Resolution is iMovie is always better than any other exported version

Hi folks -
I've used iMovie to make a few montages (photos/music/some video). When I watch the "movie" on iMovie it looks great - crisp, high resolution. But when I choose any format to compress it to, even the highest resolution, it is automatically degraded. Is there any way I can save the final cut in a resolution that won't lose image quality? Right now I've been keeping the iMovie working file on my hard drive (taking up a ridiculous amount of space) because it's the best way to watch it.
Any input would be greatly appreciated.

even the highest resolution, it is automatically degraded
No. Exporting from iMovie 6.0.3/4 (other versions like iMovie 4.0.1 may behave differently...) via File > Export > QuickTime > Full Quality preserves all quality of a iMovie DV project.
I archive my edited iMovie clips as <9 min 30 sec clips exported this way as .dv files.
Exporting to tape also preserves all quality but then you may get some dropped frames...
...by default QuickTime Player has low quality deinterlaced playback of DV-encoded clips -- you have to turn on high quality playback of the clip to see all quality. In QT 7 you do this via enabling "Window/Show Movie Properties/Video Track/Visual Settings/High Quality" setting -- do not enable "Single Field" or "Deinterlace" because they deinterlace playback. You can also set "QuickTime Player 7/Preferences.../General/Use high quality video setting when available" to check the "High Quality" box by default (notice that the "Single Field" or "Deinterlace" boxes may have been saved to the file so sometimes you must take care to uncheck them).

Similar Messages

  • Is the macbook pro much better than any other laptop?

    I am currently wanting to buy a laptop, I am deciding whether to buy a macbook pro or just a regular laptop. Is it really worth it to spend so much more?
    Thank you! ~ mtumbler

    Don't forget where you're asking that question. 
    Since nearly all people here have Macs, we obviously felt they were worth the price.  "Much better than any other laptop" is a fairly subjective statement.  All the major manufacturers have excellent high-end options.  When comparing prices, you need to compare similar specifications and quality.  You can certainly get cheaper PC computers, but similarly spec'd machines with similar build quality are generally around the same price (and actually sometimes somewhat higher).
    The areas that most of us would agree puts Apple at the top are OS X, quality/design, and customer service.  Only Macs can run OS X.  For those of us that use OS X, we typically prefer it over Windows (by quite a bit).  However, this isn't always a positive for someone moving over from Windows.  There is a little bit of a learning curve.  If you are going to need to be able to do everything you want, you need to understand that it might take a little time to figure everything out.  You can install Windows alongside the Mac OS to help make the transition a little easier, but that requires that you purchase a copy of Windows.  So far as quality and design...  Apple has always been a leader in this area.  However, as I had mentioned earlier, most major manufacturers have caught up in this area... at least with respect to their high-end offerings.  It's really a matter of preference in terms of which you like more.  No one offers the same level of customer service that you'll get from Apple.  No other manufacturer has retail stores like Apple where you can go in with your machine and have someone (who knows about Apple products) check out your machine on the spot.  Their phone support is also excellent and their user support community (where you're at now) is second to none.
    So... most of us would agree that we feel Apple products are "better".  But if you were to go to a typica PC forum and ask the same question, you'll find people who would argue fanatically that they're not.  The reality is that there isn't that much of a difference in the hardware.  You need to decide if something like the OS (which you probably don't have much experience using), design, and support are important to you.

  • Is the resolution on the iPad mini retina better than any other retina?

    The 1st gen iPad mini had the same resolution as ipad 2. Becasue the mini is smaller than the 2 the pixels were denser.
    So my question is... Is the resolution on the iPad mini retina better or denser than other retina screens found on other devices?
    Thanks
    Lionel

    Try resetting the iPad (hold the home and power buttons down until the Apple logo appears).
    Barry

  • I was just wondering if Siri will ever come out to the iPod touch maybe on the next update but I love apple like so much it is way better than any other company! But I was just wondering because Siri is so cool and I want to try her out

    I was just wondering because
    I have always loved apple and then
    I got my I pod touch and then
    I found out about Siri I have
    Always wanted to play with her
    Ever sence I found out! So i
    Just wanted to ask you
    guys from apple  

    Apple itself does not respond to questions on the Apple Support Communities forums.  Responses come from other Mac users like yourself.  We don't know what Apple plans on doing but I am not sure the iPod Touch has the computing power to do Siri.

