Scaling shape down makes it look bad

I have a mic stand that when I scale down by shift+dragging looks awful. I'd like it to view the same at both a large and small size. The stroke making up the mic is currently set at 3.
How canI do this? You can see the before and after in the screenshot.
Thanks,

web.boards,
Just on the sideline: you may consider Stroke>Cap>Round Cap for the vertical path for an appearance of roundness rather than flatness.

Similar Messages

Aperture make photos look bad!

Hello,
I use the import and i have all photos in a library,
I click on a picture in the film strip the photo looks great for a few seconds. and it has a loading icon at the top of the preview picture then after its done the photo looks muddy crappy ect...
It does this for all pic in the film strip.
I was hoping uninstalling the program anf reinstalling it would help but it does not.
I also used anouther mac pro with apature on it and it DID not do a thing to the photos, and the photos look just like what i took.
Thanks Ralph

Ralph, have you imported "Raw" images? What you are describing is very typical for Aperture creating new thumbnails and previews from the raw images, when it is loading the image for editing. Unitil you try to edit the image file, Aperture may be using the camera generated preview, that is showing all processing done by the camera, but the raw will not include any camera processing.
Have a look at this thread for a discussion of the differences between camera generated previews and Aperture's previews.
Re: Fine tuning Aperture RAW color import adjustments???

2.2 Gamma makes monitor look bad

Hi, thanks in advance for any info. I've been setting the monitor color and space in system preferences. I've had the "Target White Point" set for native of display, but it looks terrible. Dark, Overstaurated and even the timeline looks dark.
Tried at D65, which looks ok, but it won't be true to the footage. WHat would be the ideal settings please?
On a Dell, 30 in, HD display.
Thanks!

Just get a proper display setup. Computer monitors are useless for this.
What constitutes a "proper display setup"?
A computer that sends a video signal out via a qualified video output device (aka AJA/Blackmagic/Matrox card or box) to a properly adjusted monitor. Viewing/thinking/deciding/talking about ANYTHING else is a waste of time. Yours and (more importantly) mine.
x

Resizing image and looks bad afterward

So image manipulation in java is not my bag. I wrote a program to help save me time with my photography, the idea was that I could point it at a directory and then it would read all the files in that folder that are jpgs and resize them to blog ready sizes. This works really well cept the final images that are produced are not of same quality as say when I used GIMP to resize to the same size/aspect ratio the quality is much different. It looks like its a problem with setting my type perhaps to an only 8bit file? Maybe I am wrong, also goofed with the compression stuff (found code online) to turn the compression to 0 (i.e. no compression)...still no avail. Some code I am using:
    public static BufferedImage scaleImage(BufferedImage image, int imageType,
                 int newWidth, int newHeight) {
             // Make sure the aspect ratio is maintained, so the image is not distorted
             double aspectRatio = (double) image.getWidth() / (double) image.getHeight();
              if(newWidth==-1)
                   newWidth=(int)(newHeight * aspectRatio);
              if(newHeight==-1)
                   newHeight = (int)(newWidth / aspectRatio);
             // Draw the scaled image
             BufferedImage newImage = new BufferedImage(newWidth, newHeight,
                     imageType);
             Graphics2D graphics2D = newImage.createGraphics();
                //I admit little clue as to what im doing with the rendering hints.
             Map map = new HashMap();
             map.put(RenderingHints.KEY_INTERPOLATION,
             RenderingHints.VALUE_INTERPOLATION_BILINEAR);
             map.put(RenderingHints.KEY_RENDERING, RenderingHints.VALUE_RENDER_QUALITY);
             map.put(RenderingHints.KEY_ANTIALIASING, RenderingHints.VALUE_ANTIALIAS_ON);
             RenderingHints hints = new RenderingHints(map);
             graphics2D.setRenderingHints(hints);
             graphics2D.drawImage(image, 0, 0, newWidth, newHeight, null);
             return newImage;
    then the call to it looks like:
public BufferedImage processLandScapeImage(BufferedImage img)
              int width = Integer.valueOf(theHeight.getText()).intValue(); //my desired width
              return scaleImage(img, BufferedImage.TYPE_INT_RGB, width, -1);
         }So this is close, the files dont look bad but alas... they still aren't the same quality. Should I post a sample of what I get with GIMP and what I get with my little program?
Thanks to anyone who has some pointers...
-Shane

