now they're all marked Read! Situation two: Occasionally I click on the wrong message. Oops - it's marked Read now.
Simplest solution: Provide an on/off control: Mark Previewed Messages as Read - on or off
Richer solution: Provide timer control: Mark Previewed Messages as Read After 'n' seconds: - <n>
At least give us the Simpler boolean solution.
I found several threads on the same topic marked as Answered/Resolved. The workaround of getting rid of the preview pane is a poor workaround compared to what has been requested though it seems to be all we have so far. Admins should close the dangling threads only after posting a note indicating why.
TruePreview was proposed as a solution in one of the threads, but I have not tried that. If others have tried and are happy with it, please let me know.
Thanks...Alan

Similar Messages

Low Quality When Viewed In Full Screen

So when I try to view my movie in full screen it's all pixely. Is there something I'm doing wrong, or is setting I need to change? Any help would be great!

Well I'm not 100% sure. The video came from a miniDV tape and is NSTC. I also have no idea how to how to change the dimensions or if I can. Is there a way I can find out the dimensions? Sorry for not being much help.

Inferior quality when viewing a built DVD in on a computer

I've seen a few postings with similar problems but have yet to find any good solutions. I'm creating a DVD and many of my client's clients will be viewing it on computers instead of NTSC monitors.
No matter how high I set the encoding bitrate in DVDSP (they say to never go above 8Mpbs - and that's pushing it), the menu screens and text in particular look really crappy when viewed on a computer. I've tried having the text be part of the background instead of a separate graphic, as well as using the text feature in DVDSP. I've run NTSC color filters in Photoshop and the font I'm using is thick and sans serif; but no matter what I do, once the DVD project is built and viewed via the Apple DVD Player (or any player on the computer) it just looks too compressed and not good. I've saved my menu graphics from Photoshop in a variety of formats (ended up using TIFFs), and tried a variety of text colors.
Unchecking "Deinterlace" in the Apple DVD Player makes it look a little better when viewing, but there's no way to automatically force a users computer to change this default setting, so no real help there.
Even further, if I export one of the files as an m2v in a separate app like QuickTime or Compressor and view it in QuickTime, it doesn't look nearly as bad as after DVDSP builds the project and does its encoding. I've tried 2 pass VBR, 1 pass, etc. Pretty much every possible setting/preference.
There has to be some way to improve the quality of still menus and text so that it looks decent on a computer monitor as well as on a TV when building a project with DVDSP.
Does anyone have any tips or suggestions?
Thanks!

Thanks for following up Chris - I apologize for any lack of detail in my posting.
Yes, I am mostly talking about quality concerns with menus though this is not specified in the title of the post. I understand that there is always loss in general quality when compressing as mpeg2, but to be more specific than before, text quality in the menus looks too artifacted around the edges. My client has described it as being "not sharp" and/or blurry.
I have used the proper resolution for the stills in Photoshop, and have experimented with using both 720x480 and 720x534. The problem is not with highlights, as the selected/activated states are separate elements from the text itself (rectangles that appear below the text).
In terms of viewing, I'm aware that scaling up to full screen will degrade the quality. It certainly looks better when viewed at normal size but it would still be nice to be able to control the compression on the still menus so that everything didn't appear as artifacted.
The eye is more forgiving when watching video because of the movement, but on the still menus the loss of quality is much more apparent.
Perhaps (as suggested) encoding the m2vs in Compressor first and then bringing them into DVDSP would yield better results than having the built-in encoder do the job (though my understanding was that it is essentially the same encoder).
My reference to viewing the m2vs in QuickTime was simply to point out the difference in apparent quality when viewing the m2v before DVDSP builds the project - when looking at the m2v in QuickTime the quality appears much better than when you view the DVD project in the Apple DVD Player after the project is built (even though DVDSP is using the same m2v). My concern/question with that issue is just to wonder if DVDSP does some kind of extra compression/encoding on an m2v when it builds the project, and if this can be controlled.
Thanks again for your comments and suggestions.