  • Iphone "better" than any Nokia?

    Well, it is not an easy subject since there are many "religious" Nokia fans on this forum. The information I will give is objective, and based on my experienced with both brands. First of all, the simplity of Iphones compared to symbian and windows mobile (is also a HTC user), are like 2 different worlds. In USA, Africa and other contries, the inhabitants are analphabets. Iphone is genious since it only have 1 button (the on/ plus volume is extra). it has extremely self explained symbols on the screen. That make it easy to use both for ordinary analphabets, but also for "technical" analphabets. The second is that you easely can change many language and tastateur input. If you choose chinese you can also chose to "draw" the chinese letters on the screen!!!
    Symbian and windows mobile are to difficult to use. I see other places in this forum that the discussion is about if Iphone is a smartphone or not! What a waste of time! I also have a N97 that stopped to work after one week. The display got extremely hot (almost fire). The tastateur can be used, but N97 is badly constructed! I can not get acess to all symbols on the tastateur, I need to have the display. So, is Nokia still your favourite?

    Iphone "better" than any Nokia? ur title really took me off, Its really a big bold statement u get fascinated towards a mobile phone which is good in "technical" analphabets" not technically good 
    Iphone is Locked towards a Single provider who doesn't allow the Phone to tether with the computer and not allows u to send a MMS, well Iphone got the Features finally i am talking about but how to explore it real Bummer
    People say Jailbreak ur Iphone u will come to know what it is capable of doing, last thing i want to do after buying a costly "wood"  is to Jailbreak it to know what it can offer to me another Bummer
    Ur daughter's Nokia mobile was soaped for 45 mins after which u took it and opened it cleaned and made it to run again first u will void ur cell phone's warranty and can u do the same to ur Iphone
    I see other places in this forum that the discussion is about if Iphone is a smartphone or not! What a waste of time! I also have a N97 that stopped to work after one week. The display got extremely hot (almost fire). The tastateur can be used, but N97 is badly constructed! I can not get acess to all symbols on the tastateur, I need to have the display. So, is Nokia still your favourite?
    N97 is badly constructed, there are lot of N97 buyers who purchased for it solid,Robust design and found it to be great there was not even a single complaint that the Build quality was not Satisfying or clunky
    Sorry for ur display becoming Hot could be a hardware defect which neeeds to be checked and inspected in a Nokia care center or u can ask for a replacement
    Rest of what an iphone cannot do for a basic user who wants his mobile to do such basic things was justified by Grschinon very well
    At last YES Nokia is my favourite for lot of reasons
    If a reply has solved your problem click Accept as solution button, doing it will help others know the solution. Thanks.

  • The sound of the ringtone is of lower quality than any other. I've tested it, and its happens to more people. What's it's the solution? Can I communicate this problem to apple?

    The sound of the ringtone is of lower quality than any other. I've tested it, and its happens to more people. What's it's the solution? Can I communicate this problem to apple?

    You can let Apple know here - http://www.apple.com/feedback/

  • IMovie capture quality better than anything FCP can offer for consumer DV?

    As a newbie to FCP, I have not found Capture, sequence, and export settings that is equal to or better than what iMovie 08 can create. Prior to this, I've been using iMovie 08 which is extremely user friendly. Just plug in the fire wire connections and it auto detects only one setting for DV. I am not sure what format it captures in but it does a good job. When I export out of iMovie 08 I use "using Quicktime" and choose the Uncompressed 8-bit NTSC method. The result is a decent, non-interlaced looking .mov file.
    The first time I tried to capture with FCP I chose the easy setup, where I would capture in the NTSC DV, sequence would be NTSC DV and export using the current settings in quicktime. The result was an interlaced and lowered quality vid.
    I have also tried the following combinations with no success with quality comparisons w/ iMovie 08:
    capt: NTSC dv, seq: NTSC DV, progressive exp: Uncompressed 8-bit
    capt: Uncompressed 8-bit, seq: Uncompressed 8-Bit exp: Uncompressed 8-bit
    This last one came close, but still iMovie 08 was better.
    My assumption is that FCP would contain the settings to duplicate or even out perform iMovie's export quality for consumer video dv. I viewed iMovie as little brother and FCP as big brother. Shouldn't FCP produce equal to or better quality than iMovie 08? And what are the settings for this?
    Thanks

