Still images too pixelated

hi
need help with still images
looked great in the viewer ,but in timeline and canvas they look too pixelated and poor quality,
any ideas as to what i am doing wrong
any advice ealy appreciate
thankyou
simon

thanks michael
will have a look at render quality
i only have a computer monitor to view on ,the images looks great in the viewer so i need to get it looking great in the canvas ,playing in timeline,
have tried other sequence settings like dv50 and 8 and 10 bit uncompressedand they are the same ,so will try the render settings
cheers
simon

Similar Messages

Still Images Appear Pixelated When put into iMovie

I've been working on iMovie 9, and have just downloaded the new iMovie 10 (I think that's the newest one!) anyway, when working on the previous iMovie any still images I uploaded from iPhoto appeared in my projects just fine, even when I was adding the Ken Burns effect etc. I have just imported this project into the new iMovie and now all of my still photos appear crystal clear for a second and then become horrifically pixelated.
I am completely new to this and need to get this sorted as it's for a university project and I just can't get past these horrible pixely images, when they were fine on the previous iMovie! Any help would be greatly appreciated.

This should only be a temporary effect. Once the clips have been converted in to ProRes (a background process) they will be OK. If you do more editing the affected clips will again appear blurred until they are reprocessed.
(In iMovie 9 you had to wait for the clips to be transcoded when you imported them, before you could do any editing. In iMovie 10 you don't have to wait but the transcoding is done in the background.)
Geoff.

Inserted still image too big . . .

When I insert a still image and play it, the image is zoomed in about 400%, what am I doing wrong?

OK so your AVCHD media is either 1920x1080 or 1280x720. Whichever it is, if you need to move on the image, make the still image twice that horizontal resolution, so for 1280 make it 2560. If you don't need to move on it make it 1920x1080 or 1820x720 depending on your video format.

Still image becomes pixelated...

Hello all.
I have a logo that I am animating, making it increase in size as the next scene of my project comes in (the logo is in transparent lettering on a black background)
as it increases, it becomes pixelated.... (obviously) Is there any way to avoid this pixelation from happening??

How big is the logo? How big are you scaling it? There isn't much you can do if you're scaling it up. Starting with a larger logo so you don't have to scale it beyond 100% would be better.

Still image pixel aspect ratio wrong in exported video (but correct in Premiere renders)

I've saved a targa still image from my footage and added it to the bin. It's properties show as follows:
Image Size: 1440 x 1080
Pixel Aspect Ratio: 1.3333
This correctly matches my sequence settings as I'm working with 1080p widescreen footage.
The image appears as expected in the Program window both before and after rendering previews. However, once I export my sequence as a video file, the still image is squashed (displaying incorrectly):
A work around would be to stretch out the still to a width of 1920 in Premiere so that the export displays it back at its normal aspect ratio - which works - but I don't understand why I should have to do this.
The other solution I found was to go to the bin and 'Modify > Interpret Footage' and although "Use Pixel Aspect Ratio from File" already shows the correct settings, to actively reset it (to the same pixel aspect ratio) with the 'Conform to' option:
This works too.
Surely a bug?
(using Premiere Pro CC)

Thanks for the quick reply. But then why does the still's properties (in my bin) show the pixel aspect ratio as 1.3333 (not square pixels, 1.0) and should it not appear incorrectly in both the preview renders and the exported video ? This seems inconsitent to me.

Pixel dimensions for still images

Hello all,
I have just ran into a problem that seems to be a sizing problem with Final Cut Express HD. I used to crop my still pics to 1366 px - 768 px (for landscape) and then import them to FCE and export as a quicktime movie. When I brought the quicktime movie into iDVD and created the DVD it seemed to play great on my 46" Samsung tv -- full screen.
I just recently bought a Samsung 60" and when I create the same type of movies, I am getting a huge black border around the whole image (not just top and bottom but sides too). I tried creating a new movie and made all my still images 1920px x 1080 px, and it still comes out the same way.
I can stretch my tv so that they go full screen, but I think there should be a way to create the movie without having to stretch it....just have the tv set for 16:9, and I feel that it should work.
Any help would be greatly appreciated...thanks.
Norm

