Secondary Display image quality is poor (at 1:1) in Library module

I'm not a frequent user of the Secondary Display feature, so I can't say state whether this particular issue is new in 2.3RC or if it also was seen in a previous version. I submitted a bug report since I searched but did not find any previous mention of this sort of thing. Anyone else notice this?
Here's my problem: When I'm using LR's Develop module and activate the Secondary Display (SD) window, the SD images for all zoom ratios seem identical in quality (sharpness. color) to the images seen in the main screen--as expected. However when I switch over to Library module and use 1:1 zoom, the SD image becomes relatively degraded (i.e., quite blurry/pixelated) compared to the main window. When SD is set at the lower zoom ratios (still in Library module) its quality seems fine--i.e., more or less indistinguishable from the main screen. It's only when SD is used at 1:1 in the Library module that it appears "buggy".
I'm using a Mac Power PC G4, OSX 10.4.11.
Phil
P.S. I should mention that the image quality at 1:1 zoom in Library Module's Secondary Display is not only worse than the main Library screen, it's also significantly worse (less sharp) than seen in the Develop module--and that's certainly not unexpected.

>Gordon McKinney:What happens is the second display doesn't render a 1:1 for optimal sharpness.
For me it isn't just sharpness. I can make a change that is fairly radical and have it show up immediately in the main monitor--both in the navigation panel and in the main display panel. The image on the 2nd monitor remains unchanged.
If I then use the history panel to move back to the previous state and then re-select the final state the image on the secondary display
usually, not always gets updated. Sometimes it takes a 2nd or a third cycle from previous to latest history state. This 'missed update' in the 2nd monitor doesn't happen 100% of the time, but it does happen quite often.
LR 2.3RC, Vista Ultimate x64, 8GB DRAM, nVidia 9800 GTX+ with latest drivers.

Similar Messages

  • Pearl 8220 camera image quality is poor, poor, poor

    The photo image quality of the camera on my BB Pearl 8220 is extremely grainy and dark.
    I understand this is a cell phone camera and expectations are low to begin with, but this is unacceptably low quality.  The flash appears to function properly but that doesn't matter because the image quality is poor even for pictures taken in full sunlight.  
    Are there camera adjustments or settings that I haven't found that can remedy this problem?  The ones I HAVE found have had no effect.
    Thanks for any help.

    i've taken some good pics with our phones...
    I did notice that you need to be extremely steady (no built in "camera shake"), but other than that, its all been good. 
    I used the options to make the pics as large as possible too; but I do that with our digital camera as well.  I use Paint Shop to edit them on our PC.
    Where there is a will, there is a way...
    If there is no way; there is always a bigger hammer.

  • Loss of display image quality when fit to screen

    Hi everyone,
    I've noticed that when I'm editing with PSE and have the view set so that the photo fits the screen (which means, it's very much zoomed out), the quality of the photo suffers.  Almost like there's some pixelation, but not really.  I apologize for the unclear explanation, I just don't know what the term is for this loss of quality when zoomed out a lot.  I don't mean to disparage PSE, which is a great program, but I don't have this problem with another (free) program I also use.  I'm just trying to find out if it's something in my display settings that I can change or some other way I can fix this.  I often like to see the whole picture when editing but it's almost impossible to do editing when looking at the whole picture in PSE since it looks so off.
    Thank you.

    The image size are 1600x1200 or larger and should be adequate in size.  Anyone know how to improve the quality of the stills? I feel it may have something to do with the program resizing/ downsizing the pics.
    You are correct. This is a case of bigger not being better. I would suggest resizing in Photoshop, Photoshop Elements, or similar, to the Frame Size of your Project, or just slightly larger, if you need to pan on any, when they are zoomed out to full size.
    This ARTICLE will give you some tips on resizing.
    Good luck,
    Hunt

  • Media File Image Quality Suddenly Poor

    Hi All,
    After a few months I have returned to my FCP activities but for some reason the quality of the files in both the viewer and the canvas now look quite poor. There is some color distortion, a kind of "shimmy" to the video, and generally look like crap. This is with all my media, in all projects. As soon as the clip is stopped it seems to become focused, as a still. Yet, videos outside of FCP look fine.
    Any thoughts?
    Thanks in advance!