LR4 export to JPG the colour washes out when viewed in Preview

Specs:
LR4 4.2 with ACR 7.2
Mac OSX 10.8.2
Nikon D600 NEF (Raw) files
This problem has occured everytime I use LR4 and I've tried exporting to different colour space - sRGB, AdobeRGB with the same result. This is using my new Nikon D600, when I export a photo processed in LR4 and shot from my old Canon 400D the colours are almost identical when viewed in Preview with just the usual loss you would expect converting to sRGB.
Is anyone else experiencing this and/or know of a solution?
I hope this is an issue that is being worked on for the update that will fully support the D600.
Cheers
E

Mojo,
The problems which you are getting with Lightroom & your cameras D600 & 40D is not clear by the way you have tried to explained.
Can you please elaborate on the problem you have with some screenshots.
Mandhir

Poor image quality when viewing PDFs in Digital Editions

I recently bought a digital copy of a book in the .acsm file format. The site I bought it from recommended using Digital Editions. I am on a mac, OS X 10.6.3. When viewing this book, there are various screen shots that are essentially illegible in the single or double page format. If I use the zoom feature they become more legible but still of low quality. At first I thought it was the ebook I bought but I think it's Digital Editions, actually. As a test I opened a plain 'ol PDF in Preview that had some screenshots in it - and those looked good. Viewing the same PDF in Digital Editions though, the images were again of low quality.
Digital Editions doesn't seem to have preferences (like most OS X apps) that might allow me to tweak this. Is there something that can be changed in terms of settings to make the images clearer?
Also, as an aside, Digital Editions on the Mac seems to have some delay when I try to copy things from the text. I have to hold the command + c keys longer than I would otherwise in order to get the highlighted text to be copied.

In iTunes with you iPod connected select the Photos tab and check *Include full-resolution photos* and re-sync.

PDF export from Pages results in jagged fonts when viewed in Preview

Hi There,
Since installing 10.5.5 I get the following strange behavior: When exporting a file in PDF from Pages certain fonts (such as Palatino) are not shown antialiased anymore when viewed in any Apple software (Preview/Safari). When viewed in Adobe Reader, the fonts appear smooth.
The strange thing is that, when I view PDF files generated last year before updating to 10.5.5 they still show with antialiased (i.e. smooth) fonts in the current Preview/Safari.
It gets even stranger: When exporting the files as .doc into (the resented and ridiculously slow and memory gulping) Word 2008, and then converting them into PDF via the Print command, this phenomenon does not occur, i.e. the fonts look smooth in Preview/Safari.
I would appreciate if anyone had some constructive input to this problem. I would really like to be able avoiding using Word!
Thanks much in advance!

I had the exact same problem that you were describing. I'd create a document in Pages '08, then export it to PDF and I'd find that the text wouldn't be anti-aliased in the PDF.
I was using one of the resumé templates that comes with Pages '08. The template by default sets the font size very low in certain areas of the page, as low a 7. I went through my document and bumped up font sizes that were below 9 and set them to 9. Now when I export to PDF the text looks great.
It was far from obvious to me that the font sizes were linked to the anti-aliasing in my exported PDFs.

Trouble with the image quality when viewing under 100%. First time posting on the forum.

Hello everyone. I am sorry we have the get acquainted this way but I am having some issues and this is one of my last options of getting help.   Allow me to explain the problem.    When viewing a file under 100% zoom, everything looks jagged like the anti aliasing is missing. Once I zoom in to 100%, everything looks the way it should. The saved file ( jpeg format for instance) is okay. I can zoom out and it still looks true to the image. The problem is related to photoshop. I installed my latest GPU drivers twice just to be sure and it was not from that.   This problem started last night and I don`t quite know how to solve it. If I work on small resolution images, it isn`t such a bad problem because I will be working on 100% zoom, but I am working on high resolution images/ paintings. Somewhere around 8000x5000 pixels thus, working at 100% is not that doable. I attached an image that shows this issue. The one on the right is the zoomed out version and the one on the left is the zoomed in version. Yes, the noise is affected by this, badly, but this started last night. up until then everything looked good even with noise or an out of this world sharpness. I can`t imagine what I could have done to trigger this.
   This being said, I am at the mercy of the more knowledgeable folks from around here. I do hope I posted this question in the right section. This is my first post here so sorry if I messed something up.   Looking forward to your replies.