When you create a DVD, no matter what the pixel dimensions of your original material, it become 720x480 Standard Definition. This is what a DVD is. If you are creating a DVD that has material that is 16x9, then it creates a DVD that is 720x480 but plays back anamorphic, stretching to create the 16x9 screen.
If you play one of your older DVDs that played correctly on your previous TV, does it play correctly or does it also exhibit the black bars?
If it plays correctly then something has changed in the way you are creating your project in FCE.and encoding and burning the DVD.
If the older DVDs also exhibit the same playback problem, then I believe there is a menu setting on your new TV that will tell it how to display Standard Definition material from your DVD player, and you need to adjust that. (There are also settings in the set-top DVD player that tells it what kind of signal to send based on the what kind of display it is hooked up to.)
MtD

DVCPRO HD 720P: pixel aspect ratios with still images from Final Cut

I am currently trying to get still images from a trailer I am working on with Final cut pro. The footage is DVCPRO HD 720P 24pn and the interlacing and pixel aspect ratios have been giving me a lot of trouble in photoshop. I am able to convert the PAR but it is for preview purposes only...? I need the file to be saved with the converted PAR. How do you do that???
Also, the de-interlacing filter on photoshop doesn't seem to help the quality of the photo.
Anyone have any ideas?
I have searched and searched and only found somewhat related questions, so maybe I am the only one trying to do this...

Why are you doing interlace if you have 720p?

Any issues with still images being too large?

I am going to be given lots of images that were scanned at a high resolution (I think 300), so the file size and physical dimensions should be pretty large. I want to start placing these images into the timeline, even though I do not know yet which ones I will need to zoom in on and which I will not need to do anything with other than just have it display.
1.) Are there any issues with placing lots of images like these into the timeline of a SD project at a higher resolution and larger physical dimension than maybe necessary?
2.) If I want to use placeholder images, is there an easy way to later swap them with the real image, and have the swapped image take the properties of the placeholder image, such as the duration it lasts on screen and the fade transition before and after it?
Thank you.

1.) Are there any issues with placing lots of images like these into the timeline of a SD project at a higher resolution and larger physical dimension than maybe necessary?
This is dependent on the version of FCP. If you're working with FCP 5.1.2 or later, still image processing is handled by the GPU. Depending on what graphics card you've got, it can be painfully slow even at SD resolutions because image size (pixel dimensions, not bit-depth) is what is relevant.
2.) If I want to use placeholder images, is there an easy way to later swap them with the real image, and have the swapped image take the properties of the placeholder image, such as the duration it lasts on screen and the fade transition before and after it?
In theory, you should be able to do a Paste Attributes and paste Contents but that functionality has been broken since FCP 5.x. It works, but not for the very thing that you'd need it to do - both images now need to be the same size, duration and matching timecode for this to work correctly in your case.
However, you might be able to work around that limitation by trying this:
Select your placeholder image in the timeline and copy (Commmand-C)
Load your final image into the Viewer and press F11 to perform a Replace Edit.
Be mindful of where your Playhead is in both the Viewer and Timeline, of course, as the Replace Edit uses the Playhead and not marked In or Out
Select the newly replaced image and perform a Paste Attributes (Option-V), selecting the relevant attributes (Basic Motion, Crop, etc)
Of course, this might not suit what you're looking to do since stuff like Center is pixel-based rather than percentage-based (like Crop is).

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

Using still image in FCP and Motion

I'm using still images in Motion (and FCP) and exporting them to Quicktime movie files. What's the best size and resolution for the images and are JPGs or TIF best? I'm exporting for 720 X 480, and currently my JPGs are 4 x 6 at 300 dpi with a pixel width and height of 1312 x 2000. I'm adding some behaviors to the images in Motion (motion paths and shrink/grow).
My FCP project is setup as a DV NTSC 48kHz, 720 x 480, editing timebase=59.94, timecode Rate=same as editing timebase, compressor-DV/DVPRO-NTSC, quality 100%.
When I export to Quicktime the movies are very low quality--lots of noise and moire pattern etc.
How do I get the best qualtiy using still images? Is it my FPS setting, image pixel size, compressor setting? Also, do the movies need to be deinterlaced?
The preview in the FCP browser and canvas looks a little better but I do notice noise (moire patterns) along the sharp edges of the still images.
I've seen QT movies of these very same images (done by someone else who is no longer around) and they are much better quality.
Does anyone have an appropriate workflow for this type of project? The final movies are to be shown on a flatscreen monitor from a local computer, so the file sizes can be relatively large (300mb).
I can post an example of he movie files if that might help.
Thanks.
Pedro

