Preload looks better before?

I tried to search keywords, but it turns up nothing...
When loading RAW .NEF files:
1. First loads a blurry image preview
2. Then refreshes to a preload image like this:
and then
3. loads a final preview like this:
My question is...  Is there a way to get it back to the "Preload version 2" to start with for editing?  The 3rd/final loaded image is terrible!
Lightroom 3.3
Nikon D7000 camera w/ Nikon 24-70 f2.8 lens
I tried selecting camera lens (Nikon 24-70) and it made no difference other than edge curve.
Thank you in advance for any advise.

Thank you for the fast response and the article link!
My import is set to Develop Preset: None, which I didn't realize is what was setting the addition of +50 brightness and +25 contrast.  I re-imported, and per the article set the Develop Preset instead to "General - Zeroed" and came through exactly how I wanted.

Similar Messages

  • Hello, I am interested in buying this week of a mac mini 2011 with intel graphics HD3000 but I'm not sure it looks good with my Samsung SyncMaster933HD monitor. How would it look better with the hdmi-dvi connection or a built-in display adapter port-vga

    Hello, I am interested in buying this week of a mac mini 2011 withintel graphics HD3000 but I'm not sure it looks good with my Samsung SyncMaster 933HD monitor. How would it look better.... with the hdmi-dvi connection built in, buying a HDMI 1.3 cable and HDMI-making or buying an adapter hdmi display port - vga and connected through the port thunderbolt
    Thanks

    I originally set up my mini with the included HDMI -> DVI adaptor to connect to a Sycmaster monitor. The graphics were very good.

  • Why does a DVI or VGA look better than HDMI for 2nd Monitor

    Why does a DVI or VGA connection for a program monitor look better than HDMI. I've tested this on several systems with CS5x and CS6. The full screen output from premiere definitely looks worse with HDMI.
    I can often see visual differences with the Windows GUI as well, over sharpening of text and lines, harsh rendering of gradients. It looks like a VGA signal displayed on a television.
    I've looked at the NVidia stetting and it appears to be set to 1920x1080 at 60hz either way, DVI or HDMI. On one Acer 20 inch monitor the was VGA, HDMI, Composite, Component, and Digital Tuner, but no DVI. The program monitor has always looked blah from the HDMI. So I recently switched the connection to a DVI to VGA adaptor, and now the video looks so much better.
    Any thoughts or explanations?

    Just because the monitors accept a 1080P signal doesn't mean their native resolution is 1920x1080. At 20 inch they very likely can scale that signal down to the native resolution of the panel which may be 1600 x 900 or another resolution that is 16 x 9 resolution. That scaling can be done by the GPU or firmware on the Monitor depending on the video driver options and the firmware options. That scaling is also the most common cause to text and icon blurriness you are talking about. As an example there are Pro monitors that accept a 4K signal but scale it down to 2.5K or 2K on the actual panel. You might try going into your video card settings such as Nvidia control panel and look for the scaling options. Select GPU scaling and see if the preview is better. If that doesn't work select no scaling and see if it's better if the monitor firmware handles the scaling.
    Eric
    ADK

  • Why do my DV files look better when played in MPEG Streamclip than iMovie?

    My home movie DV files look washed out (compared to what my tapes looked like I played them on the TV years ago) when played with both iMovie '06 and iMove '11. The claim has been made that if I retransfer my tapes using iMovie '06 (rather than '09, which I used last time, or '11), there will be a dramatic improvement in the visual quality (and there will be some unspecified benefits if I set the dial to 48K audio). HOWEVER, if I play the files I already have in MPEG Streamclip, the visual quality improves substantially without any retransfer. Here is my question: Why? Why do my iMovie-imported files look better in MPEG Streamclip than in iMovie?
    Here is my layman's answer: algorithms. When MPEG Streamclip encounters the exact same arrangements of molecules (or whatever), it has some plan for what to do with them that is smarter than what iMovie does. Is this another sign or way that iMovie is not well suited for DV?

    Please go to my website where I have posted new instructions on working with DV.
    This keeps both interlaced fields from FireWire capture through to a DVD. All the lines means no lost quality when editing DV or Digital8.
    It also solves the washed-out color problem.

  • Does the Apple Digital Av adapter Stream in 1080P so that my keynote presentations look better that streaming them through apple TV?

    Does the Apple Digital Av adapter Stream in 1080P so that my keynote presentations look better that streaming them through apple TV? I use Keynote and Apple TV to stream my Keynote presentations at work and the Picture does not look great and does not put the presetation in widscreen mode. Would the Apple Digital Av adapter fix that?

