Why do stills look so much better in Avid Xpress Pro?

I imported some stills into FCP (dimensions 2500x2000) and while they look fine in the viewer, they look terrible in the timeline. I tried importing the same still into AXP and it looks much better.
Any ideas why?
Thanks.

Just to back John up:
Shane's Stock Answer #2: Blurry playback
ONLY JUDGE THE QUALITY OF YOUR MATERIAL ON AN EXTERNAL NTSC MONITOR, OR AT LEAST A TV.
1. Disable overlays on the canvas
2. Make sure you've rendered everything (no green bars at the top of the timeline
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=24787
Video playback requires large amounts of data and many computations. In order to maintain frame rate and be viewable at a normal size, only about one-fourth of the DV data is used in displaying the movie to the screen. However, the DV footage is still at full quality, and is best viewed thru a TV or NTSC monitor routed thru your camera or deck.
Shane

Similar Messages

Which is much better for me, MacBook Pro 13" Retina Display or MacBook Air 13"?

Hi! I'm a High School Student, and I really need help in choosing the right MacBook. So which is which?
I'm really confused in choosing which MacBook suites. I have been researching about the specs of each MacBooks; some websites say "MacBook Pro is much better" while the others "MacBook Air is better than the Pro". I'm totally confused! And PLEASE HELP ME!
Here is what I need for a laptop:
*I will use it for Editing Videos and Photos
*sTORAGE for my Documents! (Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Adobe)
*PRINTING documents and stuff
*Great Quality for Movies, Videos, and Music
*GAMES!!! (Assasin's Creed, Sims, etc.)
*Other Apllications
*Storage for my stuff
*Best performance for INTERNET, SOCIAL SITES, & ENTERTAINMENT
*Handy and Easy to use
*Lightweight ('cause I have to bring it to school for reports and I have to bring i to to different places for conventions or seminars)
*STORAGE for my Photographs, Music, Movies (edited and downloaded)
*Long Lasting Batteries
*FAST and QUICK
I'm really confused, which shal I choose: MacBook Pro because it has the best performance or MacBook Air because it is very convenient.
I WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE IF YOU HELP ME.
Message was edited by: Samkeyness

Unfortunately, you mentioned "GAMES!!!" - no Mac notebook is a good gaming machine (sad but true). For everything else, however, I would recommend a MacBook Pro (Retina or non-Retina - whichever you prefer, although my preference is for the non-Retina: it lacks the portability of the Retina but is user upgradeable whereas the Retina 13" machine is limited to 8GB of RAM, soldered onto the logic board, and a 'fixed' storage space).
I haven't looked at the specs but I'm assuming that the Retina model would be only slightly heavier than the Air. But it would out-perform the Air should you desire to try games with it.
Good luck - we get these "what shall I buy" questions all the time but, in the end, it's your decision.
Clinton

Why is the MPE so much better when using Vista?

I get more realtime playback using Windows Vista than When using Windows 7 with HDV. I can get better GPU and CPU playback both when using Vista for HDV. Why is that? Im using a GT 240 and it kicks *** with Vista. I use a second LCD TV monitor as an NTSC monitor for the realtime previews. I do get some realtime with Windows 7 but only about half as much as with Vista. Something is better about Vista for HDV clips but Idon't know what. I have done several fresh installs and updates. What gives? Any thoughts.

I have done fresh OS installs and Windows updates. The GT 240 was added the same way. For HDV the Vista OS is better. For AVCHD they are about the same. I think it is a bug. It works better using Windows 7 if I don't output to the LCD TV monitor. Do any of you use HDV and preview on a NTSC monitor?

I have used still photos to make a Quick Time movie using FCE. The DVD made using i-DVD looks somewhat grainy and the motion isn't smooth when played on my TV. Other DVD's I have made play much better and I am wondering if the problem is my Quick Time m

I have used still photos to make a Quick Time movie using FCE. The DVD made using i-DVD looks somewhat grainy and the motion isn’t smooth when played on my TV. Other DVD’s I have made play much better and I am wondering if the problem is my Quick Time movie settings. The Dimensions and size of the problem movie are 1920X1080 and 584 MB respectively, while the movies that play better have Dimensions of 853X480 and are about 1.3 GB in size. Is this the source of my problem and how do I change things for the better.

