Why are my imported stills oversaturated?

I'ved tried exporting them from photoshop as jpg, psd, save to web jpg and they still come up oversaturated on the preview. How can I fix this?

The part of the screen that plays your preview may be using an overlay? I don't know if it is still done that way or not. Check your graphics card settngs and make sure that the programs are controlling your card and that you are not using the NVidia settings, or whatever card you have.

Similar Messages

Why are my imported stills turning black?

Trying to create a slideshow in iMovie HD 6.0.3. However, every jpg file I import. loads, then turns black (completely black) in iMovie. Why is this? Your help is greatly appreciated!

Well, I figured it out! I feel kinda bad for starting a post, then figuring it out myself, but maybe someone else can learn from it as well?
*The photos you use HAVE to be in the same (exact same) folder as the working file.*
I'm a bit of a neat freak and tried saving two folders inside the same folder as the working file. Every time I tried importing the photos, they would load, then turn black. However, once I moved them directly into the folder WITH the working file, they imported just fine.
Here's to hoping that my experience can help others!

Why are my imported images appearing as mirror images

Why are my camera imported images appearing as mirror images in IPHOTO?

I guess you have things figured out but you do seem a bit confused - iPhoto and PhotoBooth are two totally different applications and iPhoto can not possibly import a mirrow image of a photo and PhotoBooth can not edit iPhoto photos
LN

Photoshop 13 why are my imported photos next to each other with no space between them as in other version

I just got the new photoshop 13. I started to import photos and each picture buts up to each other. there is no info under it and when I edit it there is no expand button next to the picture to expand the version set. How do I change this?

see In photoshop 13, why are my photos butting up next to each other with no space to show info or version set button.

Why are my photo colors oversaturated?

The colors of my photos appear dark and otherwise oversaturated when viewed on my monitor. Yet, they appear fine when viewed on other computers or my phone. Any idea why? I've got a 20-in iMac running Lion.

The part of the screen that plays your preview may be using an overlay? I don't know if it is still done that way or not. Check your graphics card settngs and make sure that the programs are controlling your card and that you are not using the NVidia settings, or whatever card you have.

Why are my imported pictures fuzzy or blurry?

Recently, some of our images that look good in Preview and Adobe Photoshop look fuzzy or blurry when imported into a layout program (like QuarkXpress) or a word processing program (like MS Word and Bean). The affected pictures only seem to be those that we’ve reduced the image size on (from about 30”-40” to 2”-3”) and changed the resolution (from 72 ppi to 300 ppi). We have followed this same procedure with the same hardware and software for years with no problems. Now they’re blurred.
They look better when printed (compared to on screen) but they are still not the quality we have had in the past.
We have tried the following:
- We found the same results with the same pictures on multiple Macs (and multiple operating systems).
- We tried using a TIFF instead of a JPEG, but it didn’t seem to make a difference.
- We reinstalled our QuarkXpress (this was before we realized the problem was also in other programs, like MS Word)
- We tried reducing the image size in Photoshop rather than Preview
Any suggestions?

