Still image to photoshop?

I have a still image (5 sec.) saved as a clip in iMovie HD 6 and I would like to print it. Is there a way to save or copy the still image into a photoshop file so that a print can be made?
Eric

Figured it out. Just save the frame and open in photoshop.

Similar Messages

  • Resize still images in Photoshop?

    Hi there
    So I'm using jpegs (say 4000 x 4000 ish) in a DVC Pro HD sequenece.  Would you recommend re-sizing in Photoshop beforehand, or is it fine to let Final Cut do the resizing?
    Im using Final Cut 7.
    Appreciate any recommendations,
    Richard

    yes, do resize in PS. If you have no pans or zooms you can make them your sequecnce dimensions. For mild pan and zoom twice your seq dimensions should do. I believe FC has a max size for stills of 4000x4000 but I wouldn't recomend using anything that big for both performance and image quality reasons.

  • Still image crop and resolution

    Dear All,
    I'm creating an H264 1280 x 720 video for Google Maps that incorporates still images and 1280x720 HD video.  I've always used 96 dpi for image resolution in the past when I cropped images for standard 720 x 640 video and they looked good.  If I crop my still images in Photoshop to 1260 x 720 at 96 dpi, jpeg, will that give me a good still image in the final product?  I know that the dpi really doesn't matter unless we're talking about print, but I want to start with a good image resolution.  There are many things to learn about all of the new formats!  Thanks.
    Small Town Gal

    Hi SMG,
    As Ann said, forget DPI for video, has absolutely no bearing on things. For a 1280x720 video, optimum still size is 1280x720 pixels. If you want to do any zooming/panning to animate the still, then of course a higher resolution will be beneficial.
    Thanks
    Jeff Pulera
    Safe Harbor Computers

  • Still image size for 16:9 video

    I want to crop and resize my images before bringing them in to PE10 on my iMac running lion. What pixel dimensions are best? The preview of my first image in the playback viewer is terrible. I used 1920 wide by 1080 high in my export settings for the image editer (Lightroom).
    Thanks,
    Mike

    Mike,
    I Scale and Crop all of my Still Images in Photoshop (PSElements works well too), to exactly the pixel x pixel dimensions of my Project's Frame Size. If one needs to Pan on a Zoomed Out Still Image, then I would calculate the Pan, and Scale/Crop to that size. You do not want to have overly-large Still Images. This ARTICLE goes into much more detail, and will show how to Automate to>Batch with Actions in PS/PSE.
    Good luck,
    Hunt

  • Blury Photos for my still image video

    I am a newer person to editing and I have Adobe Elements Premiere 10 and I wanted to do my first really nice project and when I edited and looked at the video every single picture was blurry, and when I paused the video the picture would go back to normal. I think that the image is too big and I might have to change the pixel size or resolution of it. Please if you have an answer please break down how to fix my problem, because I am only a teenager trying to figure out this editing system! Thanks, Caitlyn

    Welcome to the forum.
    There are several considerations, when doing a SlideShow in PrE.
    The first is, do you have any Video footage?
    If not, then the next quesion is, how do I plan to deliver the final results, such as DVD-Video, BD, or something else?
    Armed with those two answers, the next one is, how can I Scale my Still Images in Photoshop/Photoshop Elements, to match my chosen Project's Frame Size, and this ARTICLE addresses that, plus offers tips for doing that Scaling in Batch with Actions.
    Last, when a Still Image is Imported into PrE, and is placed onto the Timeline, PrE needs to "create" Video from those Still Images. There will be a red line above the Still Images, and for best, and smoothest playback, one needs to Render the Timeline, by hitting the Enter/Return key.
    Hope that this helps,
    Hunt

  • I have Photoshop CS5.1 (bought in 2011). The photoshop Camera Raw plug-in is not recognizing the format of my new Nikon D610. I updated the version of my Camera Raw plug in and am still getting this message when trying to open images in photoshop. Please

    I have Photoshop CS5.1 (bought in 2011). The photoshop Camera Raw plug-in is not recognizing the format of my new Nikon D610. I updated the version of my Camera Raw plug in and am still getting this message when trying to open images in photoshop. Please help.

