I am working on a project that has lots of still photos that get softer in the Avid. I first put them into Photoshop from high quality cell phone shots, size them and adjust any other parameters such as color, brightness, sharpness, etc. I output them as tiffs to desktop at 16x9, w=12, h=6.75, res=500. I then import them to Media Composer using Source Browser. I am finding that, once they are edited into a sequence, they tend to lose sharpness. I tried exporting them from Avid, and they still look sharp outside the application. Anybody know the solution to this?
Thanks,
marluc
Sorry, I forgot to add that this is a 1920 x 1080 HD project.
Two things I can think of:
1) Not sure I understand your width/height numbers, but if your ppi is 500, then Avid is RESAMPLING them to 72ppi. 2) If Avid is resampling, then you may have sharper results by changing the resampling control from default (polyphase) to something sharper (bicubic).
The best approach is to format your Tiffs in such a way that NO Avid resampling is required...1920x1080, 72 ppi.
j
Agreed regarding sizing and resolution. My understanding is that Avid takes no notice of resolution settings within a graphic - they essentially only control print size - and instead concerns itself purely with pixel dimensions.
I'd add the thought that you may simply not be viewing at full res ('green mode') in the timeline?
That could very well be ... that it ASSUMES 72ppi and it's strictlygoing off dimensions...good point! And not a bad idea to check timeline quality setting
All of your initial futzing in Photoshop results in TIFF images that are 6000x3375 pixels. (As others have pointed out, dpi is meaningless.)
First some thoughts on that: Video systems prefer images and video with even numbered pixels, so I would recommend bumping it up to 6400x3600. (Also, I've never been able to see a difference between a TIFF image and a jpeg exported at 100% quality except a massive file size difference. Since you've already done your photo edits and corrections, you can consider saving yourself some disk space using jpeg or png.)
Two ways to get your full size images into Avid:
1) Link, rather than import. (But depending on your system this can get boggy very quickly.)
2) Create a custom project with settings of 6400x3600 at whatever fps you're using. Once it's created, you can switch to those settings at any time within your project to import stills and then switch back to 1080 for editing.
If you're not doing substantial moves on your stills, you can also consider simply bringing them in at UHD 3840x2160. That's usually more than adequate for sharp images.
To all who answered my query about tiffs imported into Media Composer -- many thanks for some very sound ideas and thoughts. Unfortnately, all of my tiffs are now in Avid, not saved anywhere else with all the Photoshop work, so I will proceed from there. Cannot try to re-import but will take into consideration all suggestions in future imports to save file sizes! Oddly, the best suggestion may also have been the simplest -- to tweak the video quality menu at the bottom of screen!
All best,
marluc:Oddly, the best suggestion may also have been the simplest -- to tweak the video quality menu at the bottom of screen!
Yes. But that wasn't your question. Your questions was how to keep it full rez.
Glad you got it sorted to your satisfaction.
Ah, yes, but for viewing in the computer monitor . . . . .
The correct way to avoid resampling is indeed to create master files at the resolution of your avid project i.e. 1920x1080. DPI is meaningless in this context. If, however you wish to do any magnifying of that still (for example to create a Ken Burns type effect) then traditionally, the Pan and Zoom effect is what you would use. This links to your oversized image and allows you to move around inside it without losing resolution. So if you are working in a 1080p project you would want to have a much larger source file so that you can punch in and move about. It's not great for complex moves (try Boris BCC Pan and Zoom for that) but if you wanted to, say, crop in on one of your photos, then it's preferable to a resize or 3D warp.
Andi
The flaw I've always had issue with using P+Z is that it's a pain when dealing with conform/color. If those stills need to be color corrected -- say, in Resolve -- one would need to either make sure the newly colored stills are in the exact spot with the exact name, or would need to manually relink each and every one manually afterwards.
For this reason, I've always preferred linking to stills and using frame-flex to animate. FF is not without its flaws, but relinking to animated stills in this manner is certainly easier. It's that proprietary, inside the P+Z effect thing that I've found makes conforming a PITA.
Me personally, I'll rough out moves in Avid, but use After Effects to make the stills animations afterwards (which obviously gives you MUCH better keyframing control and and and), and those renders are what gets colored. Conform is WAY easier with QTs than the images.
Jason Sedmak:The flaw I've always had issue with using P+Z is that it's a pain when dealing with conform/color.
Agreed, without good management P&Z can become a PITA at conform. The key is always have an imported version of the still on your V1 as a reference with the P&Z on V2. As long as you don't move your stills after you've imported them then you can always follow the source file path to their location. If you're going to be grading on the same machine as you're cutting then file management shouldn't be too bad. In a networked environment then you are at the mercy of the proficiency of your operators. I've definitely had productions randomly pan and zoom from some USB thumb drive that then went off with the edit producer and was never seen again.
© Copyright 2011 Avid Technology, Inc. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Site Map | Find a Reseller