    The size on the screen should remain, but the quality should be better.
    -Kyle (www.FMFK.net)

  • Need advice on how to make my website look better!

    ive made a website for a security company but im just not 100% happy with it, i dont know if it doesnt look professional enough or things need changing design wise. i am open to any ideas on how to make my website look better, i also dont mind if anyone wants to dramtically change it if their idea is better. I would just very much appreciate a review and constructive critisism and ideas for a newly designed version of the site please!
    [advertising slogan removed by host]
    Thanks!

    As a novice, some things I see: The footer has redundant, unecessary images (4 large images-for your services--REDUNDANT) odd? The text part of footer: text seems close, scrunched, have some space between heading and items, DO NOT CENTER TEXT!,
    One of the service links bought to page with SAME LARGE image on homepage-change picture, don't use same large image for 2 different pages.
    DO NOT use CONTACT US as 1 of 5 links on menubar. Do in another creative way, and/or use footer for contact. I think this looks amateurish (my opinion of course).
    If I remember, the homepage and the rest of site, have exact same page structure.--See if you can atleast change the structure of inner pages versus the homepage.
    Didn't look at enough, but..maybe...
    each of your services should be a main menu link on your menubar. I would not put contact us on menubar, and you also had another menubar link with no dropdown( of course ok, but maybe could restructure)--Also your last service (on right of menubar)---why is that one different, and not included with the other services??
    Seems like your menubar (items) structure could be reworked.--I would suggest, briefly looking at, to maybe have each service as a primary menu heading/title..YOU MAY NOT NEED A DROPDOWN MENU? Make sure if dropdown it is necessary.
    Local security should be one of your services.
    Have your footer logo, as is to left, but maybe put your footer links more to the right;;It will 'balance' the footer section
    Your top logo seems too close to your main LARGE image (Which btw, seems oddly large compared to the rest of your site?)--That LARGE top image(the same palce on every same looking page), seems too big for your page--Why doen't it line up with the rest off your page content?

  • How do experienced editors/colorists make video look better? Any tips?

    I am an amateur editor working on a documentary about WW II airplanes.
    The footage was shot on a Cannon HV30 in HDV with the 30p mode. The footage looks great (with some needing color correction), but still looks "videoish" when played on a standard TV.
    I was just curious about what more experienced and artistic editors use to make their material look better.
    I'm not talking about drastic changes like one might make to a dramatic film, but slight stylistic changes/additions to take the edge off of the video.
    For example I've read about adding a very slight channel blur, reducing the contrast a bit, etc.
    Any tips would be appreciated.
    BTW, I've stayed in HDV for the edit and will follow these instructions for finally ending up on a SD DVD: http://www.kenstone.net/fcphomepage/hdv_timeline_to_sddvd.html

    It really depends on the tools that you have. It sounds like your are using a consumer grade camera to shoot a documentary, which makes color grading in post that much more important. Obviously the better the camera and lighting the better your video/film is going to look. Because your working with a HV30 you're going to have to take a few extra steps to make your footage shine in post. I'm not a huge fan of Magic Bullet. If your under a deadline, and you want to impress a client, sweet use it, but if you take pride in your work as a digital artist, and want to understand how color grading works with video I would recommend getting to know these programs: After Effects, Photoshop, Color, and Final Cut Pro. Each of those programs has the following effects/parameters that you can use for color grading: Saturation, Levels, Curves, Contrast/Brightness, and Composite Modes in FCP, PS, and AE. Do not get too comfortable using 3rd party plugins otherwise you'll become dependent on them.
    Peace
    GC

  • Quick preview looks better than processed raw image...??

    Hey all, probably a bit of a "newb" question here... so forgive me, and thank you...
    Using a D7000 and often times when I shoot - the preview image on the camera looks BRIGHT, VIVID and ROBUST ... after import however - when reviewing my shots, JUST as I arrow over to the next shot - many of the preview images tend to look better than the processed image that aperture displays once it's done spinning it's wheels.
    Perhaps I've messed up a Raw Fine Tuning setting?
    When I click on quick preview and browse through an import, the pictures truly look nicer to me than the when aperture processes them.
    Without question, the display on my acer monitor is a far cry from the miniature compressed image on the back of my nikon, however the more i shoot, the more I realize a disconnect between what I think I should see, and what I'm ultimately seeing in Aperture.
    Are their specific settings to fine tune the import of raw d7000 shots?
    Thanks much.. gk