    This link shows that ACR 8.3 supports the Nikon D610 and 6.7.1 was the final version for CS5.
    Camera Raw plug-in | Supported cameras
    So you can upgrade to CS6 and ACR 8.7.1
    or using the DNG converter, convert your Nikon raw files to dng format to open in CS5.
    Here is the download link: Adobe - Adobe Camera Raw and DNG Converter : For Macintosh : Adobe DNG Converter 8.7.1
    or Windows: Adobe - Adobe Camera Raw and DNG Converter : For Windows : Adobe DNG Converter 8.7.1
    And here is a great video tutorial on how to use the converter.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bqGovpuihw
    Gene

  • Need still image export in QT Pro 7.7 that opens in Photoshop CS6

    Using Quicktime 7.7 Pro I export a still image from an .avi movie file and choose movie to picture. In options, I am given a choice of various formats including jpeg and png.  But, the file extension still says .pct no matter what format option is chosen.
    I discovered today when I upgraded my old photoshop CS3 to CS6 that .pct format is no longer supported in the new version of Photoshop CS6. ( Ouch. )
    How can I export a still image in Quicktime Pro 7.7 so that it is readable in the Photoshop CS6?
    Thanks in advance for any solutions.
    Thomas

    How can I export a still image in Quicktime Pro 7.7 so that it is readable in the Photoshop CS6?
    Basically you can't. As you noted above, the QT 7 Pro option only exports a PCT file (the legacy system image file format) using your choice of compression.
    You could, however, try any of a number of other options:
    1) You can drag the current frame in your QT 7 Pro player to the desktop which should create a single-frame "Movie Clipping" file in the same format as your video video file. This file may or may not open directly in your updated version Photoshop as it does in my older version.
    2) Another possibility would be to use the Command-C keyboard shortcut to copy the current image in the QT 7 Pro player to the clipboard and then open Photoshop and create "New" file in Photoshop using the clipboard image dimensions. When the new empty file window opens, you can use the Command-V shortcut to paste the clipboard image to the window. On my system this creates a default PSD image. The major disadvantage of this approach is that if the original file was encoded anamorphically, then the image is created using the encode dimensions and you have to manually adjust the aspect ratio. (I.e., as opposed to using the work flow described above which recognizes anamorphic files and gives you the option of opening the file automatically in the correct apect.)
    2) If the "Movie Clipping" will not open in your version of Photoshop, then it will open in the free MPEG Streamclip app if you have it installed. This app can then export the video frame as a JPEG, TIFF, or PNG image.
    3) Another option would be to open the AVI video directly in the MPEG Streamclip, locate the frame you want and export the frame directly from the video file to a JPEG, TIFF, or PNG file as described above.
    4) Probably the most used work flow for compatible video is to open the file in the QT X Player, locate the frame you want, use the Command-C shortcut to copy the image to the clipboard as a PNG image which can the be opened from the clipboard in Preview and exported to a desired image file format. Of course, AVI files are frequently "iffy" with QT X depending on the specific video compression format used to create them.
    5) You can also use the Finder image capture option to capture the entire QT 7 Player image (or a portion thereof) as a PNG image (with or without a drop shadow) and then open it Photoshop where you can crop the image before performing whatever you want to do in this app.
    The are probably other options but this should be enough for you play with at this time.

  • My image in photoshop suddenly turned black after I used liquify filter.  Closed image, opened another one, it still shows black

    why my image in photoshop turned black.  opened other image, it still shows black

    Without any more details I would first try updating my video card driver. Go directly to the card manufacturers website, otherwise you may get an old driver.

  • How to save a still image from video without Photoshop

    So- I need to save a still from some video but I do not have Photoshop. How can
    I do it. Is it possible in FCP? Any other ideas?

    In your timeline, park the playhead on the frame you want to make the still from; now double click anywhere in that video clip, and it will appear in the viewer. Then Shift/N will make the still frame for you. Now go to the file menu and choose Export/QuickTime conversion, choose Still Image, and under options, set the image type.
    I've also discovered recently that MPEG streamclip can produce very good still frames; if you have a QuickTime movie you've already made from an FCP sequence, you can very quickly drag it to an MPEG Streamclip window, move the playhead to the frame you want, and choose Export Frame from the File menu. You can then choose an image type, and a location for the image file.
    Useful if you don't have FCS open at the time.

  • Best Way to Import/Export Still Image Sequence With FCP & Photoshop

    I am working on a FCP project and need to fix a couple frames using photoshop.
    What is the best method to export to Photoshop, import the image in photoshop, make changes, then export out of Photoshop and back into FCP?
    It seems whenever I re-import back into FCP, FCP doesn't recognize that they are individual frames, and instead imports each frame as an individual image file lasting several seconds long. Any help with this is greatly appreciated.
    Thanks!

