Creative Communities of the World Forums

The peer to peer support community for media production professionals.

Activity Forums Apple Final Cut Pro Legacy PNG files from photoshop looking lousy at normal size???

  • PNG files from photoshop looking lousy at normal size???

    Posted by Thomas Borden on May 17, 2010 at 1:46 am

    I am working on a project for a client, editing a product video for their website, and I’m having a lot of problems with image quality of a number of PNG files imported from photoshop. The video is a combination of 16:9 video (shot in HD on a Panasonic HVX-200) and PNG files of jewelry (gold crosses) created in Photoshop. the PNGs are a combination of graphic design and manipulated photo images. These PNG files are sized at 3844 x 2160 at 72dpi (so that I can do some scaling and motion in FCP). The problems I’m having with the PNG files are when the images are scaled at 35%, so that the entire gold cross is visible in the frame – these images have very low detail quality. When the images are at 100% size, the image quality is pretty good (not perfect, but more acceptable).
    The sequence settings in FCP are set to:
    Frame Size – 960×720 HD 16:9
    QT Video Settings:
    Compressor – DVCPRO HD720p60
    Quality – 100%

    My question is whether Final Cut Pro (vers 6.0.5) is capable of working with graphic images like these without problems like I’m having? Do I need to create all of my PNG/still image motion sequences in a different software that is designed to work with animation and/or graphic images, and then export those sequences out to Quicktime and import into FCP to drop into my project and timeline?
    I’ve already tried using the “Prepping Still Images for Final Cut Pro” techniques listed in an article by Larry Jordan with no luck.
    Any and all advice would be greatly appreciated!
    tom

    Thomas Borden replied 16 years, 3 months ago 4 Members · 10 Replies
  • 10 Replies
  • Michael Gissing

    May 17, 2010 at 2:37 am

    Firstly you are working in a sequence that is anamorphic so the png is being squeezed and then unsqueezed. DVCProHD is a good camera codec and many use it as an edit codec but it is compressed and not as clean as ProRes.

    You might find it works better to copy the edit into a ProRes 422 sequence with true 16:9 aspect (1280 x 720).

    I presume also that all quality judgments are made after rendering.

  • Thomas Borden

    May 17, 2010 at 2:53 am

    thanks for that advice, michael. i’m back home from my office now but i’ll try copying the edit into a ProRes 422 (1280×720) sequence first thing tomorrow AM. the footage was shot on the Panasonic at 960×720 60p. will FCP ask me to change the sequence settings to 960×720 (to match the footage) when i paste the edit into it? and if so, i assume i should click “no”?

  • Michael Gissing

    May 17, 2010 at 3:37 am

    If you click no it won’t resize (which is what you want), but it will mean that the footage may need to have the distort characteristics changed if it doesn’t automatically resize. So if shots look distorted you may need to adjust motion tab settings including distort.

  • Chris Tompkins

    May 17, 2010 at 11:36 am

    Also, I find having still images really large don’t look as good having them @ 20-30% in timeline. Try taking stills back to PS and making them half as a big and then bring back in to the FCP.
    Also, fully render b/4 judge.

    Chris Tompkins
    Video Atlanta

  • Thomas Borden

    May 17, 2010 at 5:40 pm

    chris, i’m not sure what you mean when you say “still images really large don’t look as good having them @ 20-30% in timeline”. right now, my images are pretty large so when they are in the timeline, their scale is about 20-30%.

  • Thomas Borden

    May 17, 2010 at 5:51 pm

    hi michael, i tried copying the edit into a ProRes 422 sequence, with 1280×1080 HD setting, and “best” motion rendering. but the images actually look a little worse now. lots of flicker around the edges and lines. the strange thing is that when an image is scaled/zoomed in on in the timeline, the quality looks much better. it’s only when the image gets closer to “normal” size that it falls apart.

  • Chris Tompkins

    May 17, 2010 at 7:12 pm

    If your images are around 20-30% in size then you are NOT using 80% of the images – it is wasted energy so to speak.

    I understand want it to have them a little large to move on them but what I’m saying is try – and your mileage may very – shrinking the images down some and re-importing or re-linking them.

    If it’s 4000 pixels wide – drop em down to 1800 pixels wide and then relink and adjust in timeline and render.
    Make sense?

    Chris Tompkins
    Video Atlanta

  • Thomas Borden

    May 17, 2010 at 7:33 pm

    thanks, will do.
    on more question, in the sequence settings, which box should be checked for rendering:
    – Always render in RGB
    – Render in 8-bit YUV
    – Render 10-bit material in high-precision YUV
    – Render all YUV material in high precision YUV

  • David Roth weiss

    May 17, 2010 at 7:36 pm

    [Chris Tompkins] “If your images are around 20-30% in size then you are NOT using 80% of the images – it is wasted energy so to speak.

    Even more going on than just wasted energy, as the FCP render engine is not able to accurately deal with images that exceed 2K pixel dimensions.

    David Roth Weiss
    Director/Editor/Colorist
    David Weiss Productions, Inc.
    Los Angeles

    POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™

    EPK Colorist – UP IN THE AIR – nominated for six academy awards

    A forum host of Creative COW’s Apple Final Cut Pro, Business & Marketing, Indie Film & Documentary, and Film History & Appreciations forums.

  • Thomas Borden

    May 17, 2010 at 7:47 pm

    that’s good to know. so if i’m working in an HD sequence with sequence settings of 960x720HD, does that mean that i should not import any PS file with pixel dimensions exceeding 1920?

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy