Nesting Footage lowers resolution.

I have been nesting footage in a UHD timeline so i can use warp stabilizer in different resolution timelines and also move certain parts of timelines into other sequences and keep them tidy. I noticed when I nest the resolution looks compressed. Is this something that is fixed with exporting or how can this be fixed...the point of nesting seems useless if it is pre compressing. Please advise.

So sorry, I guess my shorthand isn't always clear.
To answer your first question, no, Nesting should not decrease the quality of the footage.
In your second question you say that the nest (nested clips) causes the image to be "clipped" (aka cropped) when you decrease the scale of the nest.
Most of the time you create a nest by highlighting one or more clips in an existing sequence and right-clicking to select Nest..., by default this creates a nest with the same image size as the original sequence. If you scale a nest that is the same image size as the sequence (i.e. 1920 x 1080 nest in a 1920 x 1080 sequence), it will show black edges when scaled smaller than 100%.
To avoid this cropping, your nest must be a larger image size than the sequence you're placing it in. Placing a 3840 x 2160 nest into a 1920 x 1080 sequence will allow you to reduce the scale to 50% before revealing the edges of the nest. A nest is simply an independent sequence placed inside another sequence. To get an independent sequence that is a different image size than the sequence you're working on, you can drag a higher resolution file to the New Item icon, or right-click on the higher resolution file, and select New Sequence From Clip (let's name it 'Nest 1'). Build and modify Nest 1 as desired and when ready, drag the Nest 1 icon from the Project window into the (original) sequence that you were working on. If necessary, double check to make sure Nest 1 inside your original sequence is not set to Scale to Frame Size by right-clicking on the Nest 1 in the sequence.
I hope this helps a little more.

Similar Messages

Lowering resolution on Dell E6510/Intel GM45HD

Not sure if this is the right forum... anyway, I seem to be unable to lower the resolution on my laptop screen from the default one of 1600x900 (I need to get it to 1024x768 to clone the output to a projector). Attaching an external monitor works fine, and I can choose between a range of resolutions for it. Some output from xrandr:
$ xrandr -q
Screen 0: minimum 320 x 200, current 1600 x 2100, maximum 8192 x 8192
eDP1 connected 1600x900+0+1200 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) 344mm x 194mm
1600x900 60.0*+ 40.0
VGA1 connected 1600x1200+0+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) 367mm x 275mm
1600x1200 60.0*+
1280x1024 75.0 60.0
1152x864 75.0
1024x768 75.1 60.0
800x600 75.0 60.3
640x480 75.0 60.0
720x400 70.1
HDMI1 disconnected (normal left inverted right x axis y axis)
DP1 disconnected (normal left inverted right x axis y axis)
HDMI2 disconnected (normal left inverted right x axis y axis)
HDMI3 disconnected (normal left inverted right x axis y axis)
DP2 disconnected (normal left inverted right x axis y axis)
DP3 disconnected (normal left inverted right x axis y axis)
As per Arch Wiki, I tried manually creating and adding the folowing mode:
$ cvt 1024 768 60 -r
# 1024x768 59.87 Hz (CVT 0.79M3-R) hsync: 47.30 kHz; pclk: 56.00 MHz
Modeline "1024x768R" 56.00 1024 1072 1104 1184 768 771 775 790 +hsync -vsync
However, if I try to set eDP1 to this mode, the screen just goes black. Switching to a console terminal works, and
I can kill the X server by a keyboard shortcut. However, the screen remains black even if I try to switch back to
the "default" mode by a shell script:
#!/bin/bash
xrandr --output eDP1 --mode 1024x768R
sleep 2
xrandr --output eDP1 --mode 1600x900
Any ideas?
Edit: forgot to repeat the info from the subject line: I'm running a Dell Latitude E6510 laptop, with integrated Intel GM45HD video.
Last edited by _oggy (2012-02-28 11:36:49)

Sorry guys, forgot to reboot my computer. *smacks head on wall twice*

Stabilizing UHD footage on a 1080 timeline.