    I take it you're shooting and processing RAW images?
    It's worth remembering that if you have a picture style selected (i.e. vivid etc), your camera might be applying extra contrast and saturation etc to the image you see on the back of the camera. Camera manufacturers do this so that we can give our pictures some extra punch and colour automatically.
    I'd also be wary of comparing what you see on your camera to what you see on your monitor. Unless both are calibrated, you shouldn't trust either of them 100%. The best example of monitor calibration is going to look at TV's in an electronics store. You'll probably notice that in a wall of TV's, some pictures will be darker, some lighter, some more vivid, some more saturated. Using a calibration tool adjusts the picture your screen and monitor displays so that it is 'accurate'.
    It's a bit like having a room full of scales and adjusting them so that they all read 1 kilogram when a 1 kilogram weight is placed on each of them. Calibrating monitors will mean that when you display an image on it, it will always look the same rather than getting the some light/some dark problem you saw in the TV store.
    It's a tricky subject to explain (don't worry if it doesn't make sense), but you might like to have look around YouTube for videos on the subject.

  • Colours look better in iphoto than on desktop

    Hello all,
    I am new to Mac. I'll try to be short.
    I used a photo as my desktop background on my macbookpro. However, when I opened the same photo in iphoto, it looks much sharper and the colors are much more vivid than on my desktop background.
    I noticed the same thing with all other photos. They look better in iphoto than in Preview for example.
    Could someone explain why this is so?
    thanks a lot,
    JM

    JM:
    Go to the Monitor section of the System Preferences and see what the color profile the monitor is set to. You can change it to whatever you find via Terence's post and see if it renders more accurately. You can change it to one of several to get what looks best to you.
    Do you Twango?
    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 written 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. You can download it at Toad's Cellar. Be sure to read the Read Me pdf file.

  • Page preview looks better than live site? Whats wrong? Please help

    Hello to all,
    I am having problems with viewing dreamweaver pages with Internet Explorer.
    My site is
    allspecialtybuildings.com
    When I go to the preview in IE its looks ok, yet in firefox it looks better as I have little arrows for a list effect.
    Yet when I view it live it does not keep thw effect. It flows outside of my container.
    I have deleted the root files and re uploaded them on the server, yet still nothing.
    I am curious if there is any simple answerws for this?
    Any help is appreciated. You can notice th list towards the bottom of the page.
    Chris

    The problem I have with your site is that when text size is increased in browser (Zoom, text only), content spills out of division containers.  Best to avoid using height values. Better to use min-height: for Firefox and conditional commented heights for less than IE7 browsers.  Also, IE6 doesn't support transparent PNG without a JavaScript fix.  Google search for IE PNG Fix.
    IE CSS bugs that'll get you every time.
    http://css-tricks.com/ie-css-bugs-thatll-get-you-every-time/
    Nancy O.
    Alt-Web Design & Publishing
    Web | Graphics | Print | Media  Specialists
    www.alt-web.com/
    www.twitter.com/altweb

  • What happened Autofill in Version 4, Google Chrome is looking better all the time, Mozilla is kinda loosing it!!

    What happened Autofill in Version 4? Google Chrome is looking better all the time, Mozilla is kinda loosing it!! You guys following microsoft down the toilet?

    See this for support information about the Google Toolbar.
    [http://www.google.com/support/toolbar/?hl=en]
    Or visit the Google Toolbar forum.
    [http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Toolbar?hl=en]

  • I dented the top right corner of my iPhone 5c will sandpaper help it look better or will it make it look worse?

    Will sandpaper make my iphone 5c look better or worse.

    Purplehiddledog wrote:
    I do backup with iCloud.  I can't wait until the new iMac is available so that I can once again have my files in more than 1 location without needing to rely solely on the cloud. 
    I also rely on iTunes and my MacBook and Time Machine as well as backing up to iCloud. I know many users know have gone totally PC free, but I chose to use iCloud merely as my third backup.
    I assume that the restore would result in my ability to open Pages and Numbers and fix the problem with deleting apps, but this would also mean that if my Numbers documents still exist solely within the app and are just not on iCloud for some reason that they would be gone forever.  Is that right?
    In a word, yes. In a little more detail.... When you restore from an iCloud backup, you must erase the device and start all over again. There is no other way to access the backup in iCloud without erasing the device. Consequently, you are starting all over again. Therefore, it would also be my assumption that Pages and Numbers will work again and that the deleting apps issues would be fixed as well.
    If the documents are not in the backup, and you do not have a backup elsewhere, the documents could be gone forever.

  • FLV quality looks better than F4V, what am I doing wrong?