    Is the footage stored on the exact same drives as before? Or on different drives? How are the drives connected?
    Upgrade FCP since the projects were done?
    Might just need to trash your prefs. I feel another stock answer coming out.... BAM!
    #44: FCP acting weird - Trash Prefs
    Shane's Stock Answer #44: FCP acting weird or unusual. Just not like is normally should
    If the program was working fine, and now isn't, or just isn't working the way it should, the first things to do are:
    1) Trash your FCP preferences. Download the Preference Manager from Digital Rebellion: http://www.digitalrebellion.com/pref_man.htm
    http://www.kenstone.net/fcphomepage/trashing_fcpprefs.html
    2) Open the Disk Utility and Repair Permissions.
    3) Shut down for 10 min. Go for a quick walk around the block and get SOME exercise today. Come back, turn on the computer and see how things are.
    4) (optional) Do the Hokey Pokey and turn your self about. Results may vary.
    Shane

  • Image quality seems poor when exporting to ePub (even on max)

    Hello all,
      I've been using InDesign to prep a book for export to ePub format, and it will include several images. Things are going fairly well now that I finally think I've got my mind around the way InDesign works and how to think/prep in advance (i.e. get the Masters right and think 'styles' for as much as possible).
    But, when I get things exported to ePub format, I've noticed that the images seem to loose resolution even when I choose jpeg at the maximum setting. Where it's most obvious is when there is text in parts of an image (like text on a map), and at smaller fonts the text becomes blurry and unreadable. The image is pristine and sharp in Photoshop, and is very clear in InDesign doing the layout, and even if I simply save it as a jpeg in Photoshop it stays sharp and things are clear and ledgible. But...
      ...From InDesign...exported to ePub format using the maximum settings...it ends up soft, or a bit fuzzy, to the extent that whether viewing in Digital Editions or ePubReader in Firefox, the smaller text is virtually unreadable.
    Anyone have any ideas why this happens? I could consider making the initial image some much-larger size and hope that when it shrinks to fit the reader window maybe it will still be clear. But I've read that 'best practice' is to keep the image between 300 and 600 pixels in width, so I've made sure it was a bit less that 600. Regardless, it just isn't good enough as it is now.
    Any suggestions will be appreciated.
    -T

    I'm having the same problem. About 4 out of every ten images are exported at half the resolution of the rest -- looking at the images in Photoshop each apparent "pixel" is actually 2 x 2 pixels across.
    This occurs both at "high" and "maximum" settings, the images are still borked and the only difference is the resultant file size.
    I've read the PDF referred to in the reply but it says nothing about this.
    My guess is that this is a bug triggered by certain dimensional inputs to the exporter (a la the Photoshop bug where rotating pixels 90° causes artifacts when the area involved is an even number of pixels by an odd number of pixels -- see http://bjango.com/articles/photoshopcs6wishlist/ ).

  • Still Image Quality is Poor after export

    Original images are all large digital images, Nikon 6.1 megapixel DSLR. Importing the images into Premier Elements 3.0 works fine, and in the editing screen, they look good. However, after either buring to a DVD directly from Premier or exporting and buring via Nero, the finished product looks as if the camera taking the original pictures was 2 megapixel. I've tried about everything I could think of. In fact, the only way the finished product "looks" good is if I do an MPEG export in a 1080i format, but unfortunately that format has problems playing on most every dvd player or PC (audio gets way out of sync). Shouldn't be this hard - if I use Windows movie maker, the output looks great - but of course Windows Movie Maker stinks! Any ideas would be greatly appreciated.