Has anyone yet come up with a clever workaround to stabilize UHD footage on a 1080 timeline without losing resolution if the warp plugin is scaling up the nested footage in Premiere pro cc?
/Per

Now I've finally figured it out. I went to bed and woke up with the solution in my head. :-)
I drop my 4k footage on my 1080 timeline and trims it to the desired length. Then I right-click on the footage, and press "Make subclip". Then I will make a new sequence from that subclip by dragging it to the "New Item" icon. This creates a 4k timeline with my trimmed clip. I will then apply the Warp stabilizer and let it do it's thing. When it is done I'll go to the effects controls and choose "Stabilize Only" under borders/framing. That leaves me with a 4k clip that is NOT scaled up, and therefor the very same resolution as when shot. I now simply drag that 4k subclip into my 1080 timeline, and scale it down to what I want, and of cause to a point where it fills the frame at all times

How to color correct an entire nested sequence?

Hi Everyone,
So I'm attempting to color correct a camera at a time (multiple clips from the same source clip) which in recent projects I did individually. Is there a way to select an entire string of clips and color correct them and apply all at once in a nested sequence or am I doomed to color each individual clip in the nested sequence with no selection and paste options? Thanks in advance guys.
Mike Diaz

in sony vegas it would be a matter of placing all the same angle shots on one video track, then using the track fx to have one effect be applied to all the clips on that track. similar to how its done with audio in a daw. premiere doesn't have that feature and tries to make up for it with adjustment layers and nesting but its not the same. adjustment layer is easy unless the footage is mixed on the timeline, then you would have to try nesting footage on a separate track. nesting makes it messy to go back and edit, unlike the track based fx in sony vegas, so might do this as one of the last steps of the project.

4K Footage Clamped at 1364x767 in AE 5.5

I am performing some compositing tests using 4K footage (3840x2160, Apple ProRes 422 HQ, from BM Prod. Camera 4K) in AE 5.5. However, when I import the footage, the resolution is listed as being 1364x767. Closer inspection reveals that the footage is truly being treated and displayed at that lower resolution; thousands of pixels are essentially being ignored. When the footage is dropped into a 4K composition, it occupies only a small area at the center of the screen.
Mac OS X 10.9 (my operating system) incorrectly reports the footage resolution in the file properties (in Finder, listed as 1364x766), However, upon opening the file with Quicktime, the footage is displayed correctly and the "inspector" window reports the correct resolution dimensions (3840x2160). So the file is ok; all of the 4K data is there and Quicktime can read/interpret it. Why then can AfterEffects not do the same?

Thank you Rick! That makes sense, the only problem is that Quicktime 10 doesn't allow me to view "Actual Size", that option is grayed out in the menu. It seems to be clamped to whatever the resolution of my monitor is. I do have an Apple Display that's a bit larger than the one I'm currently using but it's still not 4K, so I presume that the resolution will still be limited.
I tried viewing Actual Size in Quicktime 7 Pro, saved the file, and that updated whatever metadata Finder uses, because that shows the correct info now. After Effects still imports it as 1364x767 though, .
I created a dual boot system to maintain 10.6.8 on my computer. Some of my projects require applications that run in 10.9 so I use Mavericks quite a bit. Restarting the computer to boot into Snow Leopard for CS programs was somewhat annoying, so I began running CS in Mavericks and was pleasantly surprised to find that it works fine. I'm currently back in Snow Leopard, but the problem persists both with Quicktime 10 graying out the "View Actual Size" option and AE importing at the wrong resolution.
UPDATE SOLVED: Using QT 7, setting actual size, saving, then importing to AE CS5.5 worked in Snow Leopard. I did the process over and it worked.

Urgent - 7D Footage Loading at Half Res

I need help ASAP. I am working on a project and I opened in After Effects CS5.5. My footage is resolution in After Effects is 960x540 but if I open it elsewhere it is 1920x1080. Why is this happening and how do I import the footage so it is at its proper resolution?
When I import the footage into Premiere I do not have this problem, only when I import it into After Effects.
Thanks.

