@Artorias93

Is there a section to set the images export settings?

No there isn't. The export of all objects on the timeline, be they images (stills) or video, will be exported at the movie settings or export values.

Your export parameters are more than enough to ensure good video/image quality. I get good-looking video from my still images with very low bitrates (eg HEVC at 2500kbps), but I use JPEGs mostly.

What size are your PNGs?

A couple of things you can try:

-Convert some of your PNGs to JPEGs and see if the export looks better.

-Set your movie settings to, and export at, UHD (3840x2160) and the same bitrate you are using, 32,000kbps. The increased resolution will/should improve the video quality.

@CubeAce

Ray, I wouldn't be reducing the size/resolution/quality of an image file before I put it into Magix. I think you should give the program the best you've got.

Making the image smaller will not make it look better on export but will look more like it would do once exported as a video file.

I don't understand that.

@Artorias93

I've just done a test with some PNGs (screenshots from an ipad) in VPX 12 and in the exported video they come out almost exactly the same as the originals; no pixellation at all and quite good. My PNGs are about 1.5mb each, 2048x1536.

On the Export Advanced screen, make sure you have "Best" selected in the Coding Quality dropdown.

If appropriate, you could attach a few of your PNGs to the forum here (use the up-arrow button next to the smiley button) so we could check them on our systems.

Unfortunately, the images are not of the highest quality originally, but on my screen (FHD) they turn out to be well defined... And it also happens in the Magix editor...
But when I export they lose a lot of quality...

Here the pics:




I can't use JPEG because I need transparency...

@Artorias93

Hi.

Where do the png files come from?

Can you right click on one and select properties and show the Details tab please?

For some reason again I don't seem to be able at present to upload an example jpeg.

I am used to working with quite high resolution png files which suffer due to lack of colour channel bit depth as well as resolution when converted to a video file but it would seem you have the opposite problem but maybe similar in one respect. That one respect is it will look fine in the programs editing monitor as the resolution shown there is always better than the exported file as the program works at a 16 bit resolution level but video exports are always 8 bit. That doesn't matter to the video content as unless you supply HDR video content it will have the same gamma curve but the dng may get compressed more in that respect even though it may be just as sharp.

Ray.

@Artorias93

Hi.

Where do the png files come from?

Can you right click on one and select properties and show the Details tab please?

For some reason again I don't seem to be able at present to upload an example jpeg.

I am used to working with quite high resolution png files which suffer due to lack of colour channel bit depth as well as resolution when converted to a video file but it would seem you have the opposite problem but maybe similar in one respect. That one respect is it will look fine in the programs editing monitor as the resolution shown there is always better than the exported file as the program works at a 16 bit resolution level but video exports are always 8 bit. That doesn't matter to the video content as unless you supply HDR video content it will have the same gamma curve but the dng may get compressed more in that respect even though it may be just as sharp.

Ray.

@Artorias93

Hi.

So what you are seeing in the Magix Preview monitor is what is on the right hand side of the image below and what is exported as a video file is what you see on the left hand side, which is not as bright or sharp, yes?

That is because in the video editing monitor you see the png file at it's best bit depth but the video exports to an 8bit export reducing that tonal difference. The softness comes from the additional compression of the video conversion process. You could try altering the contrast and brightness of the png and sharpen it a little and see if that helps but a larger image and then using the zoom position rotation tool would probably give a better result.

I am assuming you want some background to show through the grey boxed area.

Ray.

I see this difference

@Artorias93

If by your example you mean you are seeing blocks of two tone grey dancing around in the dark grey area then you need to increase the base settings for an MP4 export. I am assuming you are using the 'Export Movie' option rather than 'Export to media' type which is useless bit rate wise.

If the export is for a DVD burn then forget it. There is nothing you can do to improve it short of finding a different way to produce those text boxes.

If it is for a YouTube upload then try the following settings in the export box for MP4.The video file will have to be huge to avoid those types of artifacts but should upload with minimal artifacts.

Ray.

@CubeAce

Ray, 200,000kbps is insane. I doubt that that would improve those graphics.

@Artorias93

Those images are, IMO, just too small. You are never going to get them looking like the original, especially that 400 pixel one.

I'd redo them, making them at least UHD ie 3840x2160, and see how they go exported then.

Another thought: does the timer change automatically or are you manually doing it? If manually, you could just make up a title to do that overlay. A white line, a black box at 50% opacity and a title with the time digits can be saved as a "special effect" for easy re-use.

@Artorias93

I totally agree with @AAProds, the resolution and size of those .png files is far too low! Because they are being upsized by the Export process, without any method of upscaling (i.e., increasing their resolution) degradation of their visual quality is inevitable.