David, your a genius!!! You posted your reply on my birthday, and I missed it until today!
Fotomagico is devastatingly easy to use and absolutely makes me want to cry at the amount of time I wasted creating photo slideshows in FCP!
I opened Fotomagico up and created a slideshow, one that I had already created in FCP and had take me FIVE HOURS to create... in TEN MINUTES!!!!!!!!! Aaaaaaaaah.
I couldn't believe it. I thought there had to be a catch or something. This was too easy the quality can't be there... but it was. It's amazing and I can't thank you enough for all the future hours you have saved for me.
Al Romero

Using still images in PP CS6?

Hi all, newbie to this forum so hello, happy christmas and love to the lot of ya haha
I am trying to make a video for my girlfriends artwork so am using purely still images and text but for the life of me, i cannot get the pics to show at their correct resolution at all in pp. Even the text i did in photoshop looks suspect. They all seem to be very pixelated, even when i export to movie. The images are all 300 ppi and professionally taken but when in pp, they look like they've been taken on a cheap mobile phone.... not helpful at all.
I'm fairly new to all this movie stuff but i do understand technical speak so don't worry about blinding me with science
Any help would be a god send right now so thanks in advance.

1st, read Photo Scaling for Video http://forums.adobe.com/thread/450798
-Too Large May = Crash http://forums.adobe.com/thread/879967
-And another crash report http://forums.adobe.com/thread/973935
2nd, after your pictures are properly scaled, you need to realize that 300dpi for photo printing has nothing to do with the resolution of a DVD screen... which is, I think, 72dpi... Link to DVD Demystified FAQ http://forums.adobe.com/thread/544206
If you want higher resolution, you need to use a HiDef BluRay disc

Still images turn to black backgrounds in the exported movie

I am still using Premiere 2.0. I produced a ca. 25 min project with still images at the beginning and at the end and short videoclips in between. Still images are only ca. 40-50 kB large. When working on it I occasionally got a few problems (e.g. an audio transition across two clips was making Premiere hanging up) but I could easily get around them and successfully preview the project and export it to a folder and directly to a DVD. However, when viewing the movie on TV I found out that almost all (BUT NOT ALL!) the still images had turned into black backgrounds. I have exported the movie as MPEG, more still images were fine but not all of them. I have tried to drastically reduce the number of still images (max 5) but nome of them were fine. I do not have any error message and this problem is driving me crazy! Does anyone have a brilliant idea?
Last year I bought the new version of Premiere (3.0 I believe, surely not 7.0) but I stopped using it after one week because there was no way to successfully export the project I was working on. I made several videos, always got problems but so far I always found a solution on Premiere forum. Hope this time too!
Many thanks for the attention
fabia (switzerland)

Try sizing your photos to 1000x750 pixels in size.
Also, right-click on each photo on the timeline and select Field Options and check the Flicker Removal box.
These will give you the best quality.
I am also concerned, however, that you are having technical problems and, especially, that you can not use a newer version of the program.
I'd recommend you install the latest version of Quicktime and the newest RealTek drivers, as we recommend in our FAQ.
http://www.adobeforums.com/webx/.3c057647/2
Also, using my recommended computer maintenance will remove temp files on your computer and make it run like new.
http://www.adobeforums.com/webx/.3bc43f9a/0

Still Images not working

I've put together a DVD in Encore, and many of the timelines are made up of at least one clip, and one still image leading into that clip. Everything looks fine in Encore, and it all writes to a disc with no trouble, but when I play the DVD some of th still images are working fine, and some aren't. Images that don't work either seem to be ignored all together, or, the still image seems to be replaced by the first frame of the clip it is in front of in the timeline. I can't find any differences between the still images that do work and the ones that don't. I've tried .png and .jpg files. Its always the same images too.
Any ideas?