This is a known problem with some QT and AVI formats. When you view the file and the player is set to half resolution (or some other resolution) and you close the file, a meta tag of sorts is added to the file that gives the playback size. AE reads that tag and incorrectly assumes that the last viewed frame size is the frame size of the file. In some cases all you have to do is to open the file in QT, change the viewing options to full screen, than close the file. In other cases you have to have QT Pro installed so you can actually save the file.
I've found that sometimes all you have to do is to scale up the footage in AE because the pixels are all still there and scaling up the mis interpreted footage does not cause a quality loss. You might want to give that a try. Just scale up your footage to 200% and see what it looks like.

How?: a 4:3 crop of 16:9 1080i material and maintain 1080i resolution?

I've searched the forums. I've scanned the manuals. I've searched the PDF manual. And I've tried a couple things myself, but can't find what I'm looking for...can you help me?
I'm editing on a 1080i timeline, with 1080i material (HDV via Apple Intermediate Codec). Up 'till now, I've output my timeline into Quicktime at the same codec, and with "make movie self contained" and then I encode from that a variety of Quicktime movies for upload to the web, and also use the same file for Flash encoding. The 1080i format looks great on computer screens (take a look at a couple interviews: http://www.thenaturalguide.com) and I want to keep that resolution in all web work.
Well, now I have a prospective client that likes my work, but he wants the video in the 4:3 format (for interviews/headshots). I told him I could output 16:9 and that the video would run with a letterbox on web formats that take 4:3 (e.g. YouTube). But, he wants the full 4:3, via a crop of the 16:9 frame (e.g., the entire frame is filled with image).
I tried using Quicktime export and using the "crop" function under "Export Size Settings ("preserve aspect ratio using crop"), but, that encode looks like crap, even when I up the bitrate to 300 or more (I usually use 200 to 220 with great success).
So, do you have any ideas on how I can keep the 1080i resolution and crop both sides for internet streaming? Maybe do something on the timeline? Output differently? Use filter? Something!
Thank you!
Larry

Yes, the full size 1920 X 1080 (actually, 1440 X 1080) video has been resized to 480 X 270, but, that's from an HD 1080i timeline. So, the 1080 lines of sharp resolution is actually in that 480 X 270 (resized, of course). However, if it were SD footage, the resolution would be half of that, and when streaming on a computer monitor, you can actually see aliasing on SD footage whereas on HD footage you cannot (and opnce I discovered that, I went out and bought an HDV camera...for this very reason!). So, I want to keep that 1080 resolution when I scale it down, and at the same time, crop off both ends for a final showing of 4:3. Can I put it on a 4:3 timeline at 1080i resolution?
Larry. Thats about the stupidest thing I have heard all day. And considering I have spent the day at an 8 year old's birthday party, I have heard quite a lot of nonsense today already.
You're misunderstanding the principle, or rather the mechanics, of what is happening. Image data is being thrown out. Discarded. Flushed. What is left is a "resolution" of 480x270 pixels. That's 480x270 pixels of image data. The original resolution is gone. You absolutely cannot scale down and crop the original HDV footage yet maintain "1080i resolution".
Get a grip mate.

Monitor Resolution & Design :: Your Thoughts

Something I seldom think about but probably should, is the resolution most users view websites with on their monitors. My 23" Apple Display is set to 1920x1200 and in the past I generally designed my sites with a width of around 800 pixels or smaller to make sure it worked well with most displays. Even so, on occasion when I've been in a client's office and have gone to show someone my work I was aghast at how large it looked on their display due to the lowered resolution settings on their setup.
I used to keep my websites fairly compact in size to work with the smaller monitors, but it seems that the trend is now leaning toward larger designs. I realize that making a site flexible is probably the best way, but some custom designs do better with a fixed size.
I would be interested in feedback on this based on some of your experiences, and how some of you handle this.
Thank you!
Linda