I can't explain what has changed in Adobe Photoshop, QuarkXpress, MS-Word, or Bean because I don't use any of those programs on the Mac platform.
In any case, I can easily explain why your small images look blurred:
Resizing them so drastically smaller, you discard about 70% of the original image resolution by going from 30"x40" at 72dpi to 2"x3" at 300 dpi.
Your original images:
30" x 72 dpi = 2160 pixels
40" x 72 dpi = 2880 pixels
Your converted images:
2" at 300 dpi = 600 pixels 27.7% of the original pixels, a 72.3% loss of "detail"
3" at 300 dpi = 900 pixels 31.5% of the original pixels, a 68.5% loss of "detail"
Some possible work-arounds (using doubles and halves):
1) If you want the same apparent resolution at 300 dpi, you need to make the 300 dpi images larger:
Divide original pixels by 300 (dpi) to get an equivalent size at 300 dpi, but now images are over 3 times larger than your 2" x 3" size requirement.
2160/300 = 7.2"
2880/300 = 9.6"
2) Divide by 600 dpi, and we're closer, but still about double your size requirement.
2160/600 = 3.6"
2880/600 = 4.8
3) If you want the same apparent resolution near the size 2" x 3", increase the resolution to 1200 dpi
Divide by 1200dpi, and we're just under your 2" x 3", but these images still retain detail when viewed just slightly larger.
2160/1200 = 1.8"
2880/1200 = 2.4"
Another alternative that sacrifices some quality. but not as much:
If you want to compromise quality a bit and still use the 2" x 3" image size, try 600 dpi. It won't be as sharp as the original, but might be an acceptable compromise because you're keeping more than half of the original resolution. It depends quite a bit upon the subject matter. Intricate landscapes usually look better at lower resolution than dramatic headshots where the loss of those intermediate shades makes pixelization so obvious.
2" x 600 dpi = 1200 pixels, 45% loss, 55% of original
3" x 600 dpi = 1800 pixels 37.5% loss, 62.5% of original
And finally if you simply must have BOTH 2" x 3" and original resolution, here are the exact numbers:
2160/2" = 1080 dpi
2880/3" = 960 dpi
This discussion does not speak to the file sizes of the resized images, nor the maximum output resolution capabilities of your viewing and printing devices.

Why are animated GIFs still broken?

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/1229922 <-- this
'nuff said, this has been a problem ever since Preview lost its ability to animate GIFs. It may be a WebKit problem (i.e. yeah, Apple, just go ahead and let yourself off the hook...right), but regardless, how come it has not been addressed sooner? Safari chokes after about 4 frames of animation; if the GIF loops, it starts over fresh, but it chokes again.
I am using 10.5.8, but I am aware this is still a problem for all 10.6 OSes and iOSes. I don't know about Safari for Windows; not relevant at the moment.
Why is this still a problem after three-and-a-half years of Safari development have passed?

Well, here are the issues I have run into.
1) Gifs load half way and then animate on the base but not on the top.
2) Gifs animate waaaaaaay too fast.
I have found no solution for the 1st issue, and it does not always occur.
As for the second one it has to do with browsers all reading the "0 delay" setting of the animation at uniquee speeds. Most round it to 10/100th of a sec, while Safari loads it at 3/100th resulting in a faster images, but a non-standard speed. Which ***** since I am running animations that follow using a set time out only to have safari throw everything off. I think one other browser runs at something like 6/100ths so Safari is not the only one. Faster could be nice if they all got on the same page, but as they are it is pointless. Pretty much meaning if you want an animated gif you have to avoid the "0 delay setting at all costs, and pretty much anything under 1/10th because it will not display the same in many browsers. It could be this fast speed in Safari that is causing the loading and instability issues with sime.

Collect files question. Why are the paths still the same?

So I collected all of my files from a project and the new project points to all of my old paths. So is there a way to collect the files and have the project point to the new files that were collected? Not sure why they would not be connected. Or am I missing something.....Luckily I had a small project now and replacing the footage is not a big deal, but I have a really big project I'm working on now and it will be pretty time consuming in the future when I access the archived file, to replace all of the missing files. Thanks in advance

Stanley Arthur wrote:
I've seen folks belly ache and go on and on about "if you offer this feature, why can't you make it work???", to the point of personal attacks on Adobe support people. To those, I just say "PICK YOUR FREEKIN BATTLES". There are quick and easy workflows that WORK. And that is the point. KEEP WORKING.
So it's just supposed to be understood that this feature flat out doesn't work and we're supposed to be roll over and be elated that we bought a $1000+ package program that touts certain features that in fact don't work? That sounds like the Apple fanboys who still swear by Final Cut Pro X despite it being anything BUT pro. "We don't need Bluray, Steve says so."
I think Adobe either needs to make it work, and work right, or remove the broken feature until they can get it right. What's unreasonable about that? That sounds obvious. If a feature is listed as a function of the program, we, the consumers have a right to expect that feature to work.
That's like telling somone who bought a 4x4 truck to pick his battles and only drive on the interstates in the summer and not venture off road or drive through snow because the four-wheel-drive feature doesn't work... and quit complaining it doesn't work, geez! Keep it on the nice summer highways, buddy. Duh!
This guy has every right in the world to expect his four-wheel-drive to work because it's a listed feature of the truck... heck, it even has a 4x4 button to push inside the car... with options!
At the very least, Adobe needs to make a disclaimer of the like: "use this feature with caution, still in beta.... still. In fact, it flat out doesn't do as the documentation states, but feel free to give it a try if you want. But please don't come fussing to us if it doesn't work; we're tired of hearing the complaints."
Or, just disable the dumb thing till they can figure it out like much inferior Edius easily did and, as much as I hate to say it, FCP7.