    Welcome to the Forum!
    In FCP's preferences, set the Still Frame duration to 1 frame. Locate the clip on the Timeline, set an IN and OUT point and go to File->Export->Using QuickTime Conversion. In the Format menu, choose Image Sequence and in the Options menu, choose the file type (I recommend uncompressed TIFF). Next, create new folder for the image sequence and hit the Save button.
    After completing the work in Photoshop, go back to your FCP project and go to File->Import->Folder and navigate to the folder containing the corrected images. Drag the entire folder from the Browser to the Timeline.
    If for some reason the duration for each is longer than 1 frame, select all and right-click on one and choose Duration from the contextual menu. Change to 1 frame.
    -DH

  • Photoshop/Premiere Elements 13...are either capable of making time lapse movies from still images?

    Photoshop/Premiere Elements 13...are either capable of making time lapse movies from still images? I heard this feature was removed from Premiere 13, after I purchased it  =(

    jorgeavanza
    It am not understanding clearly what program is not closing
    Photoshop Elements
    or
    Premiere Elements
    There is the AdobePremiereElements.exe for Premiere Elements (video editing) and the PhotoshopElementsEditor.exe for Photoshop Elements (photo editing).
    Right now you keep mentioning Premiere Elements, but I am seeing your description more like Photoshop Elements.
    Please clarify so that we can focus on the correct program and try to resolve its problems.
    Thank you.
    ATR