    Hey Greg,
    The output is in a way dependent on your input. If your project settings selection and the image/footage size are not in sync, the output is definately gonna be distorted. Try keeping project settings as close as possible to the image size and the output will be good.
    Thanks
    Daniel

  • IDVD image quality v.poor

    I have just bought iWork 08 for iDVD as I need the improved quality for slideshows, however the so called "professional quality" is balony! after you have set this quality level then put the dvd into your player and play it, its rubbish, the quality is worse than iDVD 06!
    For a few new features this is a waste of money, no better performance in fact its worse!

    For the highest quality slideshows, I use FotoMagico. It gives you an option to encode a DV file at a high quality level. When the movie file is used in iDVD, slideshow quality is improved.
    See http://homepage.mac.com/prof_pixel/FotoMagico.jpg
    BTW, the 'Pro Quality' encoding only make a difference if your content is over 60 minutes. Under 60 minutes, 'Best Perfotmance' give the best quality.
    F Shippey

  • Lenovo Easy Camera Image quality Very poor - G 510 - Windows 7

    I have a G 510 with integrated camera. 
    I tired to download the drivers from the website. after installation, i get a message with a check box . Install driver (AVC now.
     further No appropriate driver to install. 
    Solved!
    Go to Solution.

    Hi Brprakash,
    Welcome to Lenovo Community Forums!
    I’m sorry to hear that the webcam driver is not installing completely in your G510 Laptop, I suggest you to download the driver once again and then while installing the driver right click on the downloaded file and select “Run as administrator” option to get it installed without any error.
    Do post us back if the issue still persists.
    Best Regards
    Shiva Kumar
    Did someone help you today? Press the star on the left to thank them with a Kudo!
    If you find a post helpful and it answers your question, please mark it as an "Accepted Solution"! This will help the rest of the Community with similar issues identify the verified solution and benefit from it.
    Follow @LenovoForums on Twitter!

  • Poor image quality in preview - CR2008Sp4

    Hi,
    I have a report, designed in CR 2008 SP4, with a logo image(blob field - bmp) on the top of the page.
    When previewing the report from my Win Forms app, the image quality is poor/grainy.
    If I export it to PDF (either from the previewer or from code) or print it, the image quality is perfect.
    I have the report option 'Retain Original Image Color Depth' ticked.
    Anyone have any ideas?
    Thanks,
    Fergus

    Bhushan Hyalij wrote:
    Hi Fergus,
    >
    > Does the image come up fine when the report is viewed from the CR designer?
    >
    > Is it a .bmp, jpeg or something else?
    > How large is the image?
    > Is it on the main report or inside a subreport?
    >
    > Could you provide the snapshots of the report from the designer and from the viewer?
    >
    > Try checking 'No Printer' in the Page setup of CR designer and then add the report to the app.
    > See how it behaves.
    >
    > Bhushan.
    >
    > Edited by: Bhushan Hyalij on Dec 1, 2011 7:11 PM
    >
    > Edited by: Bhushan Hyalij on Dec 1, 2011 7:28 PM
    Hi Bhushan,
    Thanks for the reply.
    Does the image come up fine when the report is viewed from the CR designer?
    >> Yes
    Is it a .bmp, jpeg or something else?
    >> In the sample I'm providing, it's a jpg but I can confirm similar behaviour with bmps
    How large is the image?
    >> In this sample, 57kb
    Is it on the main report or inside a subreport?
    >> Main report
    Could you provide the snapshots of the report from the designer and from the viewer?
    >> Sure, see this [snapshot|http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/2263/qualityexample.jpg] and the original [logo|http://img849.imageshack.us/img849/2573/acmeltdheader.jpg]
    Try checking 'No Printer' in the Page setup of CR designer and then add the report to the app.
    See how it behaves.
    >> Still loss of quality - no change
    Thanks,
    Fergus

  • Radeon 6850 poor image quality via hdmi

    Hi have a  connected via HDMI cable to a Sony Bravia 32in 100hz LCD TV and the image quality is poor Windows appears really pixalated, have used this TV with on board graphics and image quality is great any ideas?

