Graphic Quality FCP6

Scott Aubuchon · February 8th, 2008, 09:19 AM

still no luck with all the suggestions... I even tried making a motion template, which imports beautifully in the viewer (and looks perfect in motion), but as soon I drop it in the time line, it turns to garbage...

I render, export and it looks the same.

I tried all the suggestion from the ripple training article... no luck.

Now, when I import other motion templates (Tech Blue- Lower Third), it works fine... maybe slightly blurry, but more than acceptable.

What else?

Duncan Craig · February 8th, 2008, 09:54 AM

Did you try rendering in Motion and adding the finished quicktime into FCP?

Scott Aubuchon · February 8th, 2008, 09:58 AM

yeah, I rendered in motion using the animation settings... the outputted mov looked perfect... that is, until I dumped it in my timeline. :)

I am really at a loss now...

Aric Mannion · February 8th, 2008, 10:19 AM

So only the red graphic looks bad, and the blue one looks ok?

Scott Aubuchon · February 8th, 2008, 10:40 AM

funny you mention... I tried rendering in blue, thinking it was having a hard time dealing with red (which isn't uncommon)... wrong... looks just as bad.

Scott Aubuchon · February 8th, 2008, 01:28 PM

Interesting... I changed to uncompressed 8 bit (in the sequence settings) and it looks MUCH, MUCH better!

But, this kind of hoses my work flow, as I have to re-render footage. Not a show stopper, but a BIG thorn in the side.

***EDIT*** Once I rendered, it looked like POO!

Scott Aubuchon · February 8th, 2008, 09:52 PM

As I said above, I have been working this issue in multiple forums... and someone pointed out something interesting... He was drawing to the conclusion that the renders are high quality images (4:4:4) and the prores is lower (4:2:2) and they will never match. I am a confused by this as its a bit over my technical head.

Anyone have an opinion on this?

Scott Aubuchon · February 9th, 2008, 06:30 PM

this thread has kind of dried up on me... anyone have any other suggestions?

Eric Goodspeed · February 10th, 2008, 03:55 PM

http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage...p_spencer.html

Steve Oakley · February 12th, 2008, 01:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Aubuchon

As I said above, I have been working this issue in multiple forums... and someone pointed out something interesting... He was drawing to the conclusion that the renders are high quality images (4:4:4) and the prores is lower (4:2:2) and they will never match. I am a confused by this as its a bit over my technical head.

Anyone have an opinion on this?

it should not cause the problem.... BTW, is what you are seeing going out to the NTSC or HD monitor the same way ? or only the canvas ?

Scott Aubuchon · February 12th, 2008, 12:12 PM

I think its kind of a dead end issue... here is what I have determined.

If I edit in a ProRes timeline and dump in an alpha channel graphic, it looks bad... but when I am done editing and change the sequence to "Animation", it looks perfect... I then export to quicktime using the sequence settings (animation) and the output still looks perfect, although huge in size.

But then, I run it through compressor and get results no better than I had with using ProRes.

See the difference here:

http://www.sacreativeservices.com/forum_stuff/diff.jpg

I think it is what it is... I can't seem to get razor sharp graphics no matter what I do...

Scott Aubuchon · February 13th, 2008, 07:33 PM

well... knowing what I know now, when dealing with HDV or DV and other compressed codecs, you have to be careful with the way you create your graphics. High contrast, organic shaped stuff probably isn't the best choice...

so, I switched my graphic and got it to an acceptable level:

http://www.sacreativeservices.com/fo...uff/better.png

I really appreciate everyone's input...

Andrew Kimery · February 14th, 2008, 02:18 PM

Nice. Even though that wasn't what you original envisioned for the gfx, at least you know it's not a bug in your system and just a limitation the video world has that the gfx world does not.

-A

Steve Oakley · February 14th, 2008, 02:22 PM

you know maybe its the curve radius of the graphic was the problem. it was in just the right spot to be 1/2 pixels for the codec. animation being 4:4:4 of course doesn't have the limitation of of 4:2:2, but even still it should of worked.

maybe just one last thing. if you took that graphic and made it 5-10% larger or smaller, did it work ? and maybe try nudging it a 1/2 pixel over in the motion tab. seems like your new graphic looks ok.

Scott Aubuchon · February 15th, 2008, 07:51 AM

Steve... that's a good point, I may just have been at a level where with degradation was very apparent.

I will have to do a few more tests in the near future... right now I am refreshing the FedEx tracking page awaiting my new Mac Pro - YAY!