  • Large Still Images into PE - One Workflow

    Everyone wants the highest quality that they can obtain when doing their videos. It’s natural to want the best. Well, when dealing with still images, bigger is not necessarily better, for two reasons. First, overly large still images can really tax a system and second, one is limited to the frame size of the video, so these have to be resized somewhere - this resizing can be in the NLE (Non Linear Editor) program, or in an image processing program like PS (Photoshop), which does a better job anyway. Doing this in PS, or PSE, will result in better resized images, and they are easier for the NLE to work with. Quality is as high as your Project’s Preset will allow, and you are more efficient, with fewer crashes, slowdowns and hangs. It is a win-win situation.
    Here is my normal workflow when dealing with still images. This workflow is for NTSC 4:3 720x480 with a PAR (Pixel Aspect Ratio) of 0.9. If your Project’s Presets are different, use those specs to resize to.
    Since I shoot my still images in RAW, I Copy my files from the CF card to my system and catalog these images by location, subject and date (if necessary). I’ll do a quick conversion and Save_As Adobe DNG for backup. I then process these RAW images in PS with the ARC (Adobe Raw Converter), correcting them and then doing a Save_As PSD into a sub-folder. All of this is in my still photo library.
    Normally, I will edit these PSD’s to find the images that I wish to use in a Video Project, and will Copy the selected images to another folder. You’ll see that I work with a lot of Copies, so my original files are always untouched and stored elsewhere. This guards against anything happening to them.
    At this point, I’ll decide how I wish to use these selected images in my Video Project. Let’s just say that they are all horizontal images, and are still full-size from my camera. As stated, my Video Projects are DV-NTSC 4:3 720x480 PAR 0.9. [Remember, your Video Project may vary, so you will need to plug in the dimensions for YOUR Video Project in that case.] I also will have done my Cropping on each image individually, to get them to 4:3 Aspect Ratio. I do this my eye and by hand, rather than via an Action, because I want full aesthetic control.
    In PS, I have a set of Actions for Video. An Action is like a Script, but less powerful and less involved in the writing. As I have already done all of my image enhancements and additional processing before I did my Copy to the selected folder, I only have to worry about my Action resizing these selected images for use in my Video Project. My Action here is to resize to 720x480 with a PAR of 0.9, and I normally use the Action that does this with a particular resizing algorithm, Bicubic-Smoother (though I also use Bicubic-Sharper on occasion).
    For the next step, I go to my folder structure (remember, this folder contains copies of my selected still images in PSD format), and create a new sub-folder "[Project Name]_720x480." Back in PS, I choose File>Automate>Batch. Here I set my Source Folder, my Destination folder and the Action to perform. In my case, it’ll be the Destination Folder, that I just created, [Project Name]_720x480, and my Action will be my NTSC 4:3 720x480 Smooth. I check to have the Open command by-passed, because I do not need to see this take place on my monitor. When I hit OK, PS grabs all files in my Source Folder, runs the commands of my Action and does a Save_As for all files into my Destination Folder. I can process hundreds of large images down to a great 720x480 PAR 0.9 via Bicubic-Smoother interpolation, in moments. Now, I’m ready to go. Last, I Copy my Destination Folder to my Video Project’s folder hierarchy (usually on another HDD), and then Import these processed stills into my NLE.
    What if I need to pan on one, or more of these images, while they are zoomed out completely? I don’t have enough pixels in my horizontal dimension to do this. I am just filling the frame with my still. Well, if I find that there are such images, I go back to my folder with the full sized images in my still images library, and select the ones that need to be larger. I run another Action on these, but it’s one that resizes to something larger than 720x480, say 1000x750. Now, I have another Destination Folder with the name [File Name]_1000x750. I’ll Copy this over to my Video Project, and Import these into the NLE. Here, I can go to Project Panel and remove the 720x480 versions if I so choose, but since a Premiere Project file (.PRPROJ or .PREL) is only an XML database, I may just leave them. It does not contain any media files, just links to where they are on the system and to what operations are performed on them.
    By doing my resizing in PS, rather than in Premiere, I have accomplished two things:
    1.) I have better quality resized images, using the algorithms in PS, plus have a choice of several interpolation methods to work with.
    2.) I have lessened the processing load on my NLE and on my system, while doing the editing
    I get higher quality and lower resource overhead - hence my reference to "win-win."
    Now, back to my aesthetic control. I do not do any automatic zooming or panning. If one allows the NLE to do this, then they will want to probably process all of their images to 1000x750 (remember, this is for an NTSC 4:3 Project, so you will need to calculate what YOUR Project will require).
    The two programs that I use are Photoshop and Premiere Pro, but Photoshop Elements can do the same things, though the exact commands might be different. Premiere Elements will handle the resized still images, just like Premiere Pro and the only difference will be the terminology used when one wishes to Import the still images.
    I also keep all of my images in .PSD (the native format of PS), and do not convert to JPEG, or other. If one’s camera shoots only JPEG, I suggest writing the Action to do the Save_As to .PSD, as another JPEG compression will cost one quality. Yes, the JPEG’s will be smaller, but remember we are looking for the ultimate quality, so larger file sizes are just part of that equation.
    One does not have to deal with all of the Copies, as I do. However, this allows me to go back to the originals, or to the processed full-sized .PSD’s at any step along the way. There is only one thing worse than not being able to go back to an intermediate version with full Layers and Adjustment Layers, plus any Alpha Channels, and that is finding out that you’ve lost your original RAW and DNG backups! That’s why I do a lot of Save_As and also work from Copies all along the way.
    Hunt

    Your workflow looks good. I do similar, but use PS, in lieu of LightRoom. I also do DNG's for my archives.
    Provided that one chooses a JPEG compression algorithm setting that does not do too much compression, I doubt that anyone, but the most very critical, could tell the difference in Video. Most of my tests on PSD vs JPEG have been for print. There, one can more easily detect the differences. Video "hides" some of that.
    To date, I have not had a Project where the Asset size differences between equally sized PSD's vs JPEG's caused any slowdown, or problem. There could be a resources savings with the smaller JPEG files, but there is a tiny bit of overhead dealing with the JPEG compression. I have never tested this, so can only guess that the smaller Asset size of the JPEG would trump that overhead - just a guess on my part.
    For me, keeping the images in PSD does save a tiny bit of work in my Action (basically one less operation to perform), but I doubt that one could measure that time difference, even over the automation of hundreds of images. Besides, it's only one additional line in the Action. My feelings on JPEG vs PSD is firmly based in my print experience, and I am probably being too critical with images going to video. When I move up to HD and BD authoring, I need to apply a very critical eye, to see if I can tell the differences on an HD TV. So long as one does not apply too much JPEG compression, the differences should be very slight, at the worst, and maybe not even noticed, at best.
    I do minimize the impact of many files on my Project by sizing to what I need. If I will not be doing any pans on zoomed-out images, I size to my Project. For pans on zoomed-out images, I calculate just what I will need for those pans, and might end up with several groups of sizes, to accommodate each. Still, the vast majority will be sized to exactly what I need for the Project - very few extra pixels.
    In my case, and yours too, I have my RAW, my DNG, my working Layered PSD's, and then my sized output. I always keep all working PSD's, as I might change my mind, or my client might change theirs, and I do not want to have to go back and redo work, if I still have those working files. I also do as little destructive editing, as I can, using Dupe Layers, and Adjustment Layers, whenever possible. If I can, I never Flatten, or Merge Layers, so I can make any/all changes at any time, and only have to do the resizing via the same Actions. That is basically a "one-button" solution, once I have made the changes required.
    Good luck,
    Hunt

  • Unable to load TIF images into Photoshop.

