Poor quality "still" photo

I'm using Premiere Elements 12. When I'm choose "Tools", "Movie Menu", Then choose from a "Menu Theme", I am given the option of inserting a still photo. However, the quality of the photo in my final product is reproduced with VERY POOR resolution. Is there a solution to this problem? Does Premiere Elements 13 correct this problem?
Joe Nunes
Turlock,CA

britt142012
Thanks for the follow up.
Have we ruled out whether or not the issue exists with and without the antivirus and firewall(s) disabled?
Back to the now....
When did you get the Error 16 - after naming just the SLStore Folder to SLStoreOLD? Or did you do the renaming of both the SLCache as well as SLStore Folders to get the Error 16? You should be able to convert back to the original by deleting the newly created SLStore or SLCache Folders and removing OLD from the renamed ones. Is Error 16 gone then?
After that, try just the renaming of the SLStore Folder again.
Before we give up on renaming SLStore and SLCache Folders, check the permissions for each so that they are set for write/read for Everyone.
Then the classical generic ways....
1. Delete the Adobe Premiere Elements Prefs file and, if that does not work, delete the whole 12.0 Folder in which the Adobe Premiere Elements Prefs file exists.
Local Disk C
Users
Owner
AppData
Roaming
Adobe
Premiere Elements
12.0
and in the 12.0 Folder is the Adobe Premiere Elements Prefs file that you delete. If that does not work, then you delete the whole 12.0 Folder in which the Adobe Premiere Elements Prefs file exists. Be sure to be working with Folder Option Show Hidden Files, Folders, and Drives active so that you can see the complete path cited.
2. If that does not work....
a. uninstall the usual Control Panel way
b. do a free ccleaner run through (regular clearner and registry cleaner parts) to get rid of any leftovers from incomplete uninstalls reinstalls
CCleaner - PC Optimization and Cleaning - Free Download
c. reinstall with antivirus and firewall(s) disabled.
We will be watching for the new developments.
Thank you.
ATR

Similar Messages

Poor quality still frames

Does anyone know why still frames are such poor quality?
I'm constructing a movie using stills, and if a Ken Burns effect is used, the picture changing to the next photo as soon as the effect finishes can be a little jarring on the eye.
To counteract this, I've been adding a still frame of 1-2 seconds either side of the main Ken Burns adjusted photo to act as a 'cushion' (like you can in Photo to Movie). You can see the difference in quaity in iMovie, so it does of course remain when you have exported to Quicktime.
Is there a better method of doing this than still frames? I notice that the overlap transition helps by hanging on to the end of the previous frame, but it's not ideal.
Any suggestions?
Quicksilver G4 Mac OS X (10.4.6) Programmes in regular use are Freehand, Photoshop, Freeway, Keynote, iMovie, iDV

Karl, I swear you live inside everyone's browser, with a manual the like of which the rest of us have never seen!
As usual, among the quickest to answer on these forums, and absolutely correct.
It worked like a dream - another major headache removed. Many thanks indeed.

Very poor quality on photos made with iphone 4

Since a few weeks i've noticed that photos made with my iPhone 4 have a very poor quality. I've upgraded to IOS 4.3.2 thinking about a software problem, but the quality is still very poor. It´s like out of focus. I submit a just made photo. Any answer? Thanks a lot.
This photo is made with original photo app and no zoom.

Only thing I can think of is a focus problem (which could be software) or a lens with some junk on it that causes some blurring.
Can't offer a solution but can make some suggestions.
Take different types of pictures and, just for variety in case it reveals something, take two of each - one touching the screen and then one after touching for comparison.
Do close-ups and distance shots. Do indoor and outdoor, with and without flash on the indoor - again, of the same thing so you can compare.
Might reveal a pattern. If all are bad, then it probably goes back to the lense or software not working.
If some come out fine, it would seem to reduce the chance of it being the lens being dirty or something. On the other hand, if close up shots look good but distant ones don't, it could be either software or the internal focusing hardware isn't adjusting enough for distant shots.
Just some things to consider.