Are you exporting to QuickTime Movie, or to QuickTime Conversion? For iDVD, you need to export to QuickTime Movie. Exporting to QT Conversion will kill the quality if you are moving the video from FCE to iDVD.
The file size per se makes no difference.
What size (pixel dimensions) are the photos that you put into your 1920x1080 sequence? Also, exactly what are the sequence properties ... is it 1920x1080i60 ... or i50? In North America it should be i60.
853X480 is an odd frame size. Where are you seeing this number? It would appear to be DV-NTSC, which has a frame size of 720x480. Your 1920x1080 frame size would not be DV-NTSC, it would be Apple Intermediate Codec. DV and AIC will look different, for sure.
Also, your quality setting in iDVD can affect the final video. You may want to check that also (in iDVD Preferences > Projects). Set it to Professional Quality if at all possible.

Videos look awful in iTunes, much better in Quicktime Player

I was, just as many others, deceived by the quality of video clips bought on iTMS (I started with the beautiful Love Profusion, by Madonna, and M.Jackson's Thriller).
The picture appeared in particular pixellated in sull screen, this for many videos.
(and the interface is so stupid : why do you have to play a clip in order to be able to switch to full screen, except maybe to keep Quicktime Pro's full screen in QT Player option alive ?)
Then I just remembered how my videos played beautifully in Quicktime Player, and often awfully in iTunes, since iTunes 4.9.
So I tried them in Quicktime Player (I have a 7.0 Pro license). (select in iTunes, command-R, command-O, command-F, you're done)
They look much much better.
And same goes for my non-iTMS videos, even after being converted to the iPod-friendly format with Quicktime Player.
I just remember reading from a member of the iTunes team how quick it had been to add video capabilities to iTunes (since 4.9 I think).
Maybe it was dine a bit too quickly.
I just thought it would have been fixed BEFORE the release of a video-capable iPod and the sale of video clips on the iTMS.
I now hope that on the video capable iPod (waiting for mine), these videos look more like in QT Player than like in iTunes Mac.
It looks like iTunes 6 forgets to or cannot do H.264 post-processing correctly. By the way, this post-processsing is part of the standard specification, according to Apple's technology brief
(http://images.apple.com/quicktime/pdf/H264TechnologyBrief.pdf), which means that the encoding process takes into account the de-pixellization done in post-processing (unlike divx for example, if I understand correctly), and that iTunes decoding is not even compliant to the H.264 standard.
Having such a bad, broken video player as iTunes 6 for both quality and ergonomy (at least on Mac) is SO STUPID.
I hope someone fixes the quality issue very quickly (Itunes 6.01?). If this person had time to make a "not as stupid as it is right now" interface for playing videos, that would make me happy again.
If anyone can confirm if this is a Mac only, or Mac WIndows issue, I'd be glad to know.

I do see a slight difference in quality between an .m4v file (purchased from the iTunes Music Store) when played in iTunes and QT player. If freezing at a specific frame, you can definitely notice the iTunes software seems to blur things and is less sharp (colors more dull, less pronounced).
As far as the interface is concerned for viewing videos inside of iTunes, the only real concern I have is the performance. QT player resize/scrubbing is much more effective.

HT1771 why did apple erase ichat? its so much better than messages and now I cant video chat with my ichat buddies

why did apple erase ichat? its so much better than messages and now I cant video chat with my ichat buddies!!!

HI,
Apple did not erase iChat.
Messages in Mountain Lion is iChat +
The plus bit is the fact you can iMessage iOS devices.
All the other features that were in iChat are still there.
If you upgraded Lion to get to Mountain Lion then in System Preferences > Mail, Contacts and Calendars you probably list all the iChat Accounts (Screen Names and IDs).
You may need to enable them for Messages.
They should also show up in Messages Menu > Preference > Accounts
Once those accounts (AIM and Jabber) are Enabled they can be viewed in a Combined Buddy List
Windows Menu > Buddies (Or using CMD + 1 Keystrokes)
In the General Section of the Preferences you can Unlink these Buddy lists.
The Green icons or highlight a Buddy and then using the Buddies Menu or the icons at the Bottom of the Buddy list can be used the same way to start Video or Audio Only chats.
The iMessage "Account" is only for texting iOS devices or other people using their Apple ID on a Mac in Messages.
It is an account "in addition to" rather than "taking over from" the services that iChat can join.
9:22 PM Thursday; December 6, 2012
Please, if posting Logs, do not post any Log info after the line "Binary Images for iChat"
 iMac 2.5Ghz 5i 2011 (Mountain Lion 10.8.2)
 G4/1GhzDual MDD (Leopard 10.5.8)
 MacBookPro 2Gb (Snow Leopard 10.6.8)
 Mac OS X (10.6.8),
 Couple of iPhones and an iPad
"Limit the Logs to the Bits above Binary Images."  No, Seriously