    CS4 (11.0.2) and Windows 7 Home Edition.
    Have developed a problem trying to load some TIF images into Photoshop. I have a large number of images archived over a decade or more. At this point it may some of the older files that exhibit the problem. Now all these files were edited and stored using the Photoshop versions during the complete time period. The files are always saved with no compression. Have tried to load from Photoshop and clicking on the file in a file list. Photoshop just hangs and I get the message Program not responding. I can take these same files and load them into the ROXIO photo editor with no problem. Stranger yet is if I simply load the file into the ROXIO editor then "save as" back into the same folder (overwrite) the file can then be brought into Photoshop with no problem! Any ideas?

    Noel,
    Will try to keep short.
    I reinstalled Photoshop CS4 from the cd CS set. Did not uninstall first. Restarted PC and Photoshop. Still failed the same way with a 3001 image.
    Did the following, changing one item in the Edit->Preference->GPU Setting. After each change, closed Photoshop, reopened, brought in 3001 image, restored original setting. 3001 failed each time.
    * Unchecked Enable OpenGL Drawing
    * Advanced setup: Unchecked Advanced Drawing.
    * Advanced setup: Unchecked Color Matching
    Next went to the Edit->Color Profile.
    Scanned thru options and saw in the Convert Options: Engine. It was set to Adobe (ACE). ACE was the module name in the error detail!
    Only other option for this is Microsoft ICM. Changed to that, close/open Photoshop and 3001 came in no problem. So did the Nikon 3000, srgb IEC 61922 2.1 and Untagged. However, when briging in an Adobe RGB(1998) image Photoshop notes Profile Mismatch. It allows me to decide what to do (use embedded profile instead of workspace; convert color to work space color; discard embedded profile. and I choose use the convert color and it loads ok. At least it loads the image! Will use this approach for now. I need to get educated on color profiles!!
    Joe

  • How to Work With Still Images in Premiere Elements 10

    I am struggling with the still images in my Titles for my video project, and would really appreciate some help. I have done a lot of googling on this and searched this forum, but can't seem to find the answer I need, maybe not searching the right questions or just "not getting it".  Not even PE Adobe tips or Adobe TV cover this, although it seems important to know. I am not clear how PE10 will handle the resolution of an imported still image or graphic art from Photoshop. Perhaps this topic will also help others as well.
    I am working on a video project for my job, editing an old training video. Created new Title graphics in Photoshop, inserted the Title images and integrated with video clips, then exported the video segments as MPEG files.  I burned the whole video to DVD.
    When the final DVD plays on a computer or TV screen, the photo images in the titles are fuzzy even though they were clear 300 dpi images. (I know dpi doesn't matter in video). The title text is also a bit fuzzy and the title text that has animation applied to it is even more fuzzy. Yet the old MPEG video clips look fine - it's just my title graphics and text that look bad (embarrasing).
    So I need to know how to improve the quality of the still images/graphics for a video??
    Project settings:
    - Hard Disk, Standard 48kHz
    - Editing Mode: DV NTSC
    - Frame: 720 x 480 (0.9091)
    - Frame rate: 29.97fps
    - with "Optimize Stills" box checked
    Using these settings because I am working with MPEG files from an old training video CD.
    File Export: MPEG, NTSC DVD Standard
    I export the video clips as MPEGS because they will be burned to a CD or DVD for distribution to our staff offices.
    Work Details:
    In Photoshop, I created still image graphics for each Title sized at 720 x480 with high resolution photos and company logo (300 dpi), and save them as a bitmap to import into PE10.  In the Timeline, I insert the still image in "Video 1" track, then in Video 2 track create a Title over it for text (some animated, some still). Sometimes I stack 2 or three titles with text in separate video tracks over one still title image. Yes, there is a red line across the top in the Timeline because I didn't render the still images.
    Questions:
    • What is the best resolution for images imported into PE10 from Photoshop?
    • Should I be creating title graphics/images at 720 x 480 or a larger ratio like 1920 x 1080 so it will display better when seen on a computer or TV?
    • Do I need to render each title image in the timeline so that it will eventually display better in the MPEG?
    • Is it better to create a title and then insert the still image into the title so they are integrated, rather than layered on separate video tracks?
    I would greatly appreciate any assistance.