Acceptable and Quality Still Photo Resolution for HDV Documentary

I've scanned through several pages of posts on photo resolution here, but I haven't actually found a simple answer to a beginner's question. Two, actually:
1. If someone is supplying you with still photo prints for scanning and use in a documentary (shot in HDV, edited on FCP5), is there a particular size print that you should ask for? Does the broadcast venue (theatrical, TV, etc.) have any relevance?
2. If someone is scanning photos and sending you a CD with them, what are the specs (size, resolution, etc.) you should ask for? And are there "minimum acceptable" specs and "preferred, high quality" specs?
Thanks.
Paul S.
Power Mac G5 [email protected]; 4GB RAM Mac OS X (10.4.4) FCP 5 (FC Studio), Logic Express, Presonus Firebox

Having worked on several long-form historical docos with hundreds of source photo scans, I'd highly recommend getting the originals in as high a resolution as you can (at least 300 DPI), and getting the entire photo scanned. You just never know when you need to apply pans or zooms or crop into a particular area to improve the edit, and there are many simple ways to prep the selected photos for import.
The simplest is just to do the scaling & cropping in FCP. It will do a fine job of this, but if it turns out most of the photos will be static, you can waste computer resources by importing unnecessarily-large images. As mooblie pointed out, you strictly only need enough resolution to prevent scaling up past 100%, as this will create pixelated lower quality output.
The most common way to prep scans is in Photoshop, where you can scale the image to a desired pixel size very easily. I'd still leave the image at its natural frame size (as scanned), so you have the most creative choice when you are framing it in the timeline using FCPs cropping & motion tabs tools.
If you've got lots of photos and lots of pans & zooms, consider using one of the third-party tools that will help with this, such as Photo to Movie from LQ Graphics, Moving Picture from StageTools, or even the plugin for FCP I wrote to help with the docos I mentioned above. It's called Pan Zoom Pro and you can see about it and download a demo here: http://www.lyric.com/fcp-plugins/index.htm#pzp .
Cheers,
John
Lyric Media

NEED HELP! Poor quality stills and text

I'm finishing up a corporate video with lots of still pictures and text. Unfortunately, It's so bad I can't show it to the customer. As always, the video footage looks great but the still photos and the text looks very, very bad when played on a DVD. I compressed the MOV file with Compressor using the Apple-Best Quality DVD settings. I'm beginning to think stills and text will always look bad on TV. Is there a way to improve this? Is Compressor the best tool to compress my file?

Getting still images to look good at DV resolution and color depth can be a struggle.
A couple of tips.
1.Do not use images with more pixels than you absolutely need. If you are in the US (NTSC) and the images don't have any pan/zoom moves, size them to 720x480 (DV pixel ratio) in Photoshop before importing them into FCP. FCP is not a very elegant scaler.
2. Make sure the contrast in the images is under control. Keep the whites below 90.
3. It the images have a lot of high contract detail (think leaves in bright sunlight), sometimes a slight vertical gaussian blur of .3-.5 pixels can help.
4. If the total running time of the material is under 60 minutes, use a Constant Bit Rate of 6.5 or so in the Compressor settings.
If all of these don't really do it for you, and if the material is all stills, you might try to do the slide show in Fotomagico or Motion then output it as a video file for import into FCP.
Good luck,
x

Poor Quality Stills

Forgive this old favourite. I've gone through lots of past threads and still would like some help please.
I am making a 04'00" film in FCP from jpeg stills alone. Some are in boxes, other have motion effects, all have lots of layers of text / text boxes on them. In short it's a real fiddle and render nightmare compared to good old DV!
Anyway, a couple of questions. My final delivery format is DVD to play on a flatscreen LCD or Plasma screen, so should I be proofing the quality of the image on my cathoid ray tube monitor or on the LCD monitor of my iMac? Does the final TV platform make a difference to workflow?
So far, following back thread advice, I have changed the Field Dominance button to None and dropped the Whites level to 90% which made the image on the LCD timeline fantastic (it had been aliasing massively before) but it still aliases on my CRT.
Also, when I export the rendered film as a Current Settings QT and then encode via Compressor and put it into DVD Studio Pro, the picture quality again looks fantastic on DVD Studio Pro Simulate but once encoded onto the final DVD, the shots with movement added are very poor, with lots of aliasing.
Forgive the long intro, but has anyone got a workflow I could try to reliably turn moving jpegs (big ones c12Megapixels) of houses (ie lots of straight lines which tend to flicker when moving) into a DVD to be played on LCD or Plasma in which the straight lines look straight and there is no aliasing or flicker on the pan /scans?
Thank you in advance.
Hamish
iMac 2Ghz intelduo FCP 5.5 Mac OS X (10.4.8)