    Thank you for clearing up my confusion. How is my export from iMovie 08, using "Uncompressed 8-bit" coming out progressive (I see no interlaced, odd/even scan lines)? Is this export dropping lines/information? If so, uncompressed is not an appropriate name for the export.
    I understand what you are saying about "getting quality back" on export. My initial question was comparing the quality of an iMovie 08 export vs. FCP export and having the problem of a lowered output from the FCP export.
    If anyone has the time, would they try a short experiment:
    1. From your DV source, camera or deck connect to your computer
    Capture a short clip via iMovie 08 a short clip in standard 4:3.
    Export using Quicktime, Uncompressed 8-bit setting
    2. From your DV source, camera or deck, connect to your computer.
    Capture the same short clip to FCP using Easy set up for NTSC DV. Export with current settings.
    3. Compare the two.

  • Why Oracle than any other database?

    Just needs the inputs .........
    What makes Oracle database better than other.
    What are the features that makes Oracle as the preferred database.
    Recently One Pre-Sales guy from Sybase asked me why Oracle and not Sybase or any other Db.
    How to handle such questions......

    Lock escalation. There is no such concept in Oracle. Can you lock a million rows in Sybase using a row lock alone and still allow concurrency for other sessions to also lock a million rows? If you commit a million row transaction, how long does it take in Sybase? In Oracle, locking one row or a million rows has the same overheads - there are no overheads. Commit a transaction, be that a one row transaction or a million row transaction, it is equally fast (and usually sub-second).
    In Sybase readers block writers and writers block readers. Which means that for readers not to be blocked, they need to read uncommitted (dirty) data. In Oracle, readers never block writers and writers never block readers - and the data delivered via a read is always consistent.
    Scalability. No other vendor has anything like the shared everything cluster technology from Oracle called Real Application Clusters.
    And this is just scratching the surface. Sybase is technically inferior to Oracle. And that is just a plain fact.
    Once sat with a couple of Ingres engineers that were flown out from the UK to fix some serious bugs. Invariable we got talking about db features and they "us too" when I mentioned an Oracle feature. Only I knew that they had no real concept of what the Oracle feature entails and that the so-called equivalent Ingres feature does maybe at best 50% of what the Oracle feature does.
    So I showed them instead something simple. Or so I thought. I did a 'SELECT count(*) FROM table' on our data warehouse platform (and old HP box) on the largest fact table. It returned the answer of 700+ million rows in far less than 30 seconds.
    Their reaction? First stunned and then the question, "Is this a required feature for the database?", implying that it too can be done (hacked?) in Ingres, should the customer require such a fast select on such a huge table.
    No idiot - it is not a requirement. It is simply how Oracle works out of the box when used correctly.
    IMO, it is not even worth getting into these feature vs. feature matches with these 3rd party database experts. They do not want to understand what makes Oracle technically superior than their product.
    Read the Sybase DBA manual.. or Ingres DBA manual.. or SQL-Server DBA manual. Look at the sections that deal with performance tips and hints. It is fricken scary. And stuff that you will never ever have to deal with in Oracle as it is simply not a problem in Oracle.

  • In what way Exchange Server 2013 archiving is better than the other 3rd party application ?