Why is it that I downloaded Firefox 4.0 but I do not have the orange firefox box in the upper left hand corner of screen. My screen still looks like the old verison of firefox. My screen does not look like the one in the video. looks nothing like the one

My Firefox 4.0 does not look anything like the videos you show about the features of the new Firefox. My screen looks totally different than yours. It does not have the orange box in the upper left hand corner of the screen. My screen still looks like the old version. I have the logo on the top of my screen with Ask a Question a vertical line Firefox Help - Mozilla Firefox.
Under this line I have File, Edit, View, History, Bookmarks, Tools, and Help. Below this line is a tab with Ask a Question Firefox Help and a +. My husbands screen looks identical to the orange Firefox Box in the upper left of screen. I would like my screen to look identical to the ones shown in your videos. I only have one version of Firefox 4.0 my husband does have the Firefox 4.0 plus the Beta version. How do I add the Beta version? I have Windows Vista running systems. Please help. Thank you

You're welcome

While updating iphone, itune gave me error of 1015 which tells that my iphone is much better than from which that i am updating. But now my iphone is still in restoring mode how i can resolve this problem.please tell me

while updating iphone, itune gave me error of 1015 which tells that my iphone is much better than from which that i am updating. But now my iphone is still in restoring mode how i can resolve this problem.please tell me

I just had the same problem with my iphone, only thing i could do was completely restore factory settings, lost a bunch of pics and contacts in the process... hope you have better luck than me

Why is MME playing much better than ASIO4ALL

I have a 64 bit acer Aspire R7 with 8GB RAM and runing windows 8.1. i have bin using adobe audition(now using CS6) for about 10 years now and i have never found myself havin this problem:
1)It so happens that my MME drivers are giving less glitches than the ASIO4ALL.(no matter how much i play around with the buffer size)
2)when using the asio4all during play back,the volume is lower compared to that of the MME drivers.
3)the asio4all icon on the system tray keeps flickering from play(green) to an exclamation mark(red) constantly
i cant use my MME for my projects coz i gat quite a bunch of plugins waiting to join the party...hence it will start glitching too sooner than later(((pliz help!!!help help help!!!!

I'm usin the onboard soundcard.i know have to get an external USB soundcard(guilty)...money issues.((but the thing is i used to run the same version of audition on a much smaller laptop(hp,32 bit,3GB RAM) and it worked far much better than the acer.when i play audio in audition with plugin effects:MME used to lag while ASIO4ALL would play it smoothly.n now i have rather the opposite situation.
ryclark wrote:
What audio interface are you using with Audition? If you are using the onboard soundcard you would be much better off using an external USB connected one with proper ASIO drivers which bypass the operating system completely.
There should be no difference between using ASIO4All and MME drivers since ASIO4All uses the windows drivers anyway. It converts them to ASIO for audio interfaces that don't have ASIO drivers. However from what I hear Win 8.1 may be causing the problem with your glitchy audio especially if you are using the built in audio
What do you mean there is no difference between ASIO4ALL and MME drivers?then why does audition prompt to use ASIO4ALL if available??

I have XP and my firefox 4 doesn't look like the new one, it still looks like the 4 beta i downloaded, any help?

i had the beta for firefox 4 downloaded on my windows xp computer. then when the official 4 came out i down loaded it. But it doesnt look like the website says it should, there is no awesome bar, no firefox menu button and the tabs are still at the bottom. it basically still looks like the firefox 4 beta that i already had.

The final version might have picked up your existing profile preferences...
To restore your location bar, right-click after the menu bar and choose Navigation Toolbar from the pop-up.
Use the same pop-up to change the position of tabs (check Tabs on Top) and finally to remove the menu bar. When the menu bar is turned off, you will get the orange Firefox button.
Does that work?

Why tomcat is still looking for old jar files?