Over sizing your images beyond what you will use does nothing good and creates issues with how FCP dithers/downscales them.
As a format - get rid of JPEGs. It is a lossy format created to transmit crappy images over the internet on web pages. Use TIFF or PSD which are lossless formats.
The flickering is an artifact of the interlaced nature of video. It is a result of very thin (often horizontal) elements that exist on one scanline as is common in text or titling. This can also be the case in scanned images with a great deal of detail in high contrast. (Note: It does no good to import images hugely larger than the pixel dimensions of the video sequence. All it does is force FCP to work harder at interpolation.)
As the alternate fields play, the flashing element is essentially being turned on/off. The basic strategy is to get the element to exist over two scanlines so it is refreshed every time the field plays or to reduce the amount of contrast so the difference between ON and OFF is not noticeable.
Things to try (In increasing order of image degradation)
- (in FCP) field order>none
- (in FCP or Photoshop) reduce whites by 10% - reduces overly bright areas
- (in FCP) flicker filter - minimum
- (in Photoshop) motion blur>vertical> .2 - .5 pixels - blurs vertically only
- (In FCP or Photoshop) Gaussian blur> .2 - .5 pixels -blurs both horizontally as well as vertically
- (in FCP or Photoshop) deinterlace - throws away half the image and is generally not appropriate on scanned images
Remember: Unless you are viewing your work in the appropriate external NTSC/PAL monitor, you are playing blind. The computer monitor only shows you a proxy image.
good luck.
x

Poor Quality Stills on DVD

Forgive this old favourite. I've gone through lots of past threads and still would like some help please. I've also posted the same question on the FCP forum as I am not sure in which application the solution lies.
I am making a 04'00" film in FCP from jpeg stills alone. Some are in boxes, other have motion effects, all have lots of layers of text / text boxes on them. In short it's a real fiddle and render nightmare compared to good old DV!
Anyway, a couple of questions. My final delivery format is DVD to play on a flatscreen LCD or Plasma screen, so should I be proofing the quality of the image on my cathoid ray tube monitor or on the LCD monitor of my iMac? Does the final TV platform make a difference to workflow?
So far, following back thread advice, I have changed the Field Dominance button to None and dropped the Whites level to 90% which made the image on the LCD timeline fantastic (it had been aliasing massively before) but it still aliases on my CRT.
Also, when I export the rendered film as a Current Settings QT and then encode via Compressor and put it into DVD Studio Pro, the picture quality again looks fantastic on DVD Studio Pro Simulate but once encoded onto the final DVD, the shots with movement added are very poor, with lots of aliasing.
Forgive the long intro, but has anyone got a workflow I could try to reliably turn moving jpegs (big ones c12Megapixels) of houses (ie lots of straight lines which tend to flicker when moving) into a DVD to be played on LCD or Plasma in which the straight lines look straight and there is no aliasing or flicker on the pan /scans?
Thank you in advance.
Hamish
iMac 2Ghz intelduo FCP 5.5

Well, its obviously best to test your output on a source closet to your final display medium. You won't see the flickering of the thin lines on your monitor for several technical reasons, notwithstanding the fact hat simulator is not overly accurate (they even say that in the manual). Your monitor is not a substitute for how an image will look on an NTSC monitor, regardless of if its plasma, lcd, etc. Thin lines are usually killers, and taking time to thicken them in photoshop may not be your cup of tea. Jpegs are lesser quality picture format to begin with, but if thats the only way you have them, so be it. You usually run into a similar flicker problem when screen capturing websites to put on DVD. Webdesigners like to use thin, straight lines which flicker like crazy. Darkening and thickening can help, but again I don't know how much of a rush you are in.

