thnx for you reply and direction. well yes and no, yes - that it's title related however, no- in that I am not in need of help in creating titles.
The gust is. is that i want to import the "source" file AS IS, in that, I don't want to to have to type-out the information through the titler engine.
thanks hope this is clear.
In other words is there a way to splice text from a word document and onto a format that would import into premiere. perhpas I should splice and copy the text from the word document THEN paste it into a jpeg? I dunno, oh well -- Ill check out the title section anyway...again thanks
I often find that I need to create a Title with a lot of Text.
I create the Text in Word, or WordPerfect, and then Copy/Paste into a Title, created in Photoshop.
I start with a New Image, that has at least the basics for the Video, say an NTSC DV Widescreen 16:9 Image (PS offers several Video Presets), and then I enlarge the Canvas to account for my Text. Most often, I will be doing a Rolling Title, so that New Image might end up being 4000 pixels "tall."
If I only wish to animate that Text, then it can be Saved as a PSD with Transparent Background, and I adjust its Duration, to be what I want. I just did one such Title, that ran for about 45 sec., with a lot of Text, all Copied/Pasted from a WordPerfect document, so that I could also do SpellCheck on it. Worked a treat.
According to everyone's favorite After Effects expressions & scripting guru, Dan Ebberts, you can load text from a text file into After Effects with code like this:
myPath = "/media/text.txt";
I find that lots of text is a lot easier to handle in After Effects.
thanks, except that the source word document has graphs that frame the text, so when I paste into PSD, they're all aligned out of wack. Hence, I have to manually
adjust the structure of sentences and words to match indentations (cumbersome). Like I said, to have been able to just cut n paste that parge graph from it's original state,
unaltered, directly into PS would have been ideal, however, life doesn't always work that way.
none the less, i am saving time doing it your way. thanks for the setailed instruction.
Ah, the formatting from Word is not likely to translate directly. Now, as an option (one to test), maybe Export (cannot recall if this is under Export, or Save_As) as a PDF, and then Open that file in PS. Not sure how it will handle the formatting though. I have seen some odd behavior when going from a formatted Word DOC/DOCx to PDF, and I have Acrobat Pro Distiller.
Same issues can occur with formatting from WordPerfect to PDF.
Just thinking above, and it might be of no use to you.
Please report the test, and good luck,
Dear Exalted one, or shall I refer to you as Guru Hunt? Wow, thanks! That worked briallintly, like a warm knife through buttah. Actually, I DID in fact try PDf'ing prior to my post insofar, I was falsely deterred based on an issue which I now see as an over-looked error on my part, and had you not mentioned it, I probably wouldn't have tried it again. The error being; I didn't select SELECT ALL the first time around when I spliced the Pdf - I typically CUT, then paste INTO the "new" project.- instead I tried dragging and droppping or something lame like that.
Pfft, rookie move.
But this time around i was more meticulous in my metho, and it worked beautifully - EXCEPT, if I may... when it came to re-sizing the text after it was pasted in. It was much larger than the canvas size (I did choose a video preset size in the menu btw) which came out to 10 by 3600 pixels or something like that, a lil under your stated 4000 high - I see where you are coming from on that height factor. So when I imported the PSD into Premiere, I had to resize again, subsequently there was a slight loss of acuity. Though it was only a 28 percent loss, from 100 to 77 percent shrinkage; not untenable by any means, liveable.
Living with it. Thanks Sir Hunt! Oh, by the way.....
Out of mere conicidence, I seem to have stumbled onto another obstacle from whcih another question has arised, which deals wiith formats of video, i.e: MPEG4, MPEG2-DVD, AVI, etc...
If i want to provide my client with a DVD and a file that rests in his drive, which one would be best? Btw, I don't have a way to upload files to a site or anything. I guess he would have to either drag the files from off the dvd folders when it is in his player? Or, i would have to jump drive it over.
So glad that the workflow got you what you needed. I am always afraid, when typing out a process, that I will forget something important. Usually, it's much easier to DO, than to write about!
Some background: that 4000 pixel dimension WAS the limit (4096 x 4096) for Stills into PrPro, but that has changed. In my case, old habits... Also, I have never found the need to do a Rolling Title taller than about 4K pixels. Usually, by that point, I am on to making a second Rolling Title. As of CS 5, that size is no longer an issue. If my Title will only use part of the Project's Frame Size width, I will Crop in PS, just to keep the unnecessary pixel count to a minimum, as processing them DOES still require overhead.
As for the delivery scheme, if one will be working in SD, and a DVD-Video is one of the final output schemes, I think that the MPEG-2 DVD is a good choice. You can Export to that, using a DVD-compliant Bit-Rate (Bit Budgeting), for Import into Encore for authoring, AND also for distribution to the client. The MPEG-2 DVD is X-Platform, and that CODEC is common on most machines. WMP (or better), and QT Player, will play it.
As for transfer of AV files (and large Image files), I use YouSendIt. The file is uploaded to their server, and the client gets an e-mail with the URL. One can limit access to that file, password protect it, get receipt of the client downloading it, etc.. Though I have retired, I still maintain my account, and still use it, though not as much as I used to. There are other such services, but they were the best of the ones that I tried, back when. I have not investigated any others recently - I am basically lazy, and just stick with what works, and with suppliers, who do not let me down, even if there are others, with perhaps a lower unit price.