Resolution only limits the maximum practical width you can set for your
browser. In fact, a given page will look *exactly* the same (only smaller
or larger), on any resolution screen provided you keep your browser the
same width in pixels. Thus, I say that resolution is *not* the critical
issue. Browser viewport width is. To make your decision you need to have
some ideas about the following issues -
1. What is the primary target demographic for this site?
2. What are the browsing habits of that demographic? Do they normally have
their browser window maximized on the screen?
3. If they usually have their browser maximized, what is the typical screen
width?
4. If they usually do NOT have their browser maximized, what is the MINIMUM
screen width in that demographic.
5. How do I want to build the page?
a. Fixed width and left aligned?
b. Fixed width and centering?
c. Flexible to fill whatever width from left to right?
d. Flexible (within limits) and left aligned?
e. Flexible (within limits) and centering?
As you can see, this decision is probably much more complex than you
thought, and will require that you know quite a bit about your intended
target visitor and their browsing habits.
If you elect to go with 5a, or 5b, then your decision would be - 'what is
the mimimum browser width I want to support without horizontal scrolling?'.
Once you have determined that minimum supported width, all of your decisions
are made. That's how wide you want your page to be.
If you elect to go with 5c, then you just build your page within a flexible
container (the simplest example - although an obsolet one - would be to use
a 100% width table to hold the entire page). Be aware that pages with
limited text content can look VERY sparse and empty on wide viewports when
built in this way.
If you elect to go with 5d, or 5e, then you would add this sophistication to
your decision matrix -
'what is the greatest width I want to allow the page and its contents to
become?'
In this case, you would use the CSS styles - 'min-width' and 'max-width' on
the primary page container. Just so you'll know, although these styles are
well supported *now*, earlier versions of IE (and some other browsers) will
not support them so reliably.
So - which is it? 8)
Murray

Best way to export from FCP X to iDVD?

I believe this question must have been dealt with a number of times already but since I could not find a clear answer with a reasonable amount of searching I post my question here.
I have Apple ProRes 422 footage (HD 1920 x 1080) in FCP X out of which I would like to make a DVD in iDVD. What is the best way of transferring the content to iDVD so as to preserve the quality as good as possible?
As I understand it, two conversions need to take place until the material can end up on a DVD disk:
1) The format needs to be changed from ProRes to MPEG-2
2) The resolution needs to be reduced from 1920 x 1080 to 720 x 576
And I believe there are at least the following ways to achieve this:
a) Export the material as-is (ProRes 1920 x 1080) from FCP and let iDVD do the conversion to MPEG-2 720 x 576
b) Export the material with lowered resolution (720 x 576) from FCP but let iDVD do the conversion to MPEG-2
c) Export the material as-is to Compressor and let Compressor do the conversion to MPEG-2 720 x 576, which is then imported to iDVD
Now, what is the best method to perform these transformations from a quality perspective (don't care that much about processing time)?
I guess it would be good to not reencode the material more than once. Option a) would seem to achieve this but how good is the quality of the reencoding that iDVD does? Option c) could also achieve this and possibly with a better quality than a). However, I'm unsure whether iDVD really would use the material "as-is" without further conversion or whether iDVD anyway would do some sort of reencoding even if the material was imported in a DVD compliant format. And with option b) I'm unsure how much quality I lose if the rescaling and reencoding is done in separate processes.
Thanks for the advice!

Either a) or b) is fine.
However, c) will not work with iDVD, which wants a muxed file. The Compressor presets were designed ith DVD Studio Pro in mind.
I would let iDVD do the encoding and the resizing. In other words, give it a 1080 resolution Pro Res file with square pixel shape and it will do all the necessary math to preserve the wide screen aspect ratio (changing the pixel shape) and should produce very good looking image quality if you use the Professional quality setting.
Good luck.
Russ

Importing a 512 sequence into a 1080p sequence

When you edit a sequence in 512 and want to render out in 1080...do you have to make a new 1080p sequence, then imoprt the 512 and render it out for full 1080 quality? Also, if you don't render your files, does this prolong the export process in Encore? Basically what I'm asking is are rendered files only for playback purposes?