Poor Quality of Photo JPEG Quicktime Export PPro CS4

Adobe Premiere Pro CS4
2 Xeon Dual Core 3.2 Ghz
2 GB RAM
XP SP3
Nvidia 8600 GT
The program that I use for presentation (ProPresenter) prefers Quicktime files rendered in the Photo JPEG format. I render it from a HDV 1080i 60 time line to a 1280x720 file.
In CS3 this worked great. In CS4 when I render it out, the file looks terrible. I even bumped it to 100% quality (normally I do about 85% in CS3)
The video has bad posterization and looks like it has been rendered at a low bit rate, which I think may be what is happening. CS3 didn't let me set the bit rate, and neither does CS4, but 2 minute files took about 700 MB to 1 GB after being exported in CS3. The resulting files in CS4 are 150 MBs.
The bit rate option when Photo JPEG and many other Quicktime codecs is selected, is greyed out and cannot be set.
So what can I do? I NEED to be able to export to Photo JPEG at high quality. Why would Premiere not allow me to set a bit rate, but more over, use such a low one? At least in CS3 it chose a high bitrate for you.
Am I missing something? Are others having this problem with Quicktime exports?
Here is the output from CS3. Some banding in the bacground gradients, but that's to be expected with JPEG.
Here is the output from CS4. Banding is much worse, jaggedy posterization, obvious artifacts. All of this becomes even more apparent with motion.

I would like to follow up a little bit. After talking to my friend, the bitrate problem was addressed in the 4.1 patches and exporting to Photo JPEG at least was fixed, at least that's what he told me and from his description of the problem, I'm quite sure he knew exactly what I was talking about.
But still, after he listed his annoyances such as the much longer render times, and an interface and timeline playback that just never seems to be quite fast enough to keep up, I long for the simple interface of Premiere 6.5 with updated HD capabilities. Every step since then has made the interface more unnessarily resource intensive.
I don't think I'll be upgrading to CS4, sorry Adobe. Please stop making Premiere for super machines. I have a very good computer, and it's having trouble running Premiere CS4. It doesn't NEED to be this resource intensive. It doesn't have to bog down when it's run on anything but the best of the best computers.
In a simple A-B-C comparison, the speed of playing an HD clip with a couple effects goes down and down and down as you go from Pro 1.5 -> CS3 -> CS4. Why? What other areas are so improved that we need to have such a slowdown of the core?
Sorry, I'll stop venting now. I was just so hoping that I could recomend we upgrade to CS4 and solve some of our CS3 problems.

Poor quality downloaded photos

Hi all,
Can anyone explain me why photo's taken with my N96 look good as thumbnails in any viewer - I have tried several to see if the difference is caused by that ( Windows Picture Viewer, Visere, Irfanview etc) - but come out very lousy when enlarged? Colors especially are muddied and there are bands on them with the top looking normal, then blue and yellow and green horizontal areas running across them
Frustrating to not see them correctly and some are of very happy meetings that I want to share normally with beloveds.
Hope someone can help!!
I have added one example.
kr, marc
Attachments:
10122008059.jpg ‏894 KB

Dude, the total lack of color in the bottom part is definitely not due to loss of quality. It's some problem either with the matrix of the camera or a software problem. If video shooting is fine, then the problem is with the image processing of the OS. Backup everything and go directly to the repair shop (or try hard reset first)...
Message Edited by kamenlitchev on 06-Jan-2009 10:45 PM
Ericsson T10i -> Nokia 7110 -> Siemens C45, C55, M55, M65 -> Nokia 6131, N73, N82 -> HTC Wildfire, Desire HD -> Nokia Lumia 800 -> HTC Desire X -> Lumia 820 -> Sony Xperia SP -> Lumia 925 + Sennheiser CX 500
If I've helped, use the Kudos button to thank

Poor quality of photo on cover of book

Hi all,
I've posted about this before, and I'm sort of dismayed that I'm the only one experiencing this. I've made photo books in Aperture for many years now, and I just did our big year-end book for 2014. As always, I'm very impressed by the quality of the printing in the pages of the book. But the photos on the front and back covers (and on the dust-jacket as well) are very flat and muddy. The problem isn't with the digital file of the photo -- the same photos appear on the pages inside the book, and they look good there. My monitor is color-calibrated.
Here's an interesting thing. When the books are printed in New Jersey (or at least the FedEx shipment originates in New Jersey), the covers have the muddiness problem. When the shipments originate in Oregon, the covers look good. Do you think there's a way to request the Oregon printer??