Jeff
Forum Moderator

@emmrecs @AAProds @Artorias93

One of the problems I find when working with any file types if the colour bit depth changes, along with compression associated with re-encoding, is that solid blocks of any colour get randomly changed in patches (associated nearby blocks) that can rapidly change position and may only vary in tonal balance by two to three steps, (000-255).

I tend to overdo the max and min bit settings for export as it helps a lot in the shadow areas where that becomes more apparent but with care the bit rate could be lowered. What I would not do is export with an IBBP GOP structure. Keeping to an all I frame GOP structure ensures no additional compression to an individual frame is the bit rates are set high enough, so avoids that flickering of static large areas of colour or edges to become randomly more or less sharp. I find I can't tell the difference between my source files and the exported video, even when pixel peeping.

If you have your own ways of dealing with this, that's fine. Personally the additional drive space needed I don't find that inconvenient as a 4TB drive lasts me about two years and works out to pennies per day.

Ray.

I tried to export my video with your "insane" settings, but the situation didn't change @CubeAce...
I tried to export my .png files in 3840x1109, import in Editor and export my video, but the situation didn't change...
I don't know how to do...

@Artorias93

Hi.

What graphics card are you using?

If it is an AMD graphics card try exporting using CPU only for the processing and export in the program device options setting and see if anything improves.

I know it will take longer but there are differences between the way the Intel and AMD graphics cards encode video. At least it will remove one possible variant from the problem.
I ask because @AAProds only does software encoding and @emmrecs and myself are using nvidia graphics cards.

Ray.

I have an RTX3060, with Ryzen9

@Artorias93

Make up a JPEG and place solid green/blue in the area you want to be transparent and use the Chroma Key effect to make the main area transparent. It may be the PNG format that's messing up Magix.

@Artorias93

Make up a JPEG and place solid green/blue in the area you want to be transparent and use the Chroma Key effect to make the main area transparent. It may be the PNG format that's messing up Magix.

I can't do this... The color of grey box is given from grey with transparency and bottom video in execution...
I need the grey on the box to have this effect...

In that case, you can reduce the video level of the track with the title in it. The issue then is the text "TIMER" and the time itself. Put that on top as a title. This is a quick job, I've used green for chroma but that messed up the little icon, so I'd use blue. I reduced the video level of the image so the box becomes grey. I've put in a title for the "TIMER" and time.

Couldn't match the size exactly but the left is the MMS Preview monitor, and the right is the exported MP4 at 10,000kbps.

This is a good result, but I need that exactly font/size, and I don't know it

@Artorias93

I tried to export my .png files in 3840x1109

How, exactly, did you do this? If you mean you merely enlarged the originals to become the larger size, this really won't work, sorry. Unless the software you are using to enlarge the images also enhances them (i.e., increases the resolution of them, or in other words adds more pixels) all you are doing is making each original pixel "bigger". Hence, the blurring/pixellation remains!

How many .pngs do you use? If it is only a small number and you can post them to a file sharing site I would be happy to use software that I have to enlarge and increase their resolution to whatever size you need. If you wish me to do this, don't forget to provide a link to where the files are stored and to make them publicly accessible! Please don't attach them to any post here since I have no idea what changes the forum software might make to them!

Jeff

@Artorias93

I tried to export my .png files in 3840x1109

How, exactly, did you do this? If you mean you merely enlarged the originals to become the larger size, this really won't work, sorry. Unless the software you are using to enlarge the images also enhances them (i.e., increases the resolution of them, or in other words adds more pixels) all you are doing is making each original pixel "bigger". Hence, the blurring/pixellation remains!

How many .pngs do you use? If it is only a small number and you can post them to a file sharing site I would be happy to use software that I have to enlarge and increase their resolution to whatever size you need. If you wish me to do this, don't forget to provide a link to where the files are stored and to make them publicly accessible! Please don't attach them to any post here since I have no idea what changes the forum software might make to them!

Jeff

https://we.tl/t-be7BxfZONt

I use only this... The only solution I found is record video of Editor with OBS, and then mount the videosection before to export

@Artorias93

Thank you for the file!

However, I think it may itself be faulty! This is how it (your original at 100%) opens for me:

I assume the "S" is also supposed to be placed above the black background?

When the image is enhanced and resized to 600% of its original the result is this:

I notice the outline of the "S" includes some degree of pixellation, presumably exaggerated by the lack of the background. (Its size is now 2430 x 702 px. I think that is about the limit that any upscaling software can reasonably handle.)

Let me know if you'd like me to upload that larger image to We Transfer.

Jeff