I started with 4k red footage in a 512 red sequence
Did you use the Source Settings menu in CS4 (see above image)
to set your 4K footage proxy resolution to "Eighth" (512x288),
then create a 512x288 sequence to match the proxy settings?
then brought it into a 1080 red sequence
If the answer to the above question is yes, am I correct to assume
you copied and pasted the proxy resolution media from your
512x288 proxy resolution sequence to your 1920x1080 sequence
then used the "Scale to Frame Size" command?
Some of the nested sequences translated great, but a few of them looked like 512 again.
If you did use the Source Settings menu in CS4 to set your 4K footage
proxy resolution to "Eighth" (512x288) for editing in CS4, did you then go
back and reset the 4K resolution to "Full", save the project, quit application
and reopen project to apply settings to all clips before trying to open the
project in CS5?
Edit:
My 4K workflow in CS4 was to use a full 4096x2304 sequence setting
with proxy resolution media Source Settings, and "Scale to Frame Size".
After editing is completed I would return to media Source Settings,
set the resolution to full, save, exit, reopen and render.

PreComp becomes Blurry, why??

I have a weird thing happening here in AE.
I have a keyed video in a precomp. That precomp now goes in another comp where it gets scaled down and cropped - the composition changes size which crops the video. Finally this Comp is nested/placed in a new comp where it is arranged with other videos.
So normal AE compositing and all, nesting and precomposing, but something weird is happening. The 2nd precomp that I am placing in the MASTER Composition is appearing blury. So to check what's up I placed the origional keyed footage in the same comp and gave it the same scale and ... this one appears sharp and normal.
There seems to be something up with AE when you scale footage in a precomp and then view in a final comp.
Anyone solve this, or is there some setting I need to switch.
(The setting in all the comps have "preserve resolution when nested" checked in the advanced tap in the composition settings.
Chris

My money is on Mylenium's hypothesis. "Preserve resolution when nested" doesn't do what I suspect you think it does, Christopher. Ordinarily, when you switch a comp's preview resolution from, say, 50% to 100%, AE's renderer renders all nested comps at that same resolution. When you check "preserve resolution when nested", AE doesn't switch the nested comp's resolution, meaning any comps that are set to preview at a lower resolution won't be switched to 100% resolution if you decide to preview the top level comp at 100%.
Collapsing transformations might do something more like what you thought "Preserve Resolution" does. It forces the AE renderer to rasterize the contents of a nested comp inside the main comp. This means there is no intermediate rasterization of the nested comp, so the "Preserve resolution" setting is completely ignored.