I wasn't able to find any "report a problem" link. Also, in one place on the Apple website it says specifically about print products that "We want you to be satisfied with your product, so send it back if you don't love it." Then in another spot it says "Print products are not returnable." And when I go to my order information, there are no buttons or hyperlinks to click to return it.
As I've mentioned, this has happened a number of times over the years. I may take the books to a nearby Apple Store to see about a return or refund -- and with the demise of Aperture, I may take this opportunity to (reluctantly) look once again into Blurb books and others that I've used sporadically over the years . . . Sigh.
I would GREATLY appreciate hearing if others have had experiences like this or if anyone has any advice for actually contacting a human being at Apple to discuss this. Thank you.

Help! Poor quality uploading photos

My camera is a 10 megapixel and photos turn out beautiful on the camera's screen. Once I upload the pics into iphoto, they look just as terrific. The PROBLEM is when I try to upload to an independent site such as Snapfish, Photobucket, Shutterfly, etc. All of my pics come out like I'm using a 3 megapixel camera or worse! They lose all their clarity, sharpness and beauty. If anyone can help me out, I would really appreciate it. Thank you.

catslittlebirds
Welcome to the Apple Discussions.
How are you uploading? You're not rooting around in the iPhoto Library Folder, are you? Attaching files from the Data folder?
There are three ways (at least) to get files from the iPhoto Window.
1. *Drag and Drop*: Drag a photo from the iPhoto Window to the desktop, there iPhoto will make a full-sized copy of the pic.
2. *File -> Export*: Select the files in the iPhoto Window and go File -> Export. The dialogue will give you various options, including altering the format, naming the files and changing the size. Again, producing a copy.
3. *Show File*: Right- (or Control-) Click on a pic and in the resulting dialogue choose 'Show File'. A Finder window will pop open with the file already selected.
To upload to MySpace or any site that does not have an iPhoto Export Plug-in the recommended way is to Select the Pic in the iPhoto Window and go File -> Export and export the pic to the desktop, then upload from there. After the upload you can trash the pic on the desktop. It's only a copy and your original is safe in iPhoto.
This is also true for emailing with Web-based services. If you're using Gmail you can use THIS
If you use Apple's Mail, Entourage, AOL or Eudora you can email from within iPhoto.
If you use a Cocoa-based Browser such as Safari, you can drag the pics from the iPhoto Window to the Attach window in the browser. Or, if you want to access the files with iPhoto not running, then create a Media Browser using Automator (takes about 10 seconds) or use THIS
Also, for 10.5 users: If you use the extended Open or Attach dialogue (with Column View) you can scroll to the bottom of the Shortcuts and find the Media browser there. Select any pic you want from there.
Regards
TD

Why do iPhone 4s and 5 take poor quality concert photos?

I can't seem to find a straight answer or any tips for this problem. Hoping someone can hel.
I have an iPhone 4s and my husband has an iPhone 5. Every concert we've been to, we try to get some pictures and they are either all white, over exposed, or out of focus and you can't even tell what you've taken a picture of. Then, once in a while, it autofocuses for a quick second the lighting is correct and image is sharp. But then it goes out of focus again and the next picture turns white and blurry. And it's even worse when you try to zoom in. In fact the zoom takes blurry photos most of the time, whether at a concert or not. But the focus of this question is concert photos. At my most recent concert, I noticed that the person in front of me who had a non-iPhone (looked like a Samsung) was taking beautiful pictures, and she was zooming in and getting close-up shots. Compared to what she had, my iPhone camera was a piece of junk--and it should not be! Is there something we're not doing correctly? Is this just the iPhone has an inferior camera with regard to this kind of lighting? I'm hoping someone can shed some light and advice on this issue.