Here is a simplistic view that I feel may help you understand reality.
The only time you're looking at your image pixels in Photoshop is when you're zoomed in to 100%,   There your look at the actual image pixels Photoshop has for your image at your displays resolution.
At any other zoom level you are looking a scaled image that has more or less pixels than your actual image these too are displayed at your display resolution.
The scaling done by Photoshop is done for displaying your image is done for good performance not for the best image quality a quick interpolation.   Therefore at some zoom levels image quality looks poorer than at other zoom levels.
High resolution Display have now add a new wrinkle.   User interfaces were designed for displays with resolutions around 100 PPI elements like text, icon, and other things like checkboxes, buttons etc. were created so there size would be useable are this more or less fixed 100 PPI resolution.   While Photoshop was designed to scale your images so you can work well on it is was not designed with a scalable UI. Photoshop can not scale its user interface independently from its image display display window for you displays high resolution. Photoshop's Image display area has the same resolution as the rest of Photoshop User Interface. Just like there is only one resolution in all layers in a document. CC 2014 2xUI changes that. PS UI is scaled to 1/2 resolution the image Area is at the displays actual resolution.
Photoshop CC 2014 2x UI scales all of Photoshop User Interface including the image display to 200% which is 1/2 your display resolution effectively cutting you display pixel count to 1/4 its actual pixel count.   Your once again running on a low resolution display.     If your display has a native resolution 200 PPI you're running it at 100 ppi if your display has a 300 PPI resolution you're running it at 150ppi.    Which defeats the reason of having high resolution. Which is you would like to be able to edit your images at print resolution. Adobe cc2x UI scales the UI but not the image window soa inage is 216ppi on the Surface Pro 3 the UI is large and dpoes not fit. screen
To be able to edit your images at print resolution you need a display the has a print resolution and you need and application the can scale its image display and its UI independently.
Current there is no OS interface for having multiple resolutions areas on a display and applications like Photoshop can not scale UI and Image independently. OS and Photoshop can scale what is displayed. Adobe Photoshop executable is coded in a way that it tell Microsoft Windows OS that it will handle display scaling so it can using your displays native resolution. Currently Only Photoshop CC 2014 Provides you with the option of running you display at half resolution.
Windows can scale you display to many resolution and as several presets. like 100%, 125%, 150% and like Adobe 200% half resolution.    You can make a Windows Registry and add an External Photoshop Manifest file the tell's Microsoft Windows to handle display scaling. I have a Microsoft Surface Pro 3 m windows machine. Its LCD has a 216PPI resolution. Windows 8.1 had 4 preset for scaling its LCD.
Surface Pro 3 LCD Display 12" IPS display 3:2 aspect ratio 9.984603532054124" Wide, 6.656402354702749" High 216.3330765278394 PPI
Microsoft Preset Display scaling
100% 2160x1440   216 PPI
125% 1728x1152   173 PPI
150% 1440x960    144 PPI SP3 Default setting
200% 1080x720    108 PPI
Most user these days has 1024x768 or better displays and Web pages are often authored for 800x600 pixels pages. So the give you a better handle on Resolution and scaling I have edit a 800x600 document with 25x25 px grid one my Surface pro 3
using Windows 4 scaling presets and captured the 2160x1140 scaled screens Only at the 100% preset does the image window have a 216ppi Also note @ 2x UI Photoshop UI doe not fit on screen
Adobe Photoshop CC 2014 2xUI Scales the UI to a display 1/2 resolution but does not scale the Image area uses actual screen resolution. Photoshop Help system info show the screen i 1/2 resilution 1080x720 but scalet the imase to the real resolution 2160x1440. however the image window is the 216ppi the ui 108ppi via scaling

Low quality when copied to phone..?

When I try to copy content from my desktop design to my phone, they look very low quality in the design and preview. They are PNG files that I created from Photoshop. Do I have to resize them in Photoshop, or is there a way to fix this in Muse? And any suggestions on what size to make them would be appreciated. Thanks!

Hello Ray,
It is always advised to resize any images in softwares like PS, and not do it in Muse. Resizing in Muse may pixelate the image and it's quality isn't the same as it is when you resize in PS. Once resized, place that image in Muse using "Original Size".
Hope this helps.
Cheers
Parikshit

N96 - poor quality when viewing photos

when taking a photo with the n96 the image quality is great when viewing it just after taking the photo, but then when i view the images through the 'photos' application the quality is terrible, really pixelated and looks as though it hasnt loaded properly or something? i find i can sort this out by going into edit, saving the photo again, then when i view it the quality is back to normal.
anybody any ideas whats wrong?