    When the final DVD plays on a computer or TV screen, the photo images in the titles are fuzzy even though they were clear 300 dpi images. (I know dpi doesn't matter in video). The title text is also a bit fuzzy and the title text that has animation applied to it is even more fuzzy. Yet the old MPEG video clips look fine - it's just my title graphics and text that look bad (embarrasing).
    Remember that DVD-Video was designed for CRT TV sets, and was a major step up from VHS tape. However, when viewed on an HD computer monitor, or HD TV *, it is still ONLY 720 x 480, with is about 1/4 of the resolution as 1920 x 1080, which is about what we are used to seeing on those display devices. That is but only 25% of the quality. It can never look as good as HD material.
    Good luck, and if I missed something, please point that out to me.
    Hunt
    * With the advent of BD players, and up-rezzing DVD players, things HAVE improved, when viewing a DVD-Video on an HD TV. The newer players have up-rezzing chips, that do a very good job of "improving" the viewed material's quality. However, even with those amazing chips, DVD-Video will NEVER be as good as a full-HD source. Also, computers do not have those up-rezzing chips, so when one views a DVD-Video on a high-rez computer monitor, it will still look pretty bad. There ARE a couple of new DVD software players, that improve the quality of DVD-Video played on a high-rez computer monitor, and a few look fairly promising. I speculate that we will see some more development in the DVD-Video area, especially as BD is not proving to be the big seller, that many promised. Even 3D is not helping BD realize its promise.

  • Using still images with Final Cut (and the apple suite in general)

    I have had a re-occuring and long term problem that has caused me many lost hours of head scratching and work arounds, and as of yet I have not been able to come up with a good solution.
    Its to do with integrating still images with the Final Cut suite.
    If I receive a high quality image from a client to use in their video and I then try importing it into Final Cut and animating it, it always ends up looking like a pile of ahem. Often I will get "swimming" lines appear across fine detail on the image, and parts of it will flicker as it moves across the screen. For instance, if I have a picture of some blinds or other fine detail (especially horizontal and vertical lines), when I add a grow and throw movement to it the detail will become very noisy - buzzing and flickering like mad.
    I have found I can counter this by resizing the image in photoshop to a resolution closer to SD video (700w or 500h) - but I always end up losing detail, and the flickering and noise is only reduced, not eliminated. Other things that have helped are blur effects applied at a very low level, like 0.5 blur, so its not noticeable visually, but Final Cut seems to treat it differently and quieten the noise and flicker down.
    However, all of these workarounds are ultimately still giving a reduced quality product.
    Also, this problem is not necessarily constrained to Final Cut, I am currently fighting DVD Studio Pro because it is murdering the text quality in a stills slideshow I am creating - and in this situation there is no animation being applied. No matter what file type (psd, jpeg, tiff, png...) or size I output the text and images from Photoshop in, the moment DVD studio pro gets hold of it, it turns to cripe.
    For a while I was putting it down to the fact that I usually edit in SD (PAL) formats, and there just wasn't the resolution available to reproduce fine detail. However, I do often see other people achieving pin-sharp fine detail on still images and text in SD formats (the Apple templates are a good example)
    So, my question to you, oh great and high boffins, if you are dealing with still images and text, how do you do it? How do you work around any noise problems you have, and how do you produce those pin-sharp images (both moving and still) I see in other professional productions?
    Quad G5   Mac OS X (10.4.8)  

    still images with too high a resolution will always cause problems. this is due to the detail of the image being finer than the scanline of the tv can display ... obviously this will caise the image to flicker as these details alternately appear and disappear as and when the scanline can display them. as you have discovered, the answer is to apply a very small blur, the effect being that the detail is spread by the blur such that the scanline can dislay it correctly.
    text issues are often rooted in the same problem ... unless the text is placed very carefully (whole even number on the y axis) then the quality may be impaired due to the resulting interlacing/scanline issues

Maybe you are looking for