If you don't care about the original source BufferedImage, then you should be able to draw the image onto itself in an incremental fashion. That would avoid the use of intermediate images and consequently not throw the OOM.
Also note that the code in that article has a slight hiccup. If you specify you want higher quality and targetWidth > w || targetHeight > h, then you'll get an infinite loop. So it needs to be structured slightly different (indeed, the intermediate images should probably be flushed since they're being draw to and from at least once).
I didn't realize such a task was so non-trivial.If you're not worried about the speed, then I guess the trivial good-result way would be to use Image#getScaledInstance with the area average parameter. It's not so much that it's too slow for normal consumption (it isn't), it's just that the Graphics way is so much faster.
GIMP probably uses a more sophisticated resampling technique like Lanczos or something.

Imported Illustrator type looks bad in Premiere.

I'm making title cards in Adobe Illustrator CS 4 and importing them into Premiere CS 4. When I render the movie, the type looks like crap. Is there something I can do in Illustrator or Premiere to improve the quality?
Thanks in advance for the help.
Jody Radzik

I use AI quite a bit for the creation of all sorts of Shapes in PS to be used in Pr. In PS, I always use these in an image set up to match my Pr Project, i.e. NTSC 720x480 PAR 0.9. These always look very good, when I Import them as .PSD's into Pr.
Exactly what workflow have you used between AI, PS and Pr? What are your Pr Project settings, and what are your image dimensions in PS? Can you attach an example of what is looking bad with your PS image containing AI material? Hint: you'll need to do a Save_As JPEG, but do keep the compression down (higher quality # in PS), and then use the little "camera" icon in the middle of the forum editing screen, NOT the Attach Files dialog box at the bottom.
Good luck,
Hunt

Am I the only one getting bad quality youtube videos when running on LTE? When I'm on wifi they seem fine but I switch to lte it looks bad on the youtube app and on safari.

Am I the only one getting bad quality youtube videos when running on LTE? When I'm on wifi they seem fine but I switch to lte it looks bad on the youtube app and on safari.

I've never had any problems with mine ever. The only freeze I've had was from a file I recorded on tivo, cut commericals out in movie maker and then re-encoded to the lowest possible bit rate that that zens nati've resolution supports. Try turning your sensitivity in the touch pad down. Sometimes if you have it up to high you may have a chance of doing that (although I have only had slow response, instead of a freeze by doing that).
You also have to compare to all of the other products out there: Ipod and Zune are a lot worse with pathetic little problems (annoyances). I didn't pay for tech support?

I subscribed for itunes imatch - it works perfectly on my i-pad and iPhone - however on my macbook - my iTunes can no longer find my songs - i don't know how to make it look to the cloud to play my music

i subscribed for itunes imatch - it works perfectly on my i-pad and iPhone - however on my macbook - my iTunes can no longer find my songs - i don't know how to make it look to the cloud to play my music - i think it keeps trying to find on the external harddrive where i used to keep my music

Of course iTunes is looking for the music on the external HDD. Enabling iTunes Match does not magically change the location of the iTunes library to the cloud.
To play the music either plug the external HDD back into your computer or create a new, empty library to use for streaming the iTM content. The latter can be accomplished by holding down the Option key when launching iTunes, choosing "create library" then enabling iTunes Match on the new library. DO NOT have iTunes scan your HDD for music.

Why does my 24fps look bad on my TV?

I just got the Panasonic AG-HMC150. I have shot some footage at both 1080p24 and 720p24. I transcode the files to Pro Res in FCP and they look pretty good, I realize the panning isn't as smooth as 60i. I drag one of the files into the FCP timeline and let it automatically "optimize my settings" for the sequence. I have verified that it is 23.98fps and field dominance is none. I have tried selecting "share" and going straight to AVCHD from FCP, and also taking the original MTS file, and Apple Pro Res and dropping into Toast and trying that way. The footage just looks choppy, jiddery and unsmooth. I have seen enough movies in my life to know that when they pan, or have cars drive by, that movies 24fps looks a million times better. My Sony HDTV even accepts and displays 24fps, and when I press info on the TV remote when watching one of these AVCHD discs it in fact says 1080 (or 720) 24p. It just looks bad. Even taking the HDMI output from the camera and hooking up to the TV and playing from the camera looks lousy.
What am I doing wrong? I know a ton of post work goes into Hollywood movies, but why does their 24fps look nice and smooth and mine looks horrible? Do I need to render with pulldown in FCP or something. I can't figure it out. Any advice, suggestions?