Thank you, Courcoul. I will check out the Fast Camera and Blux Pro. They could come in handy for other photo-taking activities. However, I'm not sure it's going to solve my white-out-overexposure-blurry problem. Shouldn't we expect Apple's camera to work properly, without any special apps to make it behave for standard type stuff? Especially for the price we pay to own an Apple. It's a drag when you see a Samsung taking good pictures and zooming in without losing focus. I like your advice for other specialized apps, though. Much appreciated. And I will check into them.
If anyone can shed some light (no pun intended) on the over exposure white and out of focus issue with concert photos, I'd love to hear more suggestions. Thanks!!

Poor quality / dark photo books?

Hi
I created a photo book for a Christmas present and ordered 2 copies for over £50.
I hadn't ordered one for years and that one was superb but these are awful. Pics were shot with an ESO 400D and they look great on (calibrated) iMac and Formac screens but the books all look really under exposed. Backgrounds for example, which contains plant life etc have more or less just come out black.
What should I do ? (I know it's a little late after ordering them but have been busy) - should I send them back to be reprinted ?
thanks
Roger

Roger:
What is the color profile of those photos? Are they the Adobe RGB?
You might be able to get some compensation from apple. Contact them via the following link and explain in detail the issue. Waiting this long may work against you however but it's worth a try: http://www.apple.com/support/photoservices/returns/
TIP: For insurance against the iPhoto database corruption that many users have experienced I recommend making a backup copy of the Library6.iPhoto database file and keep it current. If problems crop up where iPhoto suddenly can't see any photos or thinks there are no photos in the library, replacing the working Library6.iPhoto file with the backup will often get the library back. By keeping it current I mean backup after each import and/or any serious editing or work on books, slideshows, calendars, cards, etc. That insures that if a problem pops up and you do need to replace the database file, you'll retain all those efforts. It doesn't take long to make the backup and it's good insurance.
I've created an Automator workflow application (requires Tiger), iPhoto dB File Backup, that will copy the selected Library6.iPhoto file from your iPhoto Library folder to the Pictures folder, replacing any previous version of it. It's compatible with iPhoto 08 libraries and Leopard. iPhoto does not have to be closed to run the application, just idle. You can download it at Toad's Cellar. Be sure to read the Read Me pdf file.

Poor quality of still frames

Hello, I have mpeg4 films from which I hope to extract some good quality still photos. Although I am able to create still frames and save them as jpegs the stills are a poorer quality than the film. How can I make the still frame quality as good as the film? Grateful for any help.

Hi Karsten,
Many thanks for your reply. The resolution (dimension?) of one of the mp4 videos is 1280 x 720. I have done several tests and have another at 724 x 576.
You say "screen res is much higher than video res". I'm expecting to get a still photo which is as good in quality as the full screen version - is this not possible? Taking a closer look at the video I now see it's not great quality. With this in mind, if I single out an individual frame - pixelation shows. I suppose when playing the video this pixelation is blurred by movement and the fps. Also I should mention this video has been through a video converter before I could use it in iMovies and the resulting mp4s are nearly the same quality as the original. Thanks for helping a iMovie novice!

How do I create high quality stills from iMovie?

I know how to use the Create Still feature in order to create a photo in iMovie, however the resulting jpeg appeared too grainy when imported into Photoshop. It seems that the jpeg that iMove creates is too small (in terms of kb) to be of any use. Is there a way for iMovie to create larger, higher quality still photos? Or is there another way to go about this? Thanks

rolesh79 wrote:
.... It seems that the jpeg that iMove creates is too small (in terms of kb) to be of any use. Is there a way for iMovie to create larger, higher quality still photos?
No.
video is highly compressed, much higher than any still or graphics.
e.g. a 'FullHD'-cam fits 108.000 'stills' (=1h video) of 1920x1080 pixel into 4-8GB ... make the math your own

Poor quality "still" photo

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for