February 8th, 2008, 01:28 PM	#36
Scott Aubuchon Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Michigan Posts: 105	Interesting... I changed to uncompressed 8 bit (in the sequence settings) and it looks MUCH, MUCH better! But, this kind of hoses my work flow, as I have to re-render footage. Not a show stopper, but a BIG thorn in the side. *EDIT* Once I rendered, it looked like POO! Last edited by Scott Aubuchon; February 8th, 2008 at 01:32 PM. Reason: I was wrong.

February 10th, 2008, 03:55 PM	#39
Eric Goodspeed New Boot Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Ozarks Posts: 21	Check it out http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage...p_spencer.html

February 8th, 2008, 09:19 AM	#31
Scott Aubuchon Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Michigan Posts: 105	still no luck with all the suggestions... I even tried making a motion template, which imports beautifully in the viewer (and looks perfect in motion), but as soon I drop it in the time line, it turns to garbage... I render, export and it looks the same. I tried all the suggestion from the ripple training article... no luck. Now, when I import other motion templates (Tech Blue- Lower Third), it works fine... maybe slightly blurry, but more than acceptable. What else?

February 8th, 2008, 09:54 AM	#32
Duncan Craig Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Leeds, UK Posts: 660 Images: 10	Did you try rendering in Motion and adding the finished quicktime into FCP?

February 8th, 2008, 09:58 AM	#33
Scott Aubuchon Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Michigan Posts: 105	yeah, I rendered in motion using the animation settings... the outputted mov looked perfect... that is, until I dumped it in my timeline. :) I am really at a loss now...

February 8th, 2008, 10:19 AM	#34
Aric Mannion Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Boston, Massachusetts Posts: 616	So only the red graphic looks bad, and the blue one looks ok?

February 8th, 2008, 10:40 AM	#35
Scott Aubuchon Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Michigan Posts: 105	funny you mention... I tried rendering in blue, thinking it was having a hard time dealing with red (which isn't uncommon)... wrong... looks just as bad.

February 8th, 2008, 09:52 PM	#37
Scott Aubuchon Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Michigan Posts: 105	As I said above, I have been working this issue in multiple forums... and someone pointed out something interesting... He was drawing to the conclusion that the renders are high quality images (4:4:4) and the prores is lower (4:2:2) and they will never match. I am a confused by this as its a bit over my technical head. Anyone have an opinion on this?

February 9th, 2008, 06:30 PM	#38
Scott Aubuchon Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Michigan Posts: 105	this thread has kind of dried up on me... anyone have any other suggestions?

February 12th, 2008, 12:12 PM	#41
Scott Aubuchon Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Michigan Posts: 105	I think its kind of a dead end issue... here is what I have determined. If I edit in a ProRes timeline and dump in an alpha channel graphic, it looks bad... but when I am done editing and change the sequence to "Animation", it looks perfect... I then export to quicktime using the sequence settings (animation) and the output still looks perfect, although huge in size. But then, I run it through compressor and get results no better than I had with using ProRes. See the difference here: http://www.sacreativeservices.com/forum_stuff/diff.jpg I think it is what it is... I can't seem to get razor sharp graphics no matter what I do...

February 13th, 2008, 07:33 PM	#42
Scott Aubuchon Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Michigan Posts: 105	well... knowing what I know now, when dealing with HDV or DV and other compressed codecs, you have to be careful with the way you create your graphics. High contrast, organic shaped stuff probably isn't the best choice... so, I switched my graphic and got it to an acceptable level: http://www.sacreativeservices.com/fo...uff/better.png I really appreciate everyone's input...

February 14th, 2008, 02:18 PM	#43
Andrew Kimery Major Player Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 352	Nice. Even though that wasn't what you original envisioned for the gfx, at least you know it's not a bug in your system and just a limitation the video world has that the gfx world does not. -A

February 14th, 2008, 02:22 PM	#44
Steve Oakley Trustee Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: United States Posts: 1,158	you know maybe its the curve radius of the graphic was the problem. it was in just the right spot to be 1/2 pixels for the codec. animation being 4:4:4 of course doesn't have the limitation of of 4:2:2, but even still it should of worked. maybe just one last thing. if you took that graphic and made it 5-10% larger or smaller, did it work ? and maybe try nudging it a 1/2 pixel over in the motion tab. seems like your new graphic looks ok.

February 15th, 2008, 07:51 AM	#45
Scott Aubuchon Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Michigan Posts: 105	Steve... that's a good point, I may just have been at a level where with degradation was very apparent. I will have to do a few more tests in the near future... right now I am refreshing the FedEx tracking page awaiting my new Mac Pro - YAY!