I transcode through FCP to apple pro res, the files shows up as 1920x1080 24fps. Field dominance is none. I edit the video and then export as quicktime movie using current settings. The Pro Res file says 23.98 when played in quicktime so I know that's good. I simply then drop the file into Toast (10.0.4) and burn blu-ray disc, selecting DVD as the media. I noticed too I need to change the field dominance under the encoding tab in Toast to progressive, as automatic doesn't work. It only burns the top half of the image. Regardless, when I make these discs and play them on PS3, my TV's info says 1080/24p. Maybe my eyes aren't use to seeing 24fps. Does it sound like I am doing anything wrong in my workflow/encoding process.
Again, good tip on the shutter speed Jerry.

Problem syncronizing my iPod Shuffle. iTunes makes it look like I have 2.

I have a new iPod generation 2 Shuffle. For some reason wnem I connect it to my USB port, it makes it look like I have 2 different iPod Shuffles. The first one shown under iTunes is as I registered it and says "Brad's iPod". The second one just says "iPod", yet shows the same serial number as shown under the first one with my name. I keep getting an error message when the second pops up and says that it seems that the iPod is corrupted and suggests I select the option to reset everything as it was with original factory settings. It prevents mefrom synchronizing my iPod.
Why is this doing this? Is there anyway to delete the second "instance" of the iPod being shown under the name of simply "iPod"? Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks!
Brad

Hello,
I am currently an owner of an iPod Touch 4th generation, running IOS 6.1.2. I will be glad to help solve your problem with your iPod/iPad/or iPhone.
Restart the Computer?
Reset iPod/iPad/or iPhone:
Hard Reset: Hold down the Sleep/Wake and Home buttons on your iPod/iPad/or iPhone for at least 10 seconds, or until Apple logo appears
Hope that helps!
If none of the above solutions work, could you please reply back as soon as possible, as I will try to find another solution to your problem.
Sincerely,
Pizza98704
(Parts of this message was copied and pasted --> I have a document all ready to go)
Some Helpful Links:
Apple Support Link: http://www.apple.com/support/contact/
Genius Bar of an Apple Store: http://www.apple.com/retail/geniusbar/

Quick, easy ways to make images look better?

What are the best ways to make images look a bit better? I shot my footage using a pretty bad camera, so quality already isn't the greatest, but what is the best way to make images look a bit more "movie-like"? The 3way color correstion is nothing for me, it's too hard to make images look good, they'll quickly turn too yellow or red, etc... Something to improve contrast maybe? Using Image Control: Brightness and contrast (bezier) doesn't seem to help much.

Okay, I took a couple of screenshots:
http://www.majhost.com/gallery/TheDarkBrickX/Random/film/afbeelding_1.png
http://www.majhost.com/gallery/TheDarkBrickX/Random/film/afbeelding_2.png
http://www.majhost.com/gallery/TheDarkBrickX/Random/film/afbeelding_3.png
http://www.majhost.com/gallery/TheDarkBrickX/Random/film/afbeelding_4.png
Now I don't know alot about image quality or color, but I think there is not enough contrast? It all looks very cold. Luckily, image quality isn't the most important thing in this project, but it would be nice to be able to touch it up a little bit.

Fonts look bad in OSX jagged text

Hello
I thought apple gave us font smoothing in OSX! My fonts look terrible in QuarkXpress6.0. Is this what I have to look forward to? I miss my ATM.
I did the "font smoothing thing" in appearence-no change.
Also will all my older fonts from when I used OS 7 +8, will these still work in OSX? and by Quark XPress?
Please enlighten me!
all fonts look bad; Goudy old style, bellvue etc. (postscript type 1)
imac G5 Mac OS X (10.4.4) 21" screen