Good luck, and hope that helps,
PS - if the question has been answered, you might want to look over this article: http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1058744?tstart=0
If you have a version of Ae that will accept PDF files, you can zoom in (scale up) as far as you want and not lose resolution - as long as there are no bitmaps embedded. Turn on Continuous Rasterization for the PDF layer.
Your graph may be a bitmap. If it's all vector, you're all set.
Jim, thanks, I believe thatI do, I possess the Master collection CS5, (64-something?) I forgot butthere's a parnthetical after the AE scribe. So I 'm thinking that's gotta indictae the latest and greatest.
Next time, i run into this issue, i will try tackling it in AE instead, although I've already did what Hunt advised which turned out great, it's good to know of an alternative mthod, one in which sounds actually as powerful - THAT is, if i can rasterize, haha.
Hey Hunt, well, according to my properties tab of the file it indicates just shy of 600 MBS - give n take, more or less - as I am calculating the WAV file and Media file together in my head because they were rendered separately when upon choosing the MPEG2-DVD OP scheme. Speaking of which, thanks! I was able to build a dvd in Encore quite seamlessly. I surmise however, in the future when I embark on more sophisticated and complex projects dealing with say, I-Phone app creation, web-video across multiple platforms, and (my most anticipatedly desirous one) I-Book creation in In-design! in which the union of imgaes, video and text co-exist in matrimony; all this hoopla regarding which format is best will have to be investigated more in-depth by me, when I decide to step on that proverbial bridge, pun intended, Adobe Bridge of course!
YOUSendit should accomodate the size, I am assuming. But I think I can also use a jump-drive too, which I may do since I see this dude around a lot. Thanks for the referral.
I marked, replied, and showed my digital apprecitaion as best I can, in fact, if you are in the throes of convincing the uppers about the efficacy of forum-based help in lieu-of (is that the correct use of in lieu of?) anyway, of.... tech support , you know what I mean, I will be a proponent in every sense of the defined term. Let me know or keep me updated, for I think this is a great tool.
Retired? Lazy? Terms when used together in your case become oxymorons (sic), hell, you kidding? Enjoy your earned lap of luxury and time spent basking in whatever it is that you choose to!
if you are in the throes of convincing the uppers about the efficacy of forum-based help in lieu-of (is that the correct use of in lieu of?) anyway, of.... tech support , you know what I mean, I will be a proponent in every sense of the defined term. Let me know or keep me updated, for I think this is a great tool.
At some "upper-level," it appears that there is a dichotomy of thought, regarding helping users of Adobe products. One group believes that all can be handled via Help files, and now that they are mostly on-line, they can be corrected, or ammended, almost instantly. They seem to feel that any/all "slack" can be picked up with telephone T/S. Another faction sees great benefit from the product forums, and the expertise of the users, to solve many problems, before the user with the problem/question goes to T/S. It is that faction, that most of us here support, and wish to help make their case.
In the product forums, that I frequent, I am convinced that the forums perform a great and necessary function, and do it very well - probably much better than the first few "levels" of T/S support. Part of the problem with T/S is that those first few levels encountered do not get a user to anyone, who actually knows and uses the program. They are really little more than "call screeners," with a very generalized script to help. This is often all too evident to the users. In a product forum, those same users, are usually corresponding with people who DO know and use that program. Those users usually get help more quickly, and it is usually high-level help. I say this in praise to the "regulars" in those forums, who donate their time, their experiences and expertise, in hopes of helping others.
Personally, I want to support those people, in any way that I can, and there is an Adobe team, created and funded, just for that purpose. I hope that they can make their case effectively, and that all Adobe management will swayed to realize how useful and viable the Adobe Forums are.
OK, enough OT (albeit "forum" related) talk.
I feel that you are correct - as delivery technology changes, and new delivery schemes and formats will be required. One creating material for the various new devices, will need to re-educate themselves, and do copious testing. It is a never-ending spiral of learning and development.
As for the flashdrive, I use those often. The only time, where I use a file transmitting service, is when the client/recipient is not local, and there is an immediacy, that Fed-X cannot meet.
PS - I like your view on retirement. Thank you for sharing that.
..... irascibly, I've found that when something points to something being a
benefit to all, there exists forces that seem to repell it towards the opposite
direction, sacrosanct to what logic may dictate, and stranger, impractically
unfair and dare I say, intentional.
Money. Plain and simple, greed, "lining the pocket".
T/S for Adobe is cost-based, in fact, it's billed by the case if I remember
correctly. So when customers call in, these pseudo-"support reps" who consist
mostly of under-trained priviledged types, off-spring stock of the uppers and
department heads, I presume, spring into action by billing and billing and
billing until hearts content. Nothing gets solved quickly (purposely) and annual
support plans get re-instated at healthy profits, but most importantly job
security for those in that department gets extended for another say, 2 or 4
years or however long their grand scheme of "sales continuity" gets condoned by
the uppers in their very, intentional plan of profit making schemes, all on the
Case in point, I get irritated about these so called Adobe product updates: 4.0
to 5.0, now to 5.5. What makes me believe that they are not chopping up their
technological discoveries like drug dealers chop the purity of their product
thereby diluting the quality but tripling the quantity. You mean to tell me that
these uppers don't have a business plan laid out for the next 30 years, where
incrementally, they chip away at the consumer's wallet over time. pfft, pleease,
of course they do.
I think the forums threaten this business model, hence is why they delienate
from it. Just my 2 cents. - Andrew