problem with still photographs within a movie

Mindmatter wrote on 7/21/2010, 3:55 AM
Hi all,

just exported a sequence to QT7 256kbs mov yesterday. it included a series of stills, quite large jpegs taken directly from a panasonic lumix Tz5 cam ( about 5 meg each), that had some panning and zooming movements. The first thing I noticed was that the photos were very soft, unlike viewing the originals in a simple picture browser. I also found the pans and zooms to be not smooth at all.
Is this due to the QT format or another issue altogether?
Thanks!

AMD Ryzen 9 5900X, 12x 3.7 GHz
32 GB DDR4-3200 MHz (2x16GB), Dual-Channel
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070, 8GB GDDR6, HDMI, DP, studio drivers
ASUS PRIME B550M-K, AMD B550, AM4, mATX
7.1 (8-chanel) Surround-Sound, Digital Audio, onboard
Samsung 970 EVO Plus 250GB, NVMe M.2 PCIe x4 SSD
be quiet! System Power 9 700W CM, 80+ Bronze, modular
2x WD red 6TB
2x Samsung 2TB SSD

Comments

rs170a wrote on 7/21/2010, 4:09 AM
It's due to the low bitrate you chose.
Try Sony AVC using the Internet 4:3 SD 30p preset.
Your file size will be smaller and I think you'll be much happier with the results.

Mike
Mindmatter wrote on 7/21/2010, 4:18 AM
Thanks a lot Mike.
The rendering options and formats are something I really need to get my head around, it all seems a bit confusing to me at this point. i thought the QT7 256kbs format was something quite standard and net friendly, until I saw that my 5 or so minute mov was 260 meg large...
is there a guideline somewhere that helps understanding and choosing the rendering formats? the manual is not very specific at all about it.

AMD Ryzen 9 5900X, 12x 3.7 GHz
32 GB DDR4-3200 MHz (2x16GB), Dual-Channel
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070, 8GB GDDR6, HDMI, DP, studio drivers
ASUS PRIME B550M-K, AMD B550, AM4, mATX
7.1 (8-chanel) Surround-Sound, Digital Audio, onboard
Samsung 970 EVO Plus 250GB, NVMe M.2 PCIe x4 SSD
be quiet! System Power 9 700W CM, 80+ Bronze, modular
2x WD red 6TB
2x Samsung 2TB SSD

Chienworks wrote on 7/21/2010, 8:03 AM
If it ended up at 260MB then the bitrate must have been 256KBps not 256Kbps (Bytes vs. bits).

In any case, rendering to a smaller video frame (320x240 or even 640x480, for example) is going to reduce your pictures to a tiny fraction of their original resolution. They're going to look softer with less details no matter what render settings you choose.
logiquem wrote on 7/21/2010, 1:48 PM
Dont forget also to select the highest quality rendering settings for smoother pans and zoom.