Premier Elements. Rcommendation for still photo resolution/size

I have a Panasonic composite camera. It shoots HVCHD lite. It also takes 16:9 (3968*2232 9Meg) still photos. I wish to produce a composite DVD in Pal format suitable for a wide screen TV. What resolution and size is recommended for the still shots? I am using Windows XP with Powertoy image resizer. Or is it more convenient to use the Oraganizer in Elements to resize the photos? Tony

For my thoughts on still images, you might want to see this THREAD. In your case, you'd substitute my 720x480 PAR 0.9 for your HD Project's framesize. If you need to do any panning on images that will be fully zoomed out, I'd not go any larger than you will need to accomplish this. Some Projects require that I use several different Actions in Photoshop, if I will do much panning on the zoomed out images. Since I do not do any automatic pan/zoom Effects, but create each by hand, as each image is unique, I can tailor the resizing to exactly what I will need. If you let your program do these Effects automatically, then just give a bit more wiggle room and your good to go. Having overly large stills in your Project costs you, both in processing power and also quality - PS's resizing algorithms are better than Premiere's and doing this outside of the NLE is much more efficient.
Good luck,
Hunt

Similar Messages

Acceptable File Size and Resolution for Still Photos in Keyframe Motion

Hello Hello
I know that FCE HD (as other Video Editors), will automatically fit a still photo's size to it's default capability of 720 x 480 Correct?
Well, in regard to making the best possible ZOOMS, and Pans from Still Photos, is it neccessary to re-size all your photos (from an external editor like photoshop), to a specfic size?
According to an older book for FCE, it sez that actually photos re-sized to 720x534 with a resolution of 72 are best. *The proper proportion for NTSC.
And I noticed that when I inserted larger JPG still sizes (like about a meg), on the FCE timline, and when applying Panning, or Zooms, some of the rendered images with motion didn't pan or zoom smoothly.
Is that because those file sizes were TOO large?
Well I have soooo many stills that need to be imported into this particular project that it would be a lot easier for me to just generally reduce these stills (by percentage).
And is the magic resolution amount supposed to be 72?
Because if that's the case I can re-size all my photos to 72, and try to keep the file sizes down to say 300 KB's or so.
Sound like a plan?

Thank you guys
"basically, you should try to make your images large enough so they never have to be scaled beyond 100% in the motion tab in fcp."
Actually as I mentioned some of these file sizes are very large. About 800-900 KB's - and what as a result, what I've noticed is that I actually had to DECREASE the viewing area in both the Browser Window, and the Canvas Winbow just to be able to see the whole image.
Ok - so the 72 DPI is not as important as the dimensions of the photo. But as I said I have soooooo many of these that it would take me forever to manually re-size them all not to mention the fact that re-sizing some of them (odd shapes),would throw the images out of balance.
So again I ask - if there is NO motion applied to the photo, file sizes of about 200 to 350 KB's appear just beautifully ....
BUT
If I need to PAN or ZOOM, is it ok to laod a 1 MEG sized JPG onto the timeline and start working with Keyframe?????
In fact in some cases I'm actually using these larger file JPS's (1 meg or more), so that they TOTALLLY fit the canvas window (cropping them by enlargment)
*With some clipping of the original image of course ...
Why do I do this?
So that you don't see the usual border with horizontal images, or vertical images - know what I mean?
Thanx

How do I create motion for still photos/pictures. I'd like to pan/scan & zoom. Please help!

How do I create motion for still photos/pictures. I'd like to pan/scan & zoom. Please help!

You kind of answered your own question..
Check out Motion in the FX Control Window and learn how keyframing works..

.FLV Format to Adobe Premier Elements 4 for editing -- Difficulty

Hi:
Have Dell Dimension 4600 with 2.4 GigHz CPU
WINXP with SP-2
RAM = 1 GIG
2 HD's (20 & 200 gigs)
I recently downloaded from YouTube a lot of
videos by using RealPlayer's software (version 11),
which uses the .FLV format.
I want to transfer them to Adobe Premier Elements 4
for editing, but it will not accept this format.
I tried using Virtual Dub and/or MPEG-Streamclip
to change this format and they too would not
recognize this .FLV format
Any suggestions??
Thanks