Please help me it is a very serious problem.
I updated one of the jar files used by the project. I am using a new method that is available only in the new library. I removed the old jar files in my local system, and everything worked fine. Then I commit those files to the subversion, which is in the testing server, and then I created the war file. The war is successfully created, then I deployed to the tomcat. But, now there is an error in the portion I am using the method that is only available in the new jar files.
One of the error when I go to that portion is:
1. No Such Method Exists
The other errors on log files are:
1.
WARNING: Failed to open JAR
java.util.zip.ZipException: No such file or directory
2.
validateJarFile(tomcat/webapps/ROOT/WEB-INF/lib/j2ee.jar) - jar not loaded. See Servlet Spe
c 2.3, section 9.7.2. Offending class: javax/servlet/Servlet.class
Please help me, I have tried every other way to solve this. I have tried removing all the old jar files there were, and replacing with the new one. I have tried creating a war file and ftping to the testing server.
I problem is still there and it is because the testing server's tomcat is still looking for old jar files. I used Netbeans and add jar files as usual method.

Check the contents of your WAR file that you are deploying on the testing server to see if it contains the JAR that you can't find.
More than likely you are building your WAR file and your new JAR file is not being included in the build.

Create DNG Profile - Why does it look different in the DNG Editor vs LR/ACR?

Hi everyone, I am sorry if this has been covered before -- perhaps you could give me a link to the relevant info.
I have a client who shoots with a Leica DMR. The reds are way to saturated and magenta. We created a new camera profile in the DNG editor using a color-checker chart, shot at D6500 and Tungsten. Looks great, and Lightroom recognizes it. The issue: when we look at a photograph in the DNG editor with this profile, it looks much better. When we look at the same photograph in LR/ACR with the profile selected, the reds are still too saturated and magenta (though way better than without our profile). Why would a photo look different in the two applications, with the same profile?
As shown in DNG Editor:
As shown in LR:
Thank you for any light you can shed on this.
Laura Shoe

Here is an additional comparison further highlighting the magenta issue (amongst others). Shot with Leica R9 w/DMR(firmware1.3) using Leica Vario-Elmarit-R 35-70mm at ISO 100, f/4.8, 1/60. Manual WB=4912K, no Exp Comp.
Here is screen shot of same DNG image. Un-altered in either app., no presets, no sharpening, or noise reduction. CaptureOne (v4.8.3) on the left, and LR2 (v2.6)
Here is what the above screen shot looks like thru CS3:
you must click on image to see CS3 rendering - browser is not accurate
Anyone no what's going on?
PS the images were shot just shy of perfect focus to test sharpening in both apps, same levels applied to both images (C1 on left, LR on right). Here are the results:

Disapointed - soundcard on desk, onboard much bet

Well,?I have spent hours reading on why my Audigy 2 cards would have started to make these untolerable crackling sounds when I play my favorite games (WoW or CS:S). All I see are random solutions that appear to work for individuals, and no clear direction. Also, after what seems to be?like 5 months of complaints on the issue, there is very little insight on what is being done in terms of work to resolve this and whether it is driver related or not. This seems to affect several models of cards, and it is pretty clear to me that the Creative products or drivers are at fault. It doesn't seem like getting a new Audigy will guarantee anything. If I am wrong, please feel free to show why. So I spend good money on a sound card so that my system will run better and faster. However, it is sitting on my desk while I enjoy my games without it until a solution is found. I might buy Creative again someday, but only after taking a good look at what else is out there. I used to link soundcard to creative, but I suppose things change when companies are in such a position for too long. Thank god my DFI nf3 has reasonable onboard sound.

Managed to get my Audigy 2 installed ok.Changed pci slots --still no go Set optimised defaults and it evntually posted and I was able to instal drivers etc(used my original slot--just below the X4 pcie).Below is a link to modified drivers which work much better in VISTA.Work really well on my rig --but use at your own discretion.
http://digiex.net/drivers/164-creative-audigy-series-vista-32bit-x86-vista-64bit-x64-drivers-daniel_k.html

Looking to buy a new Mac, which is better Mac Air or Pro?

