FCPX Library File Size

[Don Smith]

RE: “300dpi images will bring any NLE to a halt no matter what size they are.”

Simply not true.

Tell that myth to Final Cut Pro X now playing my 20,000 dpi image as easily as the same image next to it but with a dpi of 20.

I had done this test before but I repeated it just now…

Same picture, only 368×580, but three versions; one at 20 dpi, one at 2,000 dpi and one at 20,000 dpi. It made absolutely no difference in FCPX even on my old 2006 Mac pro. No difference in performance. No difference in display size. No difference in how it looked.

No difference. That’s because whether the picture has a high or low dpi setting, the pictures to the NLE are the same. Both contain the same number of pixels (368×580). All the NLE cares about is how many pixels it has to push. It doesn’t care how far apart they’ll be when printed to paper.

DPI is just a printer instruction. You can ignore it for video.

What CAN happen is that the more pixels in the picture (unrelated to DPI) the more processing power it needs from the NLE. But you cannot reduce the number of pixels in a picture by reducing its DPI count. The two parameters have nothing to do with one another. You fix NOTHING for video by reducing the dpi of an image.

Final Cut Pro 7 was a 32-bit application. Pixel counts greater than 4000×4000 would choke it regardless of its DPI setting. When I did my test years ago on Final Cut Pro 7 I could put in a picture with a MASSIVE DPI number and as long as the pixel count wasn’t larger than 4000 pixels x 4000 pixels it would work fine.

FCPX is a 64-bit application and can handle much higher pixel counts. But, again, pixel count and dpi have nothing in common. One does not affect the other in video.

If an image is slowing your performance and you know your system and software is running well then you can reduce the number of pixels for the NLE to push but you don’t do it by reducing the dpi number. You’ll be wasting your time.

NewsVideo.com

[Michael Harrington]

Thanks for the info, huge help moving forward with FCPX 10.1. I remember all to well searching through hundreds of edits and source material trying to identify why FCP7 would not complete an output.

BTW, the 4500 images I used came from a GoPro camera set on time-lapse, the images are 3200×2400 72dpi. While in my original event to string these images together before making a quicktime file, FCPX brought my entire system to a screeching halt, all apps even the finder were extremely slow.

I’ve made a quicktime and working in a different event now and running smoothly, so far.

On with my tutorials and first FCPX 10.1 project.

Michael Harrington
Mac Pro, Dual Quad-Core Intel Xeon 2.66 GHz, 12 GB, FCP7, Mavrick, ATI Radeon HD 4870, 30-inch Cine Display, 4 – 1TB internal, G Speed 6TB Raid 5, 1.25TB Esata, Numerous FW 800 external drives, Matrox MX02Max, FSI 17″ Broadcast Monitor, Black Magic Mini Sync Generator, Mackie 1402 & Event 20/20 monitors.

[Nikolas Bäurle]

[Don Smith] “Simply not true.

Tell that myth to Final Cut Pro X now playing my 20,000 dpi image as easily as the same image next to it but with a dpi of 20.”

I stand corrected. I tried it out myself and just realised that all these years I always had resample clicked (as is by default in Photoshop). In this case it does resize when changing dpi. Something I never really thought about, probably because I rarely have to deal with 300dpi images.

But the myth does seem very prevalent. At the beginning of my career that was what I was told to do whenever FCP Legacy had problems with images, and it worked, of course, since resample was always clicked…:-)

Thanks for the clarification Don.

“Always look on the bright side of life” – Monty Python

[Don Smith]

You’re a gentleman and I’m so glad I didn’t offend. It’s just been a crusade for me since I learned about it in the 7 days years ago because, you’re right, the myth of dpi in video is prevalent. For me, I wasn’t born knowing this. I bought into the myth for while myself until I was ‘educated’.

I wrote, but deleted because I had gone on too much by then, a paragraph about cautioning how having resampling checked could trick a person into thinking that dpi mattered but all Photoshop (or whatever app you’re using) is doing is making the changing dots-per-inch fit into the unchanging inches high and wide that would be printed.

Thank you.

NewsVideo.com

[Brett Sherman]

Higher dpi images do tend to be larger so I think that’s where the myth started. It’s all about pixel dimensions. DPI is on relevant in printing, and it’s surprising how many print graphic designers don’t understand it. I don’t know how many times I’ve been asked to produce a still from video that is 300dpi. I have to go through and explain how photo size, fixed video resolution and dpi work.