SIGN IN
::
SPONSORS
::
ADVERTISING
::
ABOUT US
::
CONTACT US
FORUMS
TUTORIALS
FEATURES
VIDEOS
PODCASTS
EVENTS
SERVICES
NEWSLETTER
NEWS
BLOGS
APPLE LIVETYPE:
Home
LiveType Forum
Final Cut
Final Cut Tutorials
Re: horrid quality compared to FCP basic text?
COW Forums
:
Apple LiveType
VIEW ALL
•
ADD A NEW POST
•
PRINT
Respond to this post
•
Return to posts index
•
Read entire thread
Re: horrid quality compared to FCP basic text?
by
Sjon Ueckert
on Jul 18, 2008 at 9:59:16 pm
In FCP leave the alpha at straight. Also there is a big difference between HDV and HDTV (one is 1440 using an anamorphic pixel (1.3) and the other (HDTV) is 1920 using a square pixel). That might be some of the problem in this discussion. I work in HDTV which is full sized 1920 X1080. When working in HDV (a long GOP mpeg format) the pixels are squashed and when the picture is displayed at 1920, the pixels are stretched, which might make the edges somewhat jagged. HDTV is WYSIWYG. I stay as far away fromo HDV as possible. If your project is HDV, I would recommend upressing it to HDTV using your ProRes 422 codec (just set your sequence export to PreRes 422 at full size). This take it out of mpeg and makes each frame an "I" frame. This just might solve your problem.
As far as LT being bad at crawls and scrolls, I think the Boris is a lot faster. LT was designed to be a titling program, and at that it is quite good. As I said the titles are always pristine. One of my films - Before the Music Dies - is available on iTunes and you can see how well that came ot.
Sjon
Posts Index
Read Thread
Reply
Like
Current Message Thread:
horrid quality compared to FCP basic text?
by mark palmos on Feb 7, 2008 at 12:45:49 pm
Re: horrid quality compared to FCP basic text?
by mark in Chapel Hill on Feb 8, 2008 at 1:58:59 am
Re: horrid quality compared to FCP basic text?
by Mark Palmos on Feb 9, 2008 at 6:48:27 am
Re: horrid quality compared to FCP basic text?
by Sjon Ueckert on Feb 9, 2008 at 8:37:41 am
Re: horrid quality compared to FCP basic text?
by mark in Chapel Hill on Feb 10, 2008 at 2:40:13 pm
one more thing
by mark in Chapel Hill on Feb 11, 2008 at 3:29:38 am
Re: one more thing
by Sjon Ueckert on Feb 11, 2008 at 8:16:30 am
Re: one more thing
by mark palmos on Feb 11, 2008 at 10:47:38 am
Re: one more thing
by mark in Chapel Hill on Feb 11, 2008 at 6:36:54 pm
Re: horrid quality compared to FCP basic text?
by Dave Gardner on Jul 18, 2008 at 4:06:34 am
Re: horrid quality compared to FCP basic text?
by Sjon Ueckert on Jul 18, 2008 at 7:28:24 pm
Re: horrid quality compared to FCP basic text?
by Dave Gardner on Jul 18, 2008 at 9:51:39 pm
Re: horrid quality compared to FCP basic text?
by Sjon Ueckert on Jul 18, 2008 at 9:59:16 pm
Re: horrid quality compared to FCP basic text?
by Chaz Hub on Nov 3, 2011 at 1:08:25 am
Re: horrid quality compared to FCP basic text?
by Sjon Ueckert on Feb 11, 2008 at 8:22:31 pm
Re: horrid quality compared to FCP basic text?
by Mark Palmos on Feb 11, 2008 at 11:14:00 pm
Re: horrid quality compared to FCP basic text?
by mark in Chapel Hill on Feb 11, 2008 at 11:21:00 pm
LOGIN TO REPLY
FORUMS
•
TUTORIALS
•
FEATURES
•
VIDEOS
•
PODCASTS
•
EVENTS
•
SERVICES
•
NEWSLETTER
•
NEWS
•
BLOGS
© 2013
CreativeCOW.net
All rights are reserved. -
Privacy Policy
[
Top
]