FCP 5.1.2 titles look bad on QT export

Working on a dual 2.5 g5 just installed the update and now all my titles, though they look fine on my NTSC monitor look bad when I create a quicktime file for the Web. I'm used to titles not looking good in the FCP windows, but usually when I export to QT they look reasonably ok. Has anyone else found this to be the case?

If it looks good in an external monitor, then chances are you're fine. Open the QuickTime movie in QuickTime Player, press APPLE-J. Select the Video Track and go to Quality. Make sure High Quality is checked, the save the QuickTime movie.


www.derekmok.com

Sooooo important to NOT be fooled by QT output of DV Files as they are NEVER at high quality. Follow Derek's advice, trust your NTSC monitor and all will be well.

Kevin Monahan
Social Support Lead, DV Products
Adobe
Adobe After Effects
Adobe Premiere Pro
Adobe After Effects and Premiere Pro Community Blog
Follow Me on Twitter!

Well, I do know that the NTSC thing is the most important. However, witness this example on my website of what I'm talking about. This issue is most pertinent for web compression. And I son't think it's an issue with Squeeze (which I used to compress the file for web). THe QT file looks just like it does on the web- all blocky and chunky on text. This is why I feel like it originated from FCP export to QT. Is there something I should do differently for the web?

Here"s the link: [www.poultryproductions.com]

Three possibilities here I can think of:

1. Try Title 3D instead of Text. If it's a Photoshop file, perhaps you need to de-interlace or put a flicker filter on it.

2. Judging from the three titles I saw -- "Poultry Productions", "2004" and the end title, I'm going to guess it's the colour you picked. On "Poultry Productions", at similar sizes, the white "Poultry" look a lot cleaner than the red "Productions", and that shade of red seems to be used for the other two titles as well. Red is a really tricky one -- I did a bunch of titles for the festival version of a spec PSA where the reds look fine on an external monitor but broken up on the QuickTime movie, even at top quality. Try putting the rest of the movie file into a timeline set to a graphics-friendly codec such as Animation, and redo the titles there. Unfortunately, however, you can't output Animation codec. But if your titles look fine on an external monitor, you could stick to what you've got for tape output, and customize an Animation-codec movie as your basis for web compression.

3. It could also be because you have a clip with a huge amount of motion behind it. That would make compression really hard -- you see it in the water, and the highway shot might be contributing to the issue. However, at full quality on your end, it shouldn't have done this much damage.


www.derekmok.com

Yeah, I've been told reds are awfully tough...but does that mean I can't use red at all? Still trying to learn the scopes and such...however those titles were created w/ title 3D so it's gotta be a color thing....

Many times, the right solution is not a single thing. You should consider using a Color Correction filter called "Broadcast Safe" for anything white or red. NTSC is not very forgiving (nor is compression) when it comes to bright reds, whites or blues.

Someone asked about the codec you are using. I've also noticed you exported to quite a small video (320x240 and used Sorenson3. Have you tried exported to a larger, H.264 video for the web? It requires Quicktime 7, but the results - in my experience - are much better.

John Flowers
aim: kanendosei
web: www.casefilms.com

So, it seems as if the magical Broadcast Safe filter cleared up my little issue (as long as I export using QT conversion as opposed to QT movie) which can be chalked up to user ignorance about red colors and broadcast colors. As to the H.264 compression technique can others view it without QT 7? My goal is for anyone to view it regardless of system updates etc.

Also, can anyone inform me about sequence settings as far as motion filtering quality go? Should it be set to best or normal? And is there a noticeable difference?

CG

I don't know about anybody else, but the movie looked *great* to my eye aside from the red titles. And H.264 looks good, but only QuickTime 7 has it. Which means it's not overly PC-friendly, and even my Mac won't be able to play it. Yet.

But I think the movie file looks really good right now. And it didn't take too long to play, either. I'm very impressed, because whenever I've used Sorenson 3 on my end, I couldn't get it to look very good without making the file big.


www.derekmok.com

I agree - good quality, short download time. Plus it was interesting and well paced. Nice work. You should put this on the 'Show and Tell' forum.

This looked GREAT to my eyes.

Finally! Someone is doing this story. One of the biggest misinterpretations of a human being's "screw up" in history.

I REALLY look forward to this doc.

Put this on the Show and Tell forum

[www.lafcpug.org]

Michael Horton
-------------------

On both coasts!!

Chris, I would just add maybe just a touch of drop shadow to the red main, and think about reworking the "film by" to a slightly bolder font, possibly spread out a bit more, which holds up better under compression.

Otherwse, show looks crisp, funny and heartfelt.

- Loren
Today's FCP 4 / 5 keytip:
Do a virtual Audio Mixdown to lighten playback load with Command-Option-R!

The FCP KeyGuide?: your power placemat.
Now available at KeyGuide Central.
www.neotrondesign.com

Geez guys, thanks! You put in a technical query and get all this heartfelt feedback. Really appreciate it! Just posted to Show and Tell area.


Christoph