Hi all,
I have a .jpeg saved at 655x480x24 that looks fine when previewing from the media pool but is blurry on the timeline. As usual, I'm sure it's something I'm overlooking but would sure appreciate it if someone would tell me what.
TIA,
Randy
Project settings at NTSC DV? It also may be appearing slightly blurred during previews, because it's being recompressed on the fly. Have you done a temp render of the image to be certain it's not just that? Just select a small portion of the pic, then SHIFT+M to temp render/prerender. You'll see exactly how it's being recompressed at that point. Or, if not sending external, just RAM render, SHIFT+B
Same scenario, you'll see the recompression applied to the image. In other words, once it's rendered, it will probably no longer be blurry. You might want to force resample it too, but you shouldn't need to. Super sample if you are really in need of crispness.
Thanks Spot,
you said: >Project settings at NTSC DV?<
I opened them in a new project and didn't save the .veg (but have to assume it was set to the default NTSC DV).
I just opened them again in a new project and it looks fine from the media pool preview AND the timeline (yesterday it was okay in the media pool only).
Now it's 20 minutes later, after trying to figure out why they don't fit my screen: This whole thing started with me trying to figure out why, for the very 1st time, .jpegs saved at 655 X 480 are too big for both of my external monitors. Well I just went to check my settings in preview and all of a sudden the .jpegs are blurry on the timeline (only) again! I made no changes, other than maybe clicking on the "use external monitor" icon. I previewed them in the media pool again and then again on the timeline and now they're not blurry! I can't re-create the problem so I'm totally clueless. Selectively prerendering makes no difference. I wouldn't be freaking out but I have a project due asap with lots of .jpegs.
I realize it's probably user error but please help!
BTW Spot, by "super sample", do you mean render at "best"?
Thanks again,
Randy