Jump to content


Photo

Overman's rendering process and settings


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#21 AngryBlack

AngryBlack

    Director

  • Members
  • 103 posts

Posted 17 May 2010 - 03:45 AM

QUOTE (kv @ Dec 1 2009, 09:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Cheers mate, I will certainly try it out, the more picture quality I can get (even if just a little) the better laugh.gif


Hi, KV. Did you try it out and what do you do exactly now, your picture quality is great!
I want to improve my English, so if there are mistakes in any of my sentences, please let me know. Thanks a lot!

#22 kv

kv

    Master Director

  • Pioneers
  • 1941 posts

Posted 17 May 2010 - 12:29 PM

QUOTE (AngryBlack @ May 17 2010, 03:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Hi, KV. Did you try it out and what do you do exactly now, your picture quality is great!


PM sent to you, but I`ll post here anyway.

When I render from moviestorm I use the default codec and render at 1920x1080, then after doing my post production in Vegas I render it at 1280x720 using WMV codec, I have always gotten great picture quality from that. Even though the moviestorm site displays a much lower resolution (512x300 I think) I still upload my 720p movie, that way even when it is scaled down on site it still maintains very high quality. Of course this means that a movie around 4-5mins can end up being about 70mb though.

#23 AngryBlack

AngryBlack

    Director

  • Members
  • 103 posts

Posted 17 May 2010 - 01:00 PM

QUOTE (kv @ May 17 2010, 12:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
PM sent to you, but I`ll post here anyway.

When I render from moviestorm I use the default codec and render at 1920x1080, then after doing my post production in Vegas I render it at 1280x720 using WMV codec, I have always gotten great picture quality from that. Even though the moviestorm site displays a much lower resolution (512x300 I think) I still upload my 720p movie, that way even when it is scaled down on site it still maintains very high quality. Of course this means that a movie around 4-5mins can end up being about 70mb though.


Thank you, KV! I saw the PM.
Maybe I should buy a new monitor, now I can only render from MS at 1280x720, because the resolution of my current monitor is 1280x1024.

I want to improve my English, so if there are mistakes in any of my sentences, please let me know. Thanks a lot!

#24 Overman

Overman

    Master Director

  • Pioneers
  • 562 posts

Posted 17 May 2010 - 02:37 PM

QUOTE (AngryBlack @ May 17 2010, 08:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Thank you, KV! I saw the PM.
Maybe I should buy a new monitor, now I can only render from MS at 1280x720, because the resolution of my current monitor is 1280x1024.


If you look into a replacement monitor, AngryBlack, first make sure your video card can support the output resolution you're hoping to achieve. If you know the make/model of your current video graphics card, you should be able to Google that to see what resolutions are supported.

To render out of Moviestorm at the full HD res (1920x1080) you'll need both a monitor and vid card that can do that res.

Cheers, and good luck!
Phil "Overman" Rice
Zarathustra Studios - http://z-studios.com
You can connect with us On Twitter, On Facebook, On YouTube, and On Vimeo.

#25 AngryBlack

AngryBlack

    Director

  • Members
  • 103 posts

Posted 18 May 2010 - 01:17 AM

QUOTE (Overman @ May 17 2010, 02:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
If you look into a replacement monitor, AngryBlack, first make sure your video card can support the output resolution you're hoping to achieve. If you know the make/model of your current video graphics card, you should be able to Google that to see what resolutions are supported.

To render out of Moviestorm at the full HD res (1920x1080) you'll need both a monitor and vid card that can do that res.

Cheers, and good luck!


Thank you, overman! My video card is 9600GT, I think it's ok for 1920x1080. tongue.gif
I want to improve my English, so if there are mistakes in any of my sentences, please let me know. Thanks a lot!