    Still you should be able to bump the Res up with DVI to DVI if it has that port.  VGA PC to DVI TV will work 1080P.  Some manufacturer though do not allow DVI to do 1080p I read somewhere.  My LG 50" TV has every port I could think of DVI VGA RCA COAX HDMI probably more that I dont even know. It does 1080p with DVI but HDMI is easier with the sound.

  • Trouble with the image quality when viewing under 100%. First time posting on the forum.

    Hello everyone. I am sorry we have the get acquainted this way but I am having some issues and this is one of my last options of getting help.   Allow me to explain the problem.    When viewing a file under 100% zoom, everything looks jagged like the anti aliasing is missing.  Once I zoom in to 100%, everything looks the way it should. The saved file ( jpeg format for instance) is okay. I can zoom out and it still looks true to the image. The problem is related to photoshop. I installed my latest GPU drivers twice just to be sure and it was not from that.   This problem started last night and I don`t quite know how to solve it.  If I work on small resolution images, it isn`t such a bad problem because I will be working on 100% zoom, but I am working on high resolution images/ paintings. Somewhere around 8000x5000 pixels thus, working at 100% is not that doable. I attached an image that shows this issue. The one on the right is the zoomed out version and the one on the left is the zoomed in version.  Yes, the noise is affected by this, badly, but this started last night. up until then everything looked good even with noise or an out of this world sharpness. I can`t imagine what I could have done to trigger this.
       This being said, I am at the mercy of the more knowledgeable folks from around here. I do hope I posted this question in the right section. This is my first post here so sorry if I messed something up.   Looking forward to your replies.

    Here is a simplistic view that I feel may help you understand reality.
    The only time you're looking at your image pixels in Photoshop is when you're zoomed in to 100%,   There your look at the actual image pixels Photoshop has for your image at your displays resolution.
    At any other zoom level you are looking a scaled image that  has more or less pixels than your actual image these too are displayed at your display resolution.
    The scaling done by Photoshop is done for displaying your image is done for good performance not for the best image quality a quick interpolation.   Therefore at some zoom levels image quality looks poorer  than at other zoom levels.
    High resolution Display have now add a new wrinkle.   User interfaces were designed for displays  with resolutions around 100 PPI elements like text, icon, and other things like checkboxes, buttons etc. were created so there size would be useable are this more or less fixed 100 PPI resolution.   While Photoshop was designed to scale your images so you can work well on it is was not designed with a scalable UI.  Photoshop can not scale its user interface independently from its image display display window for you displays high resolution.  Photoshop's Image display area has the same resolution as the rest of Photoshop User Interface.  Just like there is only one resolution in all layers in a document. CC 2014 2xUI changes that.  PS UI is scaled to 1/2 resolution the image Area is at the displays actual resolution.
    Photoshop CC 2014 2x UI scales all of Photoshop User Interface including the image display to 200% which is 1/2 your display resolution effectively cutting you display pixel count to 1/4 its actual pixel count.   Your once again running on a low resolution display.     If your display has a native resolution  200 PPI you're running it at 100 ppi if your display has a 300 PPI resolution  you're running it at 150ppi.    Which defeats the reason of having high resolution.  Which is you would like to be able to edit your images at print resolution.  Adobe cc2x UI scales the UI but not the image window soa inage is 216ppi on the Surface Pro 3 the UI is large and dpoes not fit. screen
    To be able to edit your images at print resolution  you need a display the has a print resolution and you need and application the can scale its image display  and its UI independently.
    Current there is no OS interface for having multiple resolutions areas on  a display  and applications like Photoshop can not scale UI and Image independently.  OS and Photoshop can scale what is displayed.  Adobe Photoshop executable is coded in a way that it tell Microsoft Windows OS that it will handle display scaling so it can using your displays native resolution.  Currently Only  Photoshop CC 2014  Provides you with the option of running you display at half resolution.
    Windows can scale you display to many resolution and as several presets.  like 100%, 125%, 150% and like Adobe 200% half resolution.    You can make a Windows Registry and add an External Photoshop  Manifest file the tell's Microsoft Windows to handle display scaling.  I have a  Microsoft Surface Pro 3 m windows machine. Its LCD has a 216PPI resolution.  Windows 8.1 had 4 preset for scaling its LCD.
    Surface Pro 3 LCD Display 12"  IPS display 3:2 aspect ratio 9.984603532054124" Wide, 6.656402354702749" High 216.3330765278394  PPI
    Microsoft Preset Display scaling
    100% 2160x1440   216 PPI
    125% 1728x1152   173 PPI
    150% 1440x960    144 PPI SP3 Default setting
    200% 1080x720    108 PPI
    Most user these days has 1024x768 or better displays and Web pages are often authored for 800x600 pixels pages. So the give you a better handle on Resolution and scaling I have edit a 800x600 document with 25x25 px grid one my Surface pro 3
    using Windows 4  scaling presets and captured the 2160x1140 scaled screens  Only at the 100% preset does the image window have a 216ppi Also note  @ 2x UI Photoshop UI doe not fit on screen
    Adobe Photoshop  CC 2014 2xUI Scales the UI  to a display 1/2 resolution but does not scale the Image area  uses actual screen resolution. Photoshop  Help system info show the screen i 1/2 resilution 1080x720 but scalet the imase to the real resolution 2160x1440. however the image window is the 216ppi the ui 108ppi via scaling