if I zoom out in Quark to view document at say 125% the 45 pt type really looks bad
Hmm. I'm unable to duplicate your problem. I've pasted some random text into Quark, sized it to 45 pt and set the zoom to 125%. No matter if I go up or down, the fonts look very smooth with both Goudy Old Style and News Gothic (I have the Adobe version, not MT, which is from MonoType). Well, if I look real close, I can see a little bit of jaggies around curves. But nothing very noticable.
Is your 21" monitor a CRT or LCD? LCD always produce the best image when used at their native resolution. A CRT's best display varies depending on whether it has a shadow mask or aperture grill tube. If your monitor has an independent control for sharpening, it may be too high.
I have some fonts installed that I don't know where they came from ex: News Gothic MT (Microsoft I think) Will these view and print okay in any program?
As long as it's a standard Mac suitcase style TrueType font, or a complete and proper Type 1 PostScript font, it should just as well as any other.
I keep all my fonts in classic folder and manage w/font book (thats another story) It seems that my classic apps, Illustrator, see most of the fonts all the time eventhough I turned many off in fontbook. Also illustrator doesn't see ALL the fonts.
That's a handful. When it comes to Classic, the rules are a little different. Fonts you manually place into the OS 9 Fonts folder, or are put there by the OS when activating them from Font Book with OS 9 as the choice to be activated for, fonts are then available to both Classic and OS X.
If you deactivate them in Font Book, the fonts will become unavailable to OS X apps. However, any Classic apps will continue to see them until you shut down all OS 9 applications and Classic. In other words, once you open fonts for Classic, they can't be closed to Classic without shutting the entire environment down. Confused yet?
As far as Illustrator not seeing all the fonts, that relates to this part of your question:
Please explain the limitations of classic apps and fonts.
Classic can use any fonts that were in existence for the Mac before OS X. All of your older Mac TrueType and Type 1 PostScript fonts will work in OS X and Classic. Fonts that will work as is in OS X that you couldn't use before on a Mac are PC TrueType fonts. If you have copied any of the OS X .dfonts into the OS 9 Fonts folder, those will not work. A .dfont is a variation of a TrueType font, with the data in the data fork rather than the resource fork as they are with the older Mac TrueType fonts. Neither OS 9 or any Classic apps can read these fonts. Those are likely the ones not showing up in Illustrator.
It sounds like you do a lot of work with fonts. While Apple has improved Font Book quite a bit in Tiger, it's still very much a consumer font manager for those who handle fonts only occasionally. You'd be much better off using a font manager such as Suitcase X1 or Font Agent Pro.

Elance for mac stuff? convert XLS - Numbers and make it look good

I often use elance.com for small projects. I have a project to convert some XLS sheets to Numbers. One of the main purposes is to make it look better, so I need a consulant who not only knows how to use numbers but understands design.
is there a group like elance but more mac focused...in order to get bids? or a few groups i should look at for small projects like this?
Also, as an aside, has anyone made a plug in for Excel so it can import numbers and actually work like numbers (ie, i know i can covert numbers to excel, but i really wish numbers was also available on the PC, barring that at least some plug in or somthing close?)

There is no Excel plugin available to decipher Numbers documents.
Given the past behaviour of M…Soft, I would be surprised if they offer one some day.
Apple always made a serious work to allow its customers to import/export M…Soft created files but there was no effort of this kind in the other world.
I would be surprised too if a Window version of Numbers was delivered one day.
Apple development resources aren't large enough to allow them to waste these resources on such a project.
At this time, it seems that they have some difficulties to maintain the two versions (mac and iPad) of iWork applications so, it would be very bad news for users of these products if they move some engineers on such a new task.
Yvan KOENIG (VALLAURIS, France) jeudi 19 août 2010 17:30:02

FileSystemTree and "ordinary" Tree - make them look the same?

Hi,
I wondered if anyone's worked with Adobe AIR's FileSystemTree and the "ordinary" Tree in Adobe Flex, making them look the same? If so, can you give me some hints on how to make them look the same when it comes to icons, disclosure icons, branches, leafs etc.?
The reason I'm asking is this:
Some time ago I decided it'd be nice to build a sort of FTP Client with Adobe AIR. The client would, among other things, have a tree for local folders and a tree for remote folders. It seemed ideal to use the FileSystemTree for the tree containing local folders. The tree with remote folders is built using the "ordinary" Tree with data supplied via a Microsoft .NET Web Service. However, once I started down this road I soon realized the two controls don't look and behave the same (even though FileSystemTree apparently derives from Tree).
Some examples:
- Tree seems to use easing when opening a folder. FileSystemTree just "opens it".
- FileSystemTree displays a disclosure arrow icon regardless of whether or not a directory has children. Haven't got the Tree to display the same icon when a remote directory is empty.
Any help would be appreciated! I'd also like to point out that I'm quite new to both AIR and Flex so maybe the problems I see are actually easy to solve.
//Marcus