Hi again:
Have some questions about the Moyea FLV Plug-in:
As previously stated, I have been using the Prism Video converter,
which does seem to convert the FLV file to some type of an AVI file.
I then load this AVI file into Premium Elements 4 (PE4), and it first
has to be "conformed" in the PE4 software.
Then, if one attempts to open and edit this file, it either is an ex-
tremely slow process, or the software freezes, requiring a re-start
(sometimes multiple times) to complete the editing before rendering
it into an edited AVI file.
Curious to find a work-around, I avoided this first time editing
and just had the PE4 software just re-render the whole intact
Prism-generated AVI file into a PE4-generated AVI file which has
apparently much less "overehead" and can easily be edited in PE4.
so, I end up re-re-rendering the original FLV to get the edited AVI
file I want.
Does the Moyea FLV Plug-in avoid this labor-time intensive task??
Also, its web site advertises 2 different packages:
1) FLV Importer Pro for Adobe Premiere:
"FLV Importer Pro for Adobe Premiere is a plug-in program for Adobe
Premiere. Adobe Premiere is a professional and popular video editing
tool, which allows importing video and audio in various formats, like
AVI, MPE, MPG, M2V, MP3, WMV, WMA, WAV, etc.
Yet, it does not support the FLV file, which is widely used on the
web. FLV Importer Pro for Adobe Premiere is just a program to make
Adobe Premiere accept the FLV file for video editing and composing."
Price: $60
2) FLV Importer for Adobe Premiere:
"FLV Importer for Adobe Premiere is the same with the Pro version,
except the Flash 8 alpha video import and cheaper with 20$ off!
It is a plug-in program for Adobe Premiere.
Adobe Premiere is a professional and popular video editing tool, which
allows importing video and audio in various formats, like AVI, MPEG,
MPG, M2V, MP3, WMV, WMA, WAV, etc. Yet, it does not support the FLV
file, which is widely used on the web.
Support FLV files encoded by any codec,like:
Flash 8, H.263, RAW, ADPCM, MP3, Nellymoser.
FLV Importer for Adobe Premiere is just a program to make Adobe Prem-
iere accept the FLV file for video editing and composing."
Price: $40
(version 2)
The product sites of Moyea Software:
Video-to-flash.com, Flvsoft.com, My-video-converter.com.
The homepage of Moyea Software:
http://www.moyea.com
Which one is the most practical to get??
The site offers a "Free Trial"--is that worthwhile??
Finally, is this site trustworthy??
I am using the PE4 mainly for the conversion of FLV files and would
appreciate any rational method for accelerating the process.
Thanx.

Quadro or GeForce for still-photo editing?

Hello!
I am an IT consultant who has one professional photographer as a client, and she needs a new workstation for still-photo editing using Photoshop CC. I asked her to ask her professional community about the best video card to use, and I got back "I need a video card with mercury graphics engine, over 1 gig. of ram (the more the better)." I have read about Quadro cards until my eyes bled, and I think they may not be the best suited for still-photo editing, at least from the perspective of performance vs. cost.
Her current workstation has a 1GB ATI FirePro V5800 card, 6GB memory, a three-drive RAID 5 array that is split into her C: and data partitions, and a single Xeon CPU. It is a pig.
New computer build (so far):
ASUS Z97-A LGA1150 motherboard
Windows 8.1 Pro (with Start8 start menu replacement)
Intel Core i7-4790 CPU
32GB memory
480GB SSD boot drive (current boot drive has 201GB used)
240GB SSD "active projects" drive (only $44 more than a 120GB SSD)
4TB SATA 7200RPM data drive for finished projects
Multiple 3TB drives for onsite and offsite backups
The only piece missing (?) is which video card to get. I deal almost exclusively with business workstations, not specialized markets like photography editing, so I bow to your knowledge in helping me decide between Quadro vs. GeForce vs. ???
Thank you for your time!
Gregg Hill

I'm no expert, but I built a PC about a year ago and did a lot of research into this. I found a lot of conflicting opinions on it, but most of the actual data I looked at suggested that I wasn't going to see a significant boost in performance, for still photography, by adding a GPU (over a good Intel chip). The integrated graphics performed surprisingly well in the benchmarks versus all but the top of the line GPUs. So I concluded that unless I was prepared to spend $500 on a GPU I'd stick with the integrated, and I could always upgrade later. Never felt the need to upgrade. Everyone uses Photoshop differently, and your client may have use for it. But I think a lot of people buy the most expensive machine they can afford even when it's overkill. I'd consider myself a moderately heavy PS user; I like to do big composites (60+ layers) and I do architectural work that sometimes has dozens of frames from a full frame camera. I don't do video, nor use the niche filters like oil that were heavy on GPUs. But I use a lot of layers, and am somewhat heavy with actions and batching. YMMV.
But, a caveat: I use CS6, which doesn't have many GPU accelerated features that I use. It looks like that is changing with CC, and hopefully more so in the future. So perhaps it would be prudent for you to put one in. Truthfully I don't think there's much a difference between brands so long as they're on the compatibility list.
I also did a lot of research into RAM, because Windows 7 caps at 16 gb for the basic version. At the end of the day I convinced myself that 16 would be sufficient, and I've kept an eye on my useage in photoshop and found that it has. I don't do video work, but my projects are usually pretty large (2 gb+). Everybody has different uses
Sorry to drone on: But I also looked into the traditional 4 disc setup recommend for image processors. I couldn't get a concrete answer on whether this setup still makes a significant performance increase when using SSDs. I ended up just getting an SSD for programs, OS, and working files. Then a huge slow HDD (5600 RPM) for storage. Plus backups. I since upgraded the hard drive and used my old one for scratch - really just to take the "wear and tear" off my main drive.