Welcome to the forum.
Along with John's question regarding the pixel x pixel size, have you thought about doing the work with the stills in PrPro, and then just Exporting as is necessary (or using ADL)? While Encore has a limited SlideShow feature, it is designed to work better with AV files, than stills.
Good luck,
Hunt

Text looks too pixelated when played back

Here is the situation. We have a project to produce a banner for our school that will be played at an arena. This is to played on one of those huge banner screens that go around the entire place. The dimensions are 6046 x 32 (I know that sounds crazy, I'm still waiting form them to call back to confirm if those are the right dimensions). When I put the text on there it looks way to pixelated in play back. Any thoughts of what I could do to make it look presentable?

chapp_stl wrote:
I spoke with the powers that be and they said the original dimensions are correct.
This is not supported by your following statements but it my pleasure to misunderstand stuff.
chapp_stl wrote:
I'm just hoping we can send this off to the place that will play it to see how it looks before it's too late.
Yes, that would be great. I may have missed it before, you're sending them what? The only thing you'll get from Livetype is a Quicktime movie or a still image. If they want a still, do it in Photoshop. I'm still having a really hard time believing the stadium expects you to deliver this thing intact, self contained. It is more likely they want your design and specifications and then they'll create it using the display's proprietary software. Whatever runs the thing, it's probably on a PC. Make sure you know what you're expected to provide.
chapp_stl wrote:
Another question for those of you that have done this before, is it better to section the spacing out in thirds or fourths, etc.? We have a seven word sentence with our web address on it. I'm just hoping it doesn't cut off the words in the wrong spot.
There's nothing to break up. You make a sentence and animate it across the width of the format in one movie. Don't ya?
bogiesan

"Stuttering" when panning/zooming a still image...?

Hello.
I'm working on a small project which is basically a series of zooms/pans on still images. The pans/zooms are quite slow and take place over about 6-8 seconds. There's nothing too fancy going on here, but I notice that when I do a RAM preview or render out a comp, I get small "stutters" in some of them. Does anyone have any ideas why this would be happening and any suggestions on making these animations a little more "smooth". I mean, these things aren't complex at all, and overall they're quite smooth, but there's still times when I get these stutters and I can't figure out why they'd be happening? Would appreciate some advice!
Thanks,
Kristin.

There are certain speeds that sync up with frame rates so that they cause judders, jitters, stuttering or whatever you want to call it. The slower the frame rate the more obvious the problem.
If you've ever watched a western on TV or at the movies you've seen the stagecoach wheels turn backwards at various speeds. This is an example of the problem. It's actually called a stroboscopic effect. Mechanics, in the good old days when cars had carburetors and distributors, used to hook up a timing light to the #1 spark plug so that a light flashed on a timing mark on the crankshaft pulley. This light had the effect of stopping the rotation visually. That's exactly what's happening when you are moving your photograph across the frame at one of the critical speeds. Your eye is fooled and your brain can't process the movement smoothly.
There are also other cases where the sub pixel interpolation between frames causes areas of detail to flicker between frames. The latter problem can be seen by viewing your comp a frame at a time while zoomed in to say 800% and observing the edge detail. This problem can be especially nasty when you're trying to do a smooth title or credit roll. The horizontal lines that make up fine type can almost completely vanish between fields or frames if the text is moving at the wrong speed. You can test this out by creating a single pixel high horizontal line in AE and animating it from bottom to top of the frame. The only speed where you'll get a nice solid line in every frame or field is one that is an exact multiple of the frame rate. IOW, 1 frame 1 pixel of movement, 1 frame 2 pixels of movement, and so on. Move at 1 frame and 1.33 pixels of movement and the line will appear to completely disappear then return.
If you are working at 24fps progressive you'll find that the juddering caused by motion at critical speeds is much more problematic than projects at 29.97 fps. Interlacing, as was mentioned before, helps and gives you a wider range of motion, but interlacing can introduce more pronounced flickering in the detail if you are right at one of these critical speeds.
This problem extends to shooting as well. Cinematography manuals contain critical panning speed charts that list the number of degrees per second you can pan with various lens (angle of view) and shutter speed combinations. There isn't a videographer out there that's tried shooting 24P video and not ended up with an unusable pan due to these critical speeds.
The solution to successfully animating detailed images is to use the right speed (pixels per second) for your frame rate, add extra motion blur to hide the problem, or reduce the amount of detail in the image. These are the only solutions that I know of. They all limit design and timing, but what good is your design if it makes your eyes go buggy.
The best way I know if to tell if the problem is a playback issue is to use a device or program that tells you when you're dropping frames. You can use QT (by looking at the playback rate) or in FC or PPro by having the program report dropped frames. If it's a data rate issue you need more horsepower or a better codec.

Still images too pixelated

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for