There is no bookmarks tab, expect you are referring to the bookmarks menu on the menu bar ("File, Edit, View, History, Bookmarks, Tools, Help") on your XP system.
Once your restore your menus on you Window 7 system, you can get rid of the bookmarks button. After going through the 10 steps below your toolbars on your Windows 7 system will be more usable again and like your XP system, none of which has anything to do with Sync.
You can make '''Firefox 6.0.1''' look like Firefox 3.6.*, see numbered '''items 1-10''' in the following topic [http://dmcritchie.mvps.org/firefox/firefox-problems.htm#fx4interface Fix Firefox 4.0 toolbar user interface, problems (Make Firefox 4.0 thru 8.0, look like 3.6)]. ''Whether or not you make changes, you should be aware of what has changed and what you have to do to use changed or missing features.''
* http://dmcritchie.mvps.org/firefox/firefox-problems.htm#fx4interface
the first 9 steps above are basic toolbar customization the following link is in step #1 above. (See before/after picture (.png) in the footnote)
*How do I customize the toolbars? | How to | Firefox Help
*:https://support.mozilla.com/en-US/kb/how-do-i-customize-toolbars
<br><small>Please mark "Solved" one answer that will best help others with a similar problem -- hope this was it.</small>
There is a lot more beyond those first 10 steps listed, if you want to make Firefox more functional.
Before and after customizations, the following also includes [http://dmcritchie.mvps.org/firefox/firefox-problems.htm#fx4styles styling changes] besides rearranging toolbars and toolbar items.
* http://dmcritchie.mvps.org/icons/fx4toolbars.png
*:Bookmarks toolbar -- [http://userstyles.org/styles/46947 Bookmarks Toolbar Fx4 Blue/Folders, Red/Bookmarks]
*:Tab borders -- [http://userstyles.org/styles/24728 Tab Color Underscoring active/read/unread (Fx3.6)] red=active tab, blue=read, green=unread, magenta(not shown)=loading

Linux copy the Mac Dock to make it looks like MAC! But what's Apple doing?

When I'm disappointed at PCs, it's not only because of Microsoft's Windows, but also millions of so-called different PCs only with the same Windows system inside. So I wanna to look for a new computer with unique features, I think Mac is the best choice I can never find. But now I'm annoyed that Linux are copying Mac from Mac Dock, and using some themes to make Linux look like a 'real' Mac!? Then what's Apple doing about it? Just standing by and making Linux themselves? Apple does not mind about it? Mac Dock isn't Apple's? If Linux are all with MAC OS X copying-features, then what's MAC OS X? Who will know, when millions of computer with a Mac Dock Linux, who will remenber that the DOCK is apple's? Maybe people will think: MAC OS X? just a Linux-outlook system! OH~GOD!! At that time what's the difference between MAC and Linux? And what's the difference between MAC and PC? Millions of computers with the same outlooking system as MAC? OH~NO!! I wanna Apple to give me a full answer about this!!
Message was edited by: Weida

If you are really worried about the looks of things like the dock being in linux vs mac, there is no type of Computing device that can save you.
Apple may have patents and trademarks, but even if someone made a window manager that cloned os x's gui completely, it would not have the underlying power that goes with it. Linux is similar to Darwin, but osx's implementation of a gui is nearly flawless in my opinion. I am a linux admin by trade. I used to run linux desktops. i struggled for years to find a gui that worked well on linux, because I needed the power that goes with it from the command line / mem usage etc. Then enter my first mac purchase with a macbook pro I bought on the whim last year. Wait.. can it be true? A powerfully flexible freebsdish system (darwin) underneath a gui that is fast, efficient, and actually works?! Plus hardware that knock on wood in my luck rarely goes bad, plus rarely crashes unless it's a third party tool? Gasp and egads.
That is why Apple does not have to worry. I love linux. I love os X. Linux is making breakthroughs with desktop goals, but until they redo Xorg to not be the suck it can be, I will stick with my os X. As will most of the other linux / bsd geeks in my office who are mac converts (bout 6 of us overall, theres only roughly 10 admins besides myself that are technical).
It's not that they don't care. It's that for intents and purposes, it doesn't need to.