#26 AngryBlack

AngryBlack

    Director

  • Members
  • 103 posts

Posted 15 September 2010 - 12:36 PM

QUOTE (Overman @ Jul 29 2009, 02:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I've recently revised my procedure here to a system that has higher hard disk (size) requirements, but yields absolutely stunning vid quality results, thought I'd share it here:

1) Render out of Moviestorm at 1920x1080, using the Custom option, and using the tab where you can render to a series of PNG images. It's best to (ahead of time) create a folder specifically to hold these images rather than have them dumped into a folder which contains other things. Moviestorm will automatically number the individual frames (PNG images) in sequential order.
2) Launch VirtualDub - www.virtualdub.org - and then open the first PNG image in the series created above. Be sure the checkbox for "automatically open linked segments" is checked. This will load all the images, in order.
3) In VirtualDub, under the Video menu, choose Full Processing. Under Compression, choose the HuffYUV codec. Under the Audio menu, choose "No Audio." Save As AVI... voila, you have a lossless AVI file (large, but significantly smaller than Uncompressed). Once this file is created, you can safely delete all those PNG images used to create it.
4) IF YOU NEED THE AUDIO FROM MOVIESTORM... Back to Moviestorm, render out a second copy of the movie at low resolution, using the default output type. (If you use Vegas, you'll have to take an extra step to extract the audio from this file - I've found it's easiest to just open the AVI file in Goldwave and save as WAV.) If for some reason you didn't need Moviestorm's audio, you can skip this entire step 4.
5) Bring the HuffYUV footage (with the audio from step 4, if applicable) into Vegas, edit / post produce as needed, and render out uncompressed AVI at 1280x720. This sizing down from the original footage size seems to really smooth out some hard edges (a common effect when video is downsized at quality settings) while still preserving a clean image.
6) I then take that AVI file, open it in QuickTime Pro, and render out as a QuickTime .MOV file; 3000-4000kbps video data rate, automatic keyframes, H.264 codec, 160kbps AAC audio. I got these specs from Vimeo's HD FAQ, tweaked them a bit to my liking. http://www.vimeo.com.../hd#hd_encoding

That file from step 3 is what I upload to Moviestorm, Vimeo, and YouTube alike. I do use that same uncompressed master to render to other formats, including FLV (Flash Video) and DivX AVI, the latter at very similar settings to the QuickTime file. DivX actually looks a tad better than QuickTime, but has slightly larger file size and also doesn't seem to upload/encode at the same quality.

- - -
This takes a little bit longer than my former method, however the improvement in quality is stellar, and is well worth the time for your productions when quality is a must.

I've got two short films I'll be releasing very soon which used this procedure, and I think you'll be able to see the difference especially in places like Vimeo where the film is watched in HD.



Hi, Overman. I buy a new monitor and now I can render vedios at 1920x1080. So I come back to try your rendering process and settings.

I used to use Adobe Premiere, I found that Premiere can import PNG images as still image sequence, so I didn't use VirtualDub. Now I got a Vegas on my PC, I find Vegas can do this, too.

So I wanna know that why don't you import the PNG images in to Vegas directly ,
and then edit / post produce as needed, and render out uncompressed AVI at 1280x720 ?
Is there any good reason for these? Thanks.



I want to improve my English, so if there are mistakes in any of my sentences, please let me know. Thanks a lot!

#27 Overman

Overman

    Master Director

  • Pioneers
  • 562 posts

Posted 16 September 2010 - 07:53 AM

QUOTE (AngryBlack @ Sep 15 2010, 07:36 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Hi, Overman. I buy a new monitor and now I can render vedios at 1920x1080. So I come back to try your rendering process and settings.

I used to use Adobe Premiere, I found that Premiere can import PNG images as still image sequence, so I didn't use VirtualDub. Now I got a Vegas on my PC, I find Vegas can do this, too.

So I wanna know that why don't you import the PNG images in to Vegas directly ,
and then edit / post produce as needed, and render out uncompressed AVI at 1280x720 ?
Is there any good reason for these? Thanks.


Angry, I had tried the image sequence method in Vegas but found that overall performance (and speed of renders out of Vegas) was slightly slower than when I used one uncompressed video file instead. I don't know the exact reason for the difference in speed, but it very well could be something peculiar to my setup.

Importing the PNG frames directly may indeed be a good solution for that step for you and others.

Cheers!
Phil "Overman" Rice
Zarathustra Studios - http://z-studios.com
You can connect with us On Twitter, On Facebook, On YouTube, and On Vimeo.


  • Please log in to reply


1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users