I currently own a 13.3inch LED-backlit widescreen notebook Mac book pro from 2011 and am looking to upgrade. I'm in my last year of high school and will be starting college next year. I'm really into photography, and use my computer for all my notes and assignments in class. SD card slot is prefreable. Really lost as to what I should get, not looking to spend over $1,500.00 (roughly, open to ideas). Is it worth buying an 11'inch basic? If so how can I connect my SD card? ANY help is very appreciated:)

13" Air with 8gig of RAM
11" Air doesnt have a SD card slot. Ive owned both 11 and 13" Air, still have a 13", and also a current pro.
If as you said you plan on much photo editing, then definitely get the 13"
The NEW macbook Pro and Air are extremely close in form factor
The newest macbook Pro is essentially a larger macbook Air with Retina display and options for speed in increasing prices up to an independent graphics and quad core processor.
both Air and new Pro now have PCIe SSD and permanent RAM.
The Air is the lightweight portable form factor, fast to boot and shut down, but with longer battery life than any of the macbook pro in 13"
Now the new macbook Pro and macbook Air are extremely close in form factor and nature.
both have 802ac wifi
both have permanent RAM, no superdrive
both are slim profiles and SSD
The only real differences now are (in the most expensive Pros) faster processors and quadcore processors and top end model autonomous graphics, also HDMI output on the new macbook Pros!. ....and of course the retina display
both are now "very good for travel"
DETAILED bench tests between the new AIR and the new PRO here:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/11/how-to-choose-13-inch-macbook-air-vs-13-i nch-retina-macbook-pro/2/
Other than features the form factor of the Air and Pro are VERY close now,....so now its merely a matter of features and price more than anything.
You need an external HD regardless of what you get for backups etc. Drop into an Apple store and handle both and make your choice based on features, such as Retina or non-retina, .... both at a distance now look like the same computer.
The Pro weighs more, ....but nowhere near what it used to just a month ago on the older macbook Pros
The NEW macbook Pro is a different creature entirely than the older macbook Pro, .....the new Pro is thicker than the Air, but id frankly call the NEWEST Pro a "macbook Air with Retina display" , or
Maybe a “macbook Air PRO with Retina display”
Instead of Air vs. Pro now,.....its really a smooth transition from Air to pro without comparing say, 2 different creatures, now its like contrasting a horse from a race horse (rough analogy)
Either one in 8gig of RAM (preferably)... the 4gig upgrade costs very little, the I7 you will notice only 15% faster on heavy applications over the I5, and NOTHING on most APPS.....I5 has longer battery life.
As you see below, the non-Retina 13" AIR is 82% of the Macbook with Retina display in resolution
there is no magical number of pixels per inch that automatically equates to Retina quality.
http://www.cultofmac.com/168509/why-you-might-be-disappointed-by-the-resolution- of-those-new-retina-display-macs-feature/
A huge internal SSD isnt a game changer for anything, you need an external HD anyway
what you WONT READ on Apple.com etc. is that the larger SSD are much faster due to SSD density
"The 512GB Samsung SSD found in our 13-inch model offers roughly a 400MB/s increase in write speeds over the 128GB SanDisk/Marvell SSD"
http://blog.macsales.com/19008-performance-testing-not-all-2013-macbook-air-ssds -are-the-same
Here is an excellent video comparison between the 11” I5 vs. I7 2013 Macbook Air.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDqJ-on03z4
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7113/2013-macbook-air-core-i5-4250u-vs-core-i7-465 0u/2
I5 vs. I7 performance 13” Macbook Air 2013
Boot performance
11.7 I5 ……11.4 I7
Cinebench
1.1 I5….1.41 I7
IMovie Import and Opt.
6.69 I5….5.35 I7
IMovie Export
10.33 I5…8.20 I7
Final Cut Pro X
21.47 I5…17.71 I7
Adobe Lightroom 3 Export
25.8 I5….31.8 I7
Adobe Photoshop CS5 Performance
27.3 I5…22.6 I7
Macbook Pro ports:
Macbook Air (13") ports:

How much better is Logic Pro?

Would it be a real disadvantage to get logic express over Logic, i mean has it still got all the loops, synths, drum machines and actual audio recording capabilities?
Thanks

Pro is much better imo, but depending on your budget and needs you might not need it. What I did was to purchase Logic Express first, learned it, liked it and then upgraded from Logic Express to Logic Pro once I found that I wanted the plugins and some options found in pro, this winter. That's a good route since it doesn't cost much more (Express$ + Upgrade$ ~= Pro$) and allowed me to have a much better idea for why I wanted Pro. I might have chosen not to buy it if I found so, but I did (and a the extra time accumulating money helped :-))

Why do stills look so much better in Avid Xpress Pro?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for