Do you mean the preview?
You have to click on the picture to open it. What you are seeing initially is a quick preview. If you leave it there for a few seconds it will "clean" itself. Or just open the picture by pressing the center select, You will see that it's not pixelated.
640K Should be enough for everybody
El_Loco Nokia Video Blog

Low quality when importing from camcorder

Hello,
I have an older camcorder (Sony TRV260, Digital8), and I noticed that when I import the footage into iMovie the quality is lower than when I watch it on my TV directly from the camera.
Initially I thought that it's because the resolution of my iMac is higher, but even when I burn it on DVD it looks bad, almost pixelated.
Are there any settings that I need to adjust?
Any help is much appreciated. I have a whole bunch of tapes that I kept hoping that, once I get my iMac I will be able to edit and put them on DVD. Now I am really-really frustrated.
What needs to be done?
Many thanks in advance for your help.
Laurentiu

I got iMovie 06 but, when I tried to install it said that I should have iLife 08 installed.
That's because you have iMovie 6.0.4 you want 6.0 > 6.0.3 ONLY 6.0.4 looks for iLife '08.
You can get iMovie 06 in a number of ways. You cannot download it FROM APPLE any longer (it was free for a time). You can also find iMovie 06 on the iLife 06 install disc. You can buy iLife 06 on Amazon or eBay. WELL WORTH EVERY PENNY!
iMovie 6.0.4 requires that iLife 08 is already installed. iMovie 6.0 thru iMovie 6.0.3 has no such requirement. There are no known functional differences between 6.0.3 and 6.0.4. If you install iMovie 06 from the iLife 06 disk it will probably be version 6.0 or 6.01. However you can update the software to 6.0.3 from Apple's Web site.
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/apple/application_updates/imoviehd602combo .html
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/apple/application_updates/imoviehd603.html
If you want to have both iMovie 06 and iLife 09 (and most do) just install iMovie 06 first, then iLife 09. You are now UN-STOPPABLE!
Also when you install iLife 08 or 09, iMovie 06 is not removed from the computer. Previous editions of iMovie were always un-installed when "upgrading" in the past. Apple leaves iMovie 06 on your system, because they want you to have it. iMovie 06 works great with iDVD 09.

Marking "Read" When Viewing in Preview Pane

Hi,
Just upgraded to Leopard... I'm trying to find a way to set Mail so that when you just scroll through the email message list and are viewing in the Preview Pane it doesn't automatically mark the message as "Read". I don't want it to show "Read" unless I actually OPEN the message... Is there a way to do this?!
Thanks!

I'm disappointed that Mail on the mac has not added options to control Marking as Read When Viewing in the Preview Pane. I'm using Mail 3.6 (latest as of July 2009) on 10.5.7, and this is still not supported. I have just finished switching to a new mac from a PowerBook G4 867 which I purchased in 2002, and I moved Entourage v.X (not even 2004 or 2008) app and mailboxes over to my new macbook pro. Then I used Mail 3.6 to Import Mailboxes from Entourage. I also imported contacts to Address Book and calendar items to iCal, etc. Finally I can leave Entourage behind --> Not necessarily.
Entourage v.X and Windows Outlook have had this feature for at least five years. Why has this feature been skipped in Mail all this time?
Previewing a message is not the same as Reading the message. Situation one: I like to use the up/down arrows to scroll quickly through messages, and consider which are the most important. Oops, now they're all marked Read! Situation two: Occasionally I click on the wrong message. Oops - it's marked Read now.
Simplest solution: Provide an on/off control: Mark Previewed Messages as Read - on or off
Richer solution: Provide timer control: Mark Previewed Messages as Read After 'n' seconds: - <n>
At least give us the Simpler boolean solution.
I found several threads on the same topic marked as Answered/Resolved. The workaround of getting rid of the preview pane is a poor workaround compared to what has been requested though it seems to be all we have so far. Admins should close the dangling threads only after posting a note indicating why.
TruePreview was proposed as a solution in one of the threads, but I have not tried that. If others have tried and are happy with it, please let me know.
Thanks...Alan

Low quality when using Ken Burns effect

Hi,
I tried to import hi-res photos from iPhoto 6 to iMovie HD 6, adding some zooming with Ken Burns. The resulting clips are very blurry, lots of artefacts - very low quality. Is anyone else having this problem? It happens on my iBook as well on my iMac. Or am I just expecting to much?
Thanks for any advice, Patrick
iBook G4 800GHz, iMac G4 17" 1.25Ghz Mac OS X (10.4.4)