In December I purchased and registered a copy of PS Premier Elements 12 for my MAC. I sue program exclusively for still photos. When I go from Organizer to Editor, I get a message that I need to download Elements, register program or download trial versio

In December 13, I purchased & registered PS Premier Elements 12. I use only for still photography. The organizer works just perfectly. When I go to Editor to edit and/or print I get a message to register product and/or download trial. Have I purchased the wrong product or have I missed something ?

Premiere Elements is for video editing.

Photo resolution/size for Calendar images?

I have a small photo (4" x 3.293" @ 150 ppi) that I'd like to use in my calendar. When I drag it onto the calendar page, it seems that it's being enlarged and then I get the dreaded yellow exclamation point thingy telling me it may not print out well. I do not have the "Fit Photo to Frame Size" checked. I guess I'd like to know 2 things.
1. Can't I use a small photo like this without it being enlarged?
2. Is there a particular resolution/ppi that's recommended for my photos to print out well?
Thank you!

I have a small photo (4" x 3.293" @ 150 ppi) that I'd like to use in my calendar. When I drag it onto the calendar page, it seems that it's being enlarged and then I get the dreaded yellow exclamation point thingy telling me it may not print out well. I do not have the "Fit Photo to Frame Size" checked. I guess I'd like to know 2 things.
1. Can't I use a small photo like this without it being enlarged?
Not that I have found - photos are fit to the frame - and frame sizes are not adjustable - so unless you can find a layout with a smaller frame you have what you have
2. Is there a particular resolution/ppi that's recommended for my photos to print out well?
The warning comes on below 180 dpi (ppi) - but people have printed photos with warnings and been ok with them - it would be better to have a higher resolution photo but for me anyway the subject is what is important and if the technical quality is not perfect, the subject is still there - last year I included a couple of small 72 ppi photos I downloaded from the web of our son in a 4.5 x 5 frame and while you certainly can see that the resolution of the two photos is not great - the calendar page is great
Preview your calendar before sending it - http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1040 - and set your expectations reasonably and you should be ok if the photos are not really big in the calendar - up to 4 x 3 I doubt that you will see any difference
LN

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

Resolution for Still Photos for film

Greetings,
I have a full length Digital Video film and want to add still photos to it. I have been using Photo to Movie software to add a Ken Burns effect to the photo, then exporting it under the movie format- DV(NTSC) 720x480, then importing that to the final cut time line. My question is what is the best resolution in the first place for the still photo before I do this process or is it okay to use the final render size from the Photo to Movie export? Or do you have a better idea.

I would suggest you to check your export preferences but it is my understanding that if you render the movie file, and then export, it you should be able to set the QT option for NTSC DV.

Still Photo Resolution

The resolution of my still photos looks terrible, even though I imported large jpeg files and scaled them down, not up. I'm doing a project that is only stills and audio, no video and the orginals were quite large. They looked horrible in the program panel, but I figured they would look fine on export, but no. I tried exporting my project about six different ways, maximum render, etc.

There was a post on this site a couple of years ago by Jeff Belune (as I recall) that provided a work flow for this. I fiound it to be effective. Most of the people who post here recommend that you do the scaling in Photoshop and then import the *.PSD file. The pixel dimensions W x H must match the scenario preset pixel dimensions (the DPI and/or image dimensions in inches, have no meaning). If your scenario is 1920 x 1080, then that's what the image size needs to be.
I only remember some of the steps Jeff laid out, but, it was to open the image in Photoshop, set the GENERAL preference to best for reduction, Change the image to 16 bit. Make color, exposure changes as desired, use unsharp mask set to 198, 0.6, 2, set the crop tool to your desired pixel dimensions, and crop the image to the desired size, if desired change the mode back to 8 bit, and save the file under a new name (never mess with your original. I created a photoshop action to speed the process.

Problems setting duration for still photos and transitions in iMovie '11

I downloaded iMovie 11 from the Apps Store last night and am trying to make my first movie with it today. I use still photos exclusively.
For most - but not all - I like 5 seconds for photos and for transitions 2 seconds. I do vary this on occasion and so do not check "for all photos' or "for all transitions".
I can't get these settings to work with this version of iMovie. For example, I added a photo (5 sec) then a transition (2 sec) which changed the duration time of the photo - as it should. But when I double clicked the photo, to bring up the inspector window to change the duration of the photo, nothing happened. Then I added another photo. The duration of the first photo increased to 7 seconds and nothing I do seemed to change that.
The time increases seem random: for example, sometimes the time on the still photo increases to 6:29 sec, sometimes to 7 sec.
The duration for the transitions always remains the same - 2 sec; it's the time for the photos that jumps around. And I haven't been able to find a way to get back to 5 sec.
Before posting this, I researched and found an number of earlier posts detailing the same issues.
However, none of these posts had stars to indicate the problem was solved.
Has anyone found a solution or is this a bug that should be reported to Apple?