    Hi All,
    Can anyone here please share some thoughts and comments regarding of which feature of Exchange Server 2013 archiving is better than the 3rd Party application like Symantec Enterprise Vault ?
    Any comments and suggestion would be greatly appreciated.
    Thanks
    /* Server Support Specialist */

    It's free.
    Ed Crowley MVP "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems."
    yes, as long as we are using the Exchange Server 2013 Enterprise Edition.
    /* Server Support Specialist */

  • IPhoto 6.0.3 (293) Performance Worse Than Any Other Version

    Interesting. I have 9,990 photos and my iPhoto 6 just came to a crawl. I have 1.5GB of memory. Something is definitely wrong. When I start iPhoto it appears to behave normally for about 30 seconds.
    I've read many of the other speed/performance/slow threads in this forum. Here's what I've tried:
    I have all my Rolls collapsed. After doing a couple transactions (eg: scrolling up/down or editing one picture), iPhoto freezes.
    When this happens I'll open Activity Monitor and find my dual CPUs pegged at about 97%.
    I've rebuilt my library, my small thumbnails, my large thumbnails, loaded IPLM (iPhoto Library Manager) and rebuilt the library using its copy function, and I've even moved my library to another volume. Nothing has worked. I've even run Disk Warrior against my volume that hosts iPhoto, reset permissions and run Disk Utility and verified that the hard drive is OK. I've also removed my iPhoto preference file. Nothing has helped.
    I'm beside myself.
    I'm currently running a manual rebuild test (UGGGH!!!!!) to see it's a problem with my existing library's data (i.e. corruption?) or my instance of iPhoto.
    (NOTE: a smaller, newer library helps but I don't want to lose my meta data. That's, frankly, the most important feature of iPhoto for my wife and me.)
    I've never heard the fans on my Dual G4 PPC (mirror door model) run so loudly. Of course, I've rebooted several times too.
    If anyone has any other suggestions, please let me know. I have a backup but I feer the backup contains the same, assumed, corrupt files as my active volume.
    Dual 1.25GHz G4 PowerPC Mac OS X (10.4.6)

    G4Monster:
    Have you tried rebuilding the library with iPLM and it's File->Rebuild Library... menu option? That create a new, library, copying the files and rebuilding the database, etc.? Or is that what you meant by "using its copy function,"?
    If you find you have to create new libraries in the end, there is a way to preserve the comments and keywords. See Tutorial #1 on how to preserve them.

  • I have two very similar iMacs but one performs better than the other.  Any ideas?

    I have the latest Premier CC on two systems, my 27" i7 iMac w/16 GB RAM at home, and a 27" Retina i5 iMac w/32GB RAM at work.  Both are running Yosemite but I don't quite get the performance on my home system as at work.  Both are using Mercury openGL.  The graphics cards look comparable, far as I can tell -- both have 2GB vram.  So the only thing left I can think of is the RAM but before I go spend that money and kill myself if it doesn't make any difference, anybody have any thoughts?

    Hi Scott, thanks for the quick reply.  I chatted with an Adobe support person who said the extra RAM would only make a difference in "Mercury playback software only" mode.  (Of course, this is the same support person who said, unequivocally that "...rendering is always necessary, sir" just after I'd told him that I never have to render on my office system, just my home system, so I'm skeptical he really knew what he was talking about...thus, I'm here in the forum now!)
    ANYWAY...sorry to be so lame, but could you clarify how to set cache disk settings?  I found memory allocation prefs -- it was set for 12 GB for Premiere, 4 for everything else.  I changed it to 13 premiere/3 everything else -- which is all it would allow me to do -- but it doesn't seem to have made a difference.  Also, it behaves the same way even if I'm running no other apps at all so not sure the background tasks diagnosis is a factor, but I could absolutely be confused about some key thing you're talking about!

  • The quality of built-in camera on macbook pro with retina display is far worse than any other mac. Why?

    I just got the new macbook pro with retina display like a week ago and I've been noticing that the quality of the built-in camera on it is so bad.
    It's even worse than my 2009 iMac or my sister's 2012 13" macbook pro. I don't get why this is a facetime HD built-in camera when i can obviously see that is not even near HD. Or is it just my computer. Do i have to bring it to the apple store??

    it's advertised 720p so yes it is the same as all the other MBP.  it may just be the resolution of your monitor is stretching the pixels.  Don't worry about bringing it to the apple store. 