Creation of data sources by Ant

Hi all
Please help me..
when i create data source by ant(copying data-sources.xml already stored in my hard disk with all valid entries.)and then deploy my EAR file and get the following error:
10g-deploy:
[exec] ADMN-300075
[exec] Nested exception
[exec] Resolution:
[exec] Base Exception:
[exec] javax.naming.NamingException
[exec] Lookup error: javax.naming.AuthenticationException: RMIConnection Disconnected; nested exception is:
[exec] javax.naming.AuthenticationException: RMIConnection Disconnected
[exec] javax.naming.NamingException: Lookup error: javax.naming.AuthenticationException: RMIConnection Disconnected; nested exception is:
[exec] javax.naming.AuthenticationException: RMIConnection Disconnected [Root exception is javax.naming.AuthenticationException: RMIConnection Disconnected]
[exec] at com.evermind.server.rmi.RMIContext.lookup(RMIContext.java:168)
[exec] at oracle.ias.sysmgmt.utility.Oc4jUtil.getOC4JApplicationServerAdministrator(Unknown Source)
[exec] at oracle.ias.sysmgmt.deployment.j2ee.runtime.RuntimeIf.getOC4JApplicationServerAdministrator(Unknown Source)
[exec] at oracle.ias.sysmgmt.deployment.j2ee.runtime.LocalDeploy.deployOnSingleInstance(Unknown Source)
[exec] at oracle.ias.sysmgmt.deployment.j2ee.runtime.LocalDeploy.doExecute(Unknown Source)
[exec] at oracle.ias.sysmgmt.deployment.j2ee.runtime.RuntimeIf.execute(Unknown Source)
[exec] at oracle.ias.sysmgmt.deployment.j2ee.adapter.DeploymentAdapter.doEvaluateDeploy(Unknown Source)
[exec] at oracle.ias.sysmgmt.deployment.j2ee.adapter.DeploymentAdapter.evaluate(Unknown Source)
[exec] at oracle.ias.sysmgmt.task.TaskMaster.sync_evaluate(Unknown Source)
[exec] at oracle.ias.sysmgmt.task.TaskMaster.internal_evaluate(Unknown Source)
[exec] at oracle.ias.sysmgmt.task.RemoteEvaluate.execCommand(Unknown Source)
[exec] at oracle.ias.sysmgmt.task.DaemonWorker.run(Unknown Source)
[exec] Caused by: javax.naming.AuthenticationException: RMIConnection Disconnected
[exec] at com.evermind.server.rmi.RMIConnection.connect(RMIConnection.java:2523)
[exec] at com.evermind.server.rmi.RMIConnection.connect(RMIConnection.java:2339)
[exec] at com.evermind.server.rmi.RMIConnection.lookup(RMIConnection.java:1781)
[exec] at com.evermind.server.rmi.RMIServer.lookup(RMIServer.java:721)
[exec] at com.evermind.server.rmi.RMIContext.lookup(RMIContext.java:149)
[exec] ... 11 more
BUILD SUCCESSFUL
Total time: 4 minutes 58 seconds
But when i crete data source using Oracle enterprise manager,I m able to deploy my EAR file successfully.
Can nebody please tell me how can i create data source manually by ant script ant then deploy my appln. successfully
The entries done by me in data-sources.xml are:
<data-source class="com.evermind.sql.orionCMTDataSource" location="jdbc/los" connection-driver="oracle.jdbc.driver.OracleDriver" username="dbprod_test" password="dbprod_test" url="jdbc:oracle:thin:@//10.0.52.160:1521/orcl" name="jdbc/los"><description>LOSDB</description></data-source
Thanks in advance..

user534925,
Do you want to create a global datasource or one for a specific J2EE application?
For a global datasource, you can use the "admin.jar" file.
Type the following command for more details:
java -jar admin.jar -helpOne of the options is "-installDataSource".
You should be able to launch "admin.jar" from an "ant" script (I think -- I don't use "ant").
Sorry, I don't remember how to set up a datasource for a specific application.
(And I'm too lazy to search for it for you, now :-)
Good Luck,
Avi.

MacBook Video Out problems.

Hey all.
Bit of an issue regarding my Macbook. It's a 2ghz Duo With ram upgraded to 4gb by myself. For some reason the video out on my Macbook has decided to stop working. Is it possible that it's hardware related? I have tried the following.
1: Bypassing my Onkyo TSR 609 amp straight to TV
2: Lowering resolutions (although 1080i and p was fine)
3: Bootcamping into windows to see if its an OSX issue. (my friends Samsung laptop works just fine through all the various combinations)
4: Punching it.
Im at a loss now, was working fine, got my new amp and was working fine through that for a week (havent changed any settings on it, and as I said same issues straight to TV which is a 42" Sharp XD1E) and the picture just comes out as multicoloured digital noise but you can just about make out whats on screen.Its a fairly weak connection on the MiniDVI port on laptop itself, It's connected via MiniDVI to DVI/HDMI dongle. I have also swapped out cables. It's not the amp as my PS3 blasts out 1080p with NO issues, please help!

Your Mac runs maintenance in the background for you.
Command + R gives you access to restore, repair, or reformat the drive using OS X Recovery
No idea why that was suggested.
You may have a third party video player installed that's causing an incompatibility issue.
Check these folders:
/Library/Internet Plug-Ins/
/Library/Input Methods/
/Library/InputManagers/
/Library/ScriptingAdditions
~/Library/Internet Plug-Ins/
~/Library/Input Methods/
~/Library/InputManagers/
~/Library/ScriptingAdditions
The first four locations listed are in the root-level Library on your hard disk, not the user-level Library in your Home folder.The tilde (~) represents your Home folder.
To access the Home folder in OS X Lion or Mountain Lion, open the Finder, hold the Option key, and chooseGo > Library.