  • Displayed image unsharp

    I am on version 5.4, but the problem existed on earlier version(s). I have a 2 monitor setup.
    I have previews set to 2880 pixels, preview quality high, and 1:1 previews (which have been rendered) set to never expire.
    Much of my work is closeup - macro and therefore display presision is necessary. I find that when I select a library image (image A), very often the image  will dsplay, and after 5 seconds (when it is fully loaded) will reduce in sharpness. It is then necessary to either move the focus or clarity slider for the image then to gain proper sharpness.
    I may then progress to other images, and on returning to loading image A, it loads with proper sharpness. But on another occasion it again loads with reduced sharpness.
    I have tried to explore whether the problem is associated with the graphics card - I have switched from displaying lightroom to, for instance, a browser and displayed other content, and reverted to Lightroom, but this has been inconclusive as to whether it has any effect.
    I am utilising a SSD for cache of Lightroom, and have tried resetting cache.
    I have also now observed that the problem is restricted to the display on the "second" monitor. That is, whichever monitor displays the main Lightroom screen does not show a problem - it is the "other" monitor which has this anomily.
    Where to go from here? Is this actually a Lightroom glitch?
    Advice welcomed.
    Eric

    trshaner wrote:
    Did you try using the preview pyramid Zoom settings in the Library module? I'd be interested to know if it made any difference in the secondary monitor image sharpness.
    Yes, images rendered sharp (I have never before used pyramid zoom settings!)
    Another thing you can try is to select about 10 or more images, inside the Library module select Library> Previews> Discard 1:1 Previews, and then select Build 1:1 Previews to force new previews to be built. When browsing these images in the Library module do they still appear soft at the preview pyramid Zoom settings?
    Rendered sharp.
    Also try using the 'Live' setting in the secondary display (upper RH corner) and browse the images by moving the mouse cursor over the filmstrip thumbnails (no need to click on them). How does the secondary monitor image look using Live mode in both the Library and Develop modules?
    Rendered sharp.
    In all cases above, image in Develop mode softened slightly after loading, but moving eg. Clarity by 1 single point forces recalculation and picture sharpens.

  • Image quality and editing in pages

    when i insert an image into an a4 doc and I'm viewing at 100% image quality is poor but fine if i zoom in? Also image editing such as saturation etc seems to revert on its own?