  • Firefox is supposed to be faster - it's far slower than any other version & I'm going to back to Explorer - this is too much & it keeps crashing!. Is anything going to be sorted soon?

    It is now so slow to load pages - I can have coffee and then maybe a page has loaded. Otherwise it's "embarrassed" because it cannot load pages/ bookmarks. This version is terrible - can you not put back the previous version till you've sorted out the problems?

    I don't know anything about that.  But I googled it and found this post in another forum -
    "I have more info on the issue at hand.
    The RDTSC instruction has, until recently, been an excellent high-resolution, low-overhead way of getting CPU timing information. With the advent of multi-core/hyperthreaded CPUs, systems with multiple CPUs, and "hibernating" operating systems, RDTSC often no longer provides reliable results. The issue has two components: rate of tick and whether all cores (processors) have identical values in their time-keeping registers. There is no longer any promise that the timestamp counters of multiple CPUs on a single motherboard will be synchronized. So, you can no longer get reliable timestamp values unless you lock your program to using a single CPU. Even then, the CPU speed may change due to power-saving measures taken by the OS or BIOS, or the system may be hibernated and later resumed (resetting the time stamp counter).
    I might be understanding this wrong but... Basically both RDTSC and QPC are used to time code in time-sensitive programs. However, RDTSC might be inaccurate in above described situations. I also might be wrong about this but I believe QPC has something to do with the HPET high precision event timer. Which is a more accurate timer.
    So this might explain why RDTSC and QPC has a delta that is too high. And if all of what I said above is true, then this error is benign."
    This signature left intentionally blank.

  • One USB port works better than the other

    I have a brand new 2011 MBP i5.  I just bought a Microsoft USB mouse and noticed that it works significantly better when plugged into one of the usb ports verses the other.  Any idea on if this is a peripheral problem or a MBP hardware problem?  Thanks!

    I appreciate the help.
    Here is what it says under More info - USB
    USB High-Speed Bus:
      Host Controller Location:          Built-in USB
      Host Controller Driver:          AppleUSBEHCI
      PCI Device ID:          0x1c26
      PCI Revision ID:          0x0005
      PCI Vendor ID:          0x8086
      Bus Number:          0xfd
    Hub:
      Product ID:          0x2513
      Vendor ID:          0x0424  (SMSC)
      Version:           b.b3
      Speed:          Up to 480 Mb/sec
      Location ID:          0xfd100000 / 2
      Current Available (mA):          500
      Current Required (mA):          2
    Microsoft® Nano Transceiver v2.0:
      Product ID:          0x0745
      Vendor ID:          0x045e  (Microsoft Corporation)
      Version:           6.34
      Speed:          Up to 12 Mb/sec
      Manufacturer:          Microsoft
      Location ID:          0xfd120000 / 4
      Current Available (mA):          500
      Current Required (mA):          100
    IR Receiver:
      Product ID:          0x8242
      Vendor ID:          0x05ac  (Apple Inc.)
      Version:           0.16
      Speed:          Up to 1.5 Mb/sec
      Manufacturer:          Apple Computer, Inc.
      Location ID:          0xfd110000 / 3
      Current Available (mA):          500
      Current Required (mA):          100

  • Why are RMAs always rendered behind any other Annotation (e. g. Watermark) on the page?

    I cannot seem to get an RMA be played in front of another Annotation on the page, even if the RMA is added after the other Annotation (and the indirect object reference of the RMA goes after the other one in the /Annots array of the page dictionary). As an example, if there is a watermark on the page, it is rendered on top of (that is, overlaying) the activated RMA which is not what I want. Is there a way to force RMAs to be rendered in front of other annotations?

    Inactive RMAs are treated as page content, so any regular annotations (or layers such as watermarks) will naturally go over them. You can put inactive RMAs into OCGs and stack them among other stuff on the page, as you're only seeing the  poster image.
    Active RMAs always bubble to the top of the display stack, with one exception - a watermark can still appear above an active RMA provided the watermark has the scaling option turned on.

Maybe you are looking for