DV clips look bad, good when converted to H.264 in QuickTime and reimported

Still a problem after 7.0.1:
DV camera -> iMovie 08 -> looks bad when playing and exporting/sharing
DV camera -> iMovie 08 -> "reveal in finder" -> clip opened in QuickTime -> looks good -> export as H.264 -> re-import to iMovie 08 -> looks good when playing and exporting/sharing.
In plain words: Importing DV clips from my DV camera into iMovie gives bad results when playing and exporting/sharing. Have tried everything, but the clips look blurry and not sharp at all. The actual DV clip in the events folder looks sharp and clear.
If I take the very same DV clip from the events folder ("reveal in finder"), open it in QuickTime, export it as H.264 and then re-import to iMovie 08, it looks brilliant, retaining the quality the DV clip in the events folder has.
Why can't the DV clips look good in the first place? What is it that iMovie 08 does to these poor clips? Some have suggested re-encoding, re-rendering and so on, but if I do just that in QuickTime and re-import it to iMovie 08, it still looks razor sharp and crystal clear. No reason that iMovie 08 shouldn't handle the DV file in the same manner.
Some have suggested that this is because iMovie 08 internally re-encodes to AIM or H.264, enabling edits with different kinds of formats, but if I do this myself in QuickTime before importing to iMovie 08, the problem isn't there!
If this is difficult to achieve, why not add the option of importing from a DV camera as H.264 and not DV? That would make my day!
(I have posted this to Apple using the feedback menu item in iMovie 08.)
(Background here in these threads:)
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1088568
Sample clips in Apple TV format here:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=5173005

iMovie '08 stores rendered projects in H.264 form. This happens when you render to the Media Browser. The rendered file(s) (you can have several different sizes) are in the iMovie '08 project package. The original flies in your Events folders stay in whatever format they were in.
Yes, the movies exported to the Media Browser use the H.264 format, the same as iMovie HD 5/6 did when we exported using the presets Email, Web, Web Streaming and CD-ROM. They were all H.264 too. Apple is obviously putting the (powerful) H.264 to good use to prepare movies for Web pages and other purposes.
As you know, the Full Quality export in 5/6 was to the project's native format, which varied according to the type of project. For DV projects, that was DV video. Everything was converted to DV when imported into the project, and to preserve the original quality we could export to a Full Quality DV movie.
There is nothing like that in iMovie 7, at least that I've seen. As you said, nothing is converted to a "native format" when imported to the project. (Still images are added to the project's single Apple Photo - JPEG "Still Images" movie, which is a nice twist.)
So I think of iMovie 7 as having no "native" format, but a nicely-designed path for using H.264 as the delivery format. The Media Browser — a virtual library of movies with no shared place — is a nice invention.
When I export slideshow movies in DV format out of FotoMagico I always select 'Best' and it DOES make a difference in iDVD.
I think of iMovie 7's problem with DV as more profoundly flawed. Exporting ANY DV video that's in the project to DV or ANY OTHER format is messed up. It's the handling of the DV inside iMovie that's messed up, not just the export to DV.
My guess is — and it's only a guess — that FotoMagico's Best setting adjusts the content of the image delivered for iDVD. Put another way, it prepares an image that works best with iDVD's own encoding algorithms.
One long-standing diappointment I've had with iLife is that Apple has never coordinated the image it prepares for iDVD with what(ever) iDVD does best. It's as if the programmers never talk to each other. iMovie engineers have never asked the iDVD engineers how best to deliver the image to deliver the best quality on the DVD.
Given Apple's emphasis on H.264, one would think that iDVD would be written to embrace any H.264 video and deliver great quality on the DVD. It doesn't. And with iLife '08 it doesn't even embrace iMovie's own DV exports!
I suppose Blu-Ray will change all that, but for now we're stuck with a version of iLife that can't deliver a quality DVD of our home movies.
Karl

Scaling shape down makes it look bad

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for