Hi Sue,
Have you ever tried Photo to iMovie? Apple even recommends it.
Yes, I know Photo to iMovie. But if I buy an integrated solution like iLife'06, it makes no sense to buy additional shareware programs to correct some flaws of it.
Isn't it possible to raise the quality of a Ken Burns effect, I would say in iLife '05 it was much better.
So I am looking forward to an update of iMovie HD 6...
Kind regards,
Patrick

Low quality when saving MMs pics

I've been getting MMS pics of the kids from my wife's phone (not an iphone) for a while, and they look great on my iPhone 4 screen. The good ones I save to Photos.
As of today, the new ones still look great on the screen, but when I save them the quality drops significantly. I've also tried emailing one to myself, but the quality was very low that way as well.
I've also noticed that I can't tap-to-open these newly saved pics from MMS from the Camera Roll album. In the past I have been able to. I can view them if I open another pic and flip through the album until I get to that one.
Any thoughts? Am I missing a setting about saving media from MMS? Is this a result of the recent update?
Thanks for any help!

Yes! My iPhone started doing this after the 4.1 update. I frequently save mms photos and post them on my twitter feed. I'm using the exact same procedure as always, but it now appears to be saving the thumbnail instead of the image (the saved pictures are very small and cropped or resized to a square aspect.
Keep hoping for an update to the Messages app...gonna have to turn in my "Apple Fanboi" decoder ring if this keeps up
-BB

Imovie hd low quality when export in "full quality"

Hi
i made one hour of a movie with Imovie hd. When i exported to "full quality"
is not equal to the original!
I imported photos from iphoto, all in hi definition and i inserted audio track and Ken b. effects.
I have to view this movie on the screen display but i dont't know what export i have to use
I tried full all kind of export: quality, mpeg4, but the result is not good. Help !
Must i play from IMOVIE? But the movie flikering because of the rendering in progress.
Must i change application? Can u help me?

Welcome fabrizio to the  iMovie boards ..
first of all: iMHD is optimized and meant for TV delivery.. interlaced, low res video on TVs.. therefore, the quality of an iM is never comparable with a HiRes still on a computer's screen..
knowing that, there's another issue: your FullQualiyt does contain FQ, but the QTplayer doesn't show it... the socalled 'high flag' for playback isn't set..
example:
same file ( ! ), see the difference on playback, actual screenshots: 'high' not set (1), 'high' set in QTpro (Apple-J, video, playback high) pic#2 ...
free tools as Mpeg Streamclip allow to set the high-flag into a given .mov ...
last comment: for 'computer only' delivery, consider usage of 3rd party apps as Boinx' FotoMagico http://www.boinx.com/fotomagico/

Lower quality when opening canon raw w/ aperture instead of canon software

hi,
i just shoot a two days performance with a canon 5d, raw files and imported successfully all images into aperture. at first everything looks good but if i use the canon digital photo professional software that came with the camera i get better saturation, contrast, and detailed images. the difference is very visible if i use photoshop (which i always do).
why is aperture not having a similar quality images when opening canon raw files?
is there anything i can do to make my workflow easy. i feel now that i have to use aperture only to select the best images. when i got my selection, i reopen the selected raw files (from the memory cards) using canon software, and then transfer all converted raw's to photoshop.
any ideas to make my workflow lighter without compromising quality?
Thanks

ejamas,
A few things to keep in mind -
*DPP vs. Aperture: Image previews when images are not at 100% -> DPP will appear much sharper/crisper then they actually are. You need to view at 100% to see the image accurately. Aperture will appear softer than they actually are (especially in comparison to DPP). Again, you need to view at 100% to get an accurate sense of how the image will look.
*As others have said. If you've customized the settings in your 5D then DPP will honor those. Aperture will not. That's the case with any third-party raw convertor.
*Images in a third-party convertor (Aperture, ACR, C1, Lightroom, etc.) will never match the OEM convertor (DPP, Nikon Capture, etc.) exactly. They use different color engines.
*Your findings to not mesh with my experience per se. I shoot with 1Ds M 2's and have found Aperture, in general, to be the way to go. The color is excellent, the tonal range far exceeds that of DPP and the controls in Aperture have far more finesse than anything in DPP. It's not as crash prone as DPP and if Aperture does crash you don't loose your work from that session (in DPP you loose anything done since your last save). Like any raw convertor you need to learn it inside and out before you draw any conclusions about it.
*I assume you are working on a color calibrated monitor and have all your color management ducks in a row?.....
Jon Roemer
http://www.jonroemer.com

Lower quality when viewing in Preview

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for