Interesting!!
I've spent a lot of hours on this too, but I have come up with a different solution perhaps because I like to vary both the image duration and the transition duration in my movies.
Here's my process:
-> Knowing that (a) I want most of the photos to be visible for 5 seconds and most transitions for 2 seconds and (b) that a transition takes half from the photo before and half from the photo after, under File>Project Properties>Photo Duration I chose 7 seconds - each photo will 'lose' a total of 2 seconds from the transitions in front and behind. I did not check either "Applies to all transitions." or "Applies to all photos." - See below for why.
-> I discovered, as you have, that all the photos have to go in before I add any transitions. This was new to me. With all previous versions of iMovie I simply added a photo then a transition then another photo one at a time. I had to fiddle with the timing adjustments, but at least I could fiddle. With this new version of iMovie I can't. Once the transition is in place, I cannot change the duration of the photo.
-> Sometimes, I want a longer or shorter duration for a photo. For example, on photos to which I apply the Ken Burns effect, I often want the image on the screen for a slightly longer time. In this case, I have to use the inspector to change the duration before I add the transitions. So I might set the time for 8 seconds; when both transitions are added, the time for this photo becomes 6 seconds, which is what I want.
-> The same applies if I want a transition to be shorter or longer than 2 seconds. If, for example, I want the duration for a transition to be 1 second, then I have to change the duration on the two linked photos to 5 1/2 seconds.
All of this requires much more prior planning than I am used to with iMovie. Right now, I working with batches of 5 or 6 photos at a time. I don't put a transition on the last photo in the batch until I have added the next group of photos. And things get really tricky if I don't like my original design. If I want to change anything, I have to take out all of the transitions linking the photos I want to work on, do the math, make the changes in the photo durations, then put the transitions back.
Perhaps I am trying to make iMovie do more than it was intended to do, I don't know. Perhaps this problem stems from the fact that I bought just iMovie 11 from the Mac Apps Store and not the entire iLife 11. Don't know that either. But at least I have found a way to make the movie look the way I want it to look.
Thanks for sharing your process. I will use it when the circumstances are right.

Still Photo - Maximum Size

What is the "Ideal" maximum size still photo that can be used?
Most of my photos were scanned from negatives and about 15MB in size.
Thanks,
Steve

The advice makes a lot of sense. I will be using the 720x480 pixel size
Is their a shortcut in Photoshop that will resize "multiple" still photos at one time?
Thanks,
Steve

Does still photo resolution determine maximum movie quality?

I am making a movie combining relatively low quality jpegs and dv footage.
It seems that I read somewhere that if you are going to combine still photos and dv footage that you have to import the video first or else the resolution of the photos will set the maximum resolution of the whole movie. Is this true?
Thanks,
Artlover13060

Artlover,
Never heard that one before, but what do I know? The following may be totally wrong, but I feel like taking a stab at this, so if I'm wrong, I'm sure I will be quickly pounced on. I believe that iMovie sets a maximum resolution on imported photos, your low quality ones will be used as is, I imagine. They have to be converted to a video format anyway. The video clips will be used as is, but sized as 720X480 to fit your TV screen. Am I right folks?
Forest

Do you have to uninstall premier elements 11 for premier elements 13

1) I have just purchased Adobe photoshop elements 13. I currently have CS5..... Can I use both on my Mac on the "same" HD?
2) I have also purchased Adobe Premier Elements 13. I currently use Premier Elements 11. Can I keep/use Mac Both on the "same" HD?
If you have any suggestions or advice on these 2 questions (before I install) please let me know. Thank You!

Joeysudyka
Please check with the people in the Adobe Photoshop Elements Forum on Photoshop Elements 13 on Yosemite. Barbara
Brundage has much to offer on this.
http://barbarabrundage.com/category/photoshop-elements/
It is my understanding the Premiere Elements 13 does work on Yosemite, but I do not know that first hand. I am strictly an Elements
Windows user. I also believe that the Photoshop Elements Yosemite problems were in 11 and 12, but ot 13. But that need confirmation
OS X 10.10 Yosemite: Will Adobe software work? | conrad chavez | blog
ATR

If i purchase Premier Elements 13 for my 3 macs can I install and use on all 3?

Can a purchase of Premier Elements be used on my iMac and my two MacBooks? They are all within the system requirements

I found it LOL..

Premier Elements. Rcommendation for still photo resolution/size

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for