Why are nd filters still used with digital?

I'm kind of new to the world of DSLRs, but it just occurred to me from what I know, that nd filters should really be a thing of the past. I mean nd filters are just there to reduce the amount of light right? This is such a basic thing to do when dealing with digital imaging. Other than holding onto the past, why wouldn't there be a way to set your ISO as low as 1? Or am I just totally missing something? I know some professional digital video cameras like the sony f65 have internal nd filters, but unless that's a software thing, then that also seems a bit silly. Can someone educate me if I'm not understanding.
Cheers,
Cg.
Canon 6D,Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM, Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM, Sigma 1.4 x EX DG Teleconverter, Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 macro USM, Canon EF 50mm f/1.8, EF 40mm f/2.8 pancake, Sigma AF 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 DC HSM, Pentax 400mm f/5.6

Many "effects" filters are no longer required as the effects can be applied with digital editing software... so while it's true that many filters are "a thing of the past", ND filters are _not_ actually "effects" filters. What they do cannot be simulated by editing an image.
An "good" ND filter wont change the look of the image itself... everything should appear sharp and without any color cast. What it does... is change your shooting CIRCUMSTANCES.
Suppose I'm shooting with an outdoor "fill" flash on a sunny day and my flash can't do "high speed sync" mode... so I'm limited to max flash sync shutters speeds of, say, 1/200th (this varies based on your specific camera model.) The "Sunny 16" rule says that I the normal exposure for full mid-day sun using f/16 is to use the inverse of the ISO as the shutter speed. So at a low base ISO of ISO 100, that'd be 1/100th. But the side-effect of f/16 is a _very_ broad depth of field and suppose I want a deliberately blurred background. I can increase the shutter to 1/200th and this will let me drop my f-stop to f/11... but that's still a LOT of depth of field and no nicely blurred background. If I wanted to bring that down to, say, f/4... I'd have to find a way to dump 3 full stops worth of light. I can't just drop the f-stop to f/4 and increase the shutter by 3 stops to 1/1600th because that's WELL beyond flash-sync speed and my flash (for purposes of this example) can't do high-speed sync.
One really great way to dump 3 stops of light so I can drop my f-stop down without having to speed up my shutter is... a 3 stop ND filter (sometimes called an ND 0.9 -- every "0.1" worth of density blocks 1/3rd of a stop of light.)
Another _VERY_ common use of the ND filter is to get shutters speeds much slower than possible without the filter.
Suppose I want to take a photo of a waterfall and I want a slow shutter so that I can have that gorgeously blurred dreamy looking water. At f/16 my shutter is still at 1/100th... I could go to f/22 and drop the shutter to 1/50th... but that's still pretty fast. If I used 5 stops I could get the shutter down to 1/4 second. A 10 stop ND (ND 3.0) would let me bring that down to 8 seconds...
The final images in these examples would still have the same amount of light and there'd be no tint or color-cast on the images... what you're REALLY doing is changing your shooting "circumstances" which allows you to use different exposure settings than would otherwise be possible without the filter.
Hope that helps!
Regards,
Tim
Tim Campbell
5D II, 5D III, 60Da

Why are PS3 controllers still $55?