Satellite Pro M30 graphics card not working when driver is installed

Hi all,
Im having problem with my nvidia Geforce FX Go5200, in a Satellite Pro M30 laptop, (Intel Pentium M processor 1.7 GHz, 512 Ram). This card was working fine suddenly the notebook stops.
I have formatted the notebook and installed Win XP PRO. After installing the VGA driver I restarted the notebook but black screen started coming up right after the Win XP splash screen appears. The notebook continues to start up but no screen.
It starts just fine in safe mode. I get my best screen by simply disabling the geforce card or uninstalling the driver. I tried to install a new driver for the VGA from the Toshiba download site but same problem appears. I have also tried updating BIOS but nothing happens.
Anyone can help me?
[email protected]

It is very strange issue. It will be really interesting to know if this happen when you use delivered recovery installations CD.
Anyway I presume there is some problem with LCD display. In safe mode the desktop is shown in lowers resolution but when OS starts the resolution will be adapted for standard one (1280x800) and obviously there is the problem.
I am not technician but I recommend you to contact service partner. As far as I know they use special tools and programs for display tests. They can tell you more.

Acrobat Pro 9 - Conversion Error from Word 2007

I do not want to hijack the thread or question raised by another poster a short time ago but I cannot figure out how to correct the below.
Office 2007 fully updated
Vista 32-bit
Acrobat Pro 9.3.4
I have to provide data for someone else to assemble and publish and have been attempting to convert some Word documents nearly full of tables to press quality .pdf. Whenever I try the conversion, Acrobat Pro seems to re-center the tables both horizontally and vertically forcing the misalignment of the rows of data although any repeating headers remain properly placed. I can even see the table shift downward slightly when using the Acrobat conversion macro within Word. It may be adjusting the margins instead of re-centering.
I have tried using the macro within Word 2007, Create PDF within Acrobat Pro and Print to PDF as well as tweaking some of the settings such as lowering resolution and turned off unused settings such as enable fast web view, etc. The glitch also occurs with High Quality Print. Standard used to work but after the update to 9.3.4 that conversion shows the same problem. I even tried saving in Word 97-2003 format with the same results.
The documents in question do have custom page sizes and margins but do not use any abnormal fonts. I have tried changing the margins but the conversion to .pdf still changes the information and/or magins as described above. Row height seems to be correctly maintained.
I realize that a knowledgeable user can export the .pdf back into Word or other program but am trying to make it more difficult for someone to edit information which has always had extremely negative consequences in terms of data organization, layout and even integrity.
There has to be something really silly that I am overlooking.
Thank You

Thanks Bill.
Sorry for the delay, Verizon dumped its DSL +service to Frontier so we had one of the bi-weekly extended outages.
No changes occurred when I changed the default printer to Adobe PDF. All of my printers are new enough so that they can handle the current margins so I do not think that they is a problem there but changing the default as suggested by you and Michael eliminates that as the source.
I had previously been able to convert using the built-in converter in Word but was unsure whether or not the result would be press quality and was unable to find this information in my searches. I retested this and conversion using Word’s built-in converter works without a problem.
The conversion using Combine Miles > Merge Into A Single PDF also works without a problem with the highest quality setting. It took several hours to run but I guess or assume that it was because of the number of tags as this is a quick setting and therefore I could not disable the tagging which is not needed in this case.
I was also able to convert the same file which had been saved from Word 2007 into the 1997-2003 format as described above but the same problem came up when using the Acrobat macro and Create PDF from File. I had even created a modified press quality settings to modify settings like disabling autorotate, Object Level Compression, changed the binding option, lowered resolution, bumping the format up to PDF 1.7, etc., but all produce the same result. I have tried changing the document margins in case the conversion process rounded these but all produce the same artifact/problem except when I use Combine Files or the converter built into Word.

Nesting Footage lowers resolution.

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for