    Hi Matti. Thanks for your work and help you are giving to me and others. I have printed off your info and will try and get my poor old brain round it!. So many people are having the same problem with iMovie it's amazing that the mac software dept has no don anything to rectify this bug and or problem. I have downloaded the software you state "Photo to Movie" but it does not seem to have the same things as iMovie with all the fancy transitions of images and music in the background, I have tried 4 images in this software and thay come up on full screen as 100% perfect, I still have to work out how to get them onto DVD with some kind of presentation. I want to start in the field of wedding photography and need some high end presentation software for digital wedding albums or Imaging with transitin affects, what would you recomend?. I am in spain so we are on PAL here, I think!. I have people over here in the Spanish Mac forums asking about the same problems, is it OK with you to translate some of yours and pass over to them in Spanish?. best regards. Kevin

  • Poor image quality when displaying OLE Word object in PDF

    MS Word 2007 OLE object in Crystal Reports XII R2 designer...looks OK in designer.  When we export to PDF, the image quality has been degraded significantly.  Anybody had this issue before?  tried replacing usp10.dll with one found in CommonFiles folder, that did not help.

    Hi Mark,
    See if this [kbase |http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/servlet/prt/portal/prtroot/com.sap.km.cm.docs/oss_notes_boj/sdn_oss_boj_bi/sap(bD1lbiZjPTAwMQ==)/bc/bsp/spn/scn_bosap/notes%7B6163636573733d36393736354636443646363436353344333933393338323636393736354637333631373036453646373436353733354636453735364436323635373233443330333033303331333233313333333633383336%7D.do] - SAP Note 1213686 - Certain objects do not appear clearly when exporting to PDF/RTF/Word formats - article resolves the issue. It's for CR 9 so you'll have to browse to the CR XI registry structure.
    Otherwise try all of the patches for CR XI R2:
    Keep your Keycode and then uninstall XI R2, unless you are on SP 4 then just apply SP 5 and 6:
    https://smpdl.sap-ag.de/~sapidp/012002523100011802732008E/crxir2_sp4_full_build.exe
    https://smpdl.sap-ag.de/~sapidp/012002523100013876392008E/crxir2win_sp5.exe
    https://smpdl.sap-ag.de/~sapidp/012002523100015859952009E/crxir2win_sp6.exe
    Thank you
    Don

  • Poor image quality elements 12 slideshow preview

    As I can't find any reference to my original post I thought I'd re-do it.  I created a slideshow in elements 12 and found the image quality to fall far short of high definition.  The source folder for the images used is contained in Windows Pictures.  The pictures were taken with a Canon t4i camera with the image quality being excellent.  For whatever reason the quality of the slideshow images are poor.  Any help would be appreciated.

    Don't purchase a video editing app to work with just still images. They are meant to be used with DV and really don't do a still image any justice.
    The final source format should determine the software used. You are suggesting a DVD distribution of your work.
    iPhoto is meant to be used on still images (not iMovie, in my opinion).
    You don't really want to convert a single frame into multiple frames if you don't need to.
    You may want to try the Photo JPEG, Motion JPEG or Animation codecs from iMovie and see if they improve the visual appearance of your work.
    Since you want to use a DVD as the distribution method then iDVD may not be the best option either. It is meant for set top boxes using a poor 720X480 dimension in MPEG-2 video format.
    You may want to consider a bit different approach and use a "data" DVD and use QuickTime Player as the playback engine. These will only play on a computer but your could use the higher dimensions to your advantage and also the visual quality of computer displays to showcase your work.
    Since HD DVD players are not yet ready for mass use it may be a better way to distribute your work.
    There is no 720X480 dimension limit (only the limit set by the viewer on the display size when viewed on a computer monitor).
    Your "still" images would remain "still" except for transitions.
    Heck. You could probably put the whole file onto a CD and save even more in production costs.

Maybe you are looking for