    Hi,
    I exported a small clip as a on2vp6 flv, a h.264 f4v, and a h.264 mp4 file with the adobe media encoder cs4. Each file is the same clip, exported with pretty much the same settings. Resolution: 640x480, 0.5mbps target bit rate, 29.97 fps.
    Everything I read says that for a given file and a given bitrate, h.264 should provide better video quality when compared to a h.263 flv file. I would like to know what I am doing wrong, because the h.264 files look worse than the flv file. I have provided download links for a short demo clip in each format.
    fl7756n_29_640x480_500kbpsbr.f4v
    http://www.filefactory.com/file/af5gc7b/n/fl7756n_29_640x480_500kbpsbr_f4v
    fl7756n_29_640x480_500kbpsbr.flv
    http://www.filefactory.com/file/af5gc7e/n/fl7756n_29_640x480_500kbpsbr_flv
    fl7756n_29_640x480_500kbpsbr.mp4
    http://www.filefactory.com/file/af5gc71/n/fl7756n_29_640x480_500kbpsbr_mp4
    Why does the clip look better in h.263? It seems that everything I encode at low bitrates looks better in h.263 which leads me to believe I am doing something wrong.

    Okay, that is true, they are different codecs. But even adobe says:
    Q: How does H.264 compare with the current video formats supported in Flash Player?
    A: Flash Player supports the Sorenson Spark video codec (based on H.263) and On2 VP6. H.263 is the predecessor of H.264 and was designed for teleconferencing applications, at 64k rates. H.264 delivers even higher quality at lower bitrates. H.264 will deliver the same or better quality when to compared to the same encoding profile in On2. Factors you should consider when choosing a format include the complexity of the content, the desired reach, ability to archive, and licensing considerations.
    at
    http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/Flash_Player:9:Update:H.264#Q:_What_is_H.264.3F
    Are there any tricks to getting the h.264 to look "better" than the h.263? Like, the h.264 version of the video doesn't even look close to as good, and I think that the f4v version looks worse than the mp4, which I don't really understand since they are both h.264 files. The footage is from a canon XL2 and the original source is ntsc 720x480. Is there anything special I should be doing for encoding in h.264 instead of h.263. The video is going to be only for the web.

  • Theme looking different before and after previewing an advanced style

    Hello,
    i have a problem with a theme looking different before and after previewing an advanced style in mapbuilder Ver11_1_1_5_B110527
    My style xml looks like this:
    <?xml version="1.0" ?>
    <AdvancedStyle>
        <CollectionStyle>
          <style name="color_style" shape="polygon"/>
          <style name="line_style"/>
      </CollectionStyle>
    </AdvancedStyle>It is a combination of a color style and a line style styles:
    <?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
    <svg width="1in" height="1in">
        <desc/>
        <g class="color" style="fill:#B6D1CA">
            <rect width="50" height="50"/>
      </g>
    </svg>
    <?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
    <svg width="1in" height="1in">
      <desc/>
      <g class="line" style="fill:#969696;stroke-width:2;stroke-linecap:BUTT">
        <line class="base"/>
      </g>
    </svg>The styles and theme are created using insert statements, and not the mapbuilder.
    When i take a look at the theme preview in mapbuilder, it will look like this: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22117905/before_preview.PNG
    Now i open up the advanced style and hit the preview button.
    If i take another look at the theme preview, it will now look like this (and this is the desired output btw.): http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22117905/after_preview.PNG
    Now my question is, why does the same theme look different, after previewing the advanced style?
    I tried clearing the cached geometries and metadata cache of mapviewer, but that didn't help.
    Apart from previewing every style, what can i do to make sure that the themes are styled correctly?
    Thanks for help in advance,
    Dirk

    Hello Joao,
    i just found the error. It is in my pl/sql package where i create the styles.
    Mapbuilder showed the staly as in my first post, but that i created looks like this
    <?xml version="1.0" ?>
    <AdvancedStyle>
        <CollectionStyle>
          <style name="color_style" shape="polygon"/>
          <style name="line_style" shape="all"/>
      </CollectionStyle>
    </AdvancedStyle>Notice the "shape=all" attribute in line_style. Apperently Mapbuilder doesn't like it, if i set this in the style. After previewing or saving the style in mapbuilder, the sttribute is removed and the style is correct.
    I now edited my package and rerun it, and now the themes are displayed correctly.
    Regards,
    Dirk

  • Hay guy, does any one here know what kind of games can i download/buy for my new macbook pro? and what should i look after before i buy any game?

    Hay guy, does any one here know what kind of games can i download/buy for my new macbook pro? and what should i look after before i buy any game?

    http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/games/
     

Maybe you are looking for