With the new PS4 system out now, you'd think that the prices on PS3 controllers would drop but no, they're still 55 bucks! There's only a $5 difference between the DS3 and DS4 controllers ($60) so who would buy a controller that's been out for 6 years now for full price anymore unless they really need it?
Sony, y u no lower DS3 prices?!

Hi there! Thanks for the message. Our colleagues at PlayStation are actually better equipped to respond to your PlayStation questions. Please feel free to contact them at https://support.us.playstation.com/. I hope this helps.

Why are external servers STILL auto-opening when you connect to them!

This never happened in classic. One of the many reasons why I stopped liking "macs".

Hi efacg,
Most printing issues are solved by resetting the Printing preferences. When you print from Firefox and you click on the down arrow, do you see Defualt and Firefox? Please make changes to the preferences here and preview the document.
If this continues to be an issue please also see [[Fix printing problems in Firefox]]
If there are any other questions, please do not hesitate to ask, we are here to help.

Why are my imported mp4 video files upside down and black and white?

I just started using Premiere Pro and anytime I import mp4 files they only play upside down and in black and white. I did not apply any video effects! How do I fix this? Thanks in advance!

Some similar rectent threads:
http://forums.adobe.com/message/5525979#5525979
http://forums.adobe.com/message/4854015#4854015
Good luck,
Hunt

Why are the pages still loading so slowly? Firefox is also still using a lot of memory. I've tried everything and still have the same issues. The new versions never help either. The support section still lists the same "solutions" that do not work.

I have spent too much time on the same issues. Will the issues ever be resolved?

i'm also having major CPU problems w/ FF 29.0.1. when i restart the app it calms down again but after loading tabs it steadily climbs up to 100% after not too long. i have checked out the 2 CPU links/articles above and do all the basic troubleshooting and tips, but with all the FF tools & add-ons isn't there some sort of CPU monitor that has the ability to display which extensions/scripts are hogging the CPU? Activity Monitor on Mac just shows the total used by the app. it's impossible in my case to efficiently disable dozens of add-ons & scripts, restart, and test each one by one b/c it can take several hrs before the CPU starts to spike high again. i have no time for this.
thanks

View Accessors: Why are they important?

Hi,
I have a couple of questions below. please help me in getting them.
1. What View accessors are actually meant for? From the documentation at http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E17904_01/web.1111/b31974/bclookups.htm#CIHCHGIA, although its clear that it accesses all the rows from the other View objects, so are View accessors meant only for accessing such data, from different view object.
2. Are view accessors also meant to access rows from two or more view objects?
Thanks,
Edited by: pandurang_sp on Jun 10, 2012 10:39 PM

- View Accessors by definition are ADF Business Components object that points from an entity object attribute (or view object) to a destination view object or shared view instance in the same application workspace. The view accessor returns a row set that by default contains all the rows from the destination view object.
- The source and destination view objects are generally associated in some way so you can retrieve the row set from destination based on source row selection.
- And yes the accessors can access rows from multiple view objects.
- E.g. consider an Dept/Emp case where EmpVO is set as accessor for DeptVO where DeptID=EmpVO.DeptID. For a given dept you can quickly access all employees using this accessor.

Why are my apps still in trial mode after subcription is paid

my adobe cc trial apps are about to expire and but i have a paid subscription and have tried to download the full apps but have only been given the option to download apps in trial mode, what to do?

Nothing works. Here is the situation. I have a subscription that is up for its monthly fee tomorrow, ever since the first payment, which was processed, I have been able to access the apps but they have always started in trial mode. Even with this latest release today, I uninstalled everything cleaned my system out completely and started from scratch. I access my page the apps are available fro download, firstly they appear as "download trial" but a second later it switches to just plain "download" I download the app, it starts up, there are a few flashes on the initial screen that appears and then the apps revert to the almost finished trial mode I had initially started with and I am presented with an option to continue or activiate with a serial number which i do not have. I am downloading an english version and am making sure that the english is the default language. Dont know what to do. Up the creek without a paddle!!!!!!! HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why are my imported stills oversaturated?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for