ETF2L – Latest activity in “render quality tutorial”

ETF2L – Latest activity in “render quality tutorial” https://staging.etf2l.org/forum/movie/topic-17177/ Reply by tasku https://staging.etf2l.org/forum/movie/topic-17177/page-2/?recent=311864#post=311864 generator=rsdiscuss&baseurl=https://staging.etf2l.org&feed=forum&forum=movie&topic=17177&post=311864 Fri, 17 Jun 2011 02:58:09 +0200 Reply by skeej https://staging.etf2l.org/forum/movie/topic-17177/page-2/?recent=311864#post=311823 generator=rsdiscuss&baseurl=https://staging.etf2l.org&feed=forum&forum=movie&topic=17177&post=311823 Fri, 17 Jun 2011 00:02:51 +0200 Reply by iQue https://staging.etf2l.org/forum/movie/topic-17177/page-2/?recent=311864#post=311801 Quoted from rtan

keep getting an error in every single encoder so far. might just ask someone to do movie stuff from now on :D

Tried the ffmpeg encoder pldx hosted before? If you haven't, try it out (links here) http://etf2l.org/forum/movie/topic-16563/?recent=298511 I can render directly out of vegas with decent results but no matter the quality settings or bit rate there seems to be some weird blur/pixelation going on sometimes when rendering directly as mp4. Rendering to lossless avi and then using this encoder gets me great results as long as bitrate is high enough for the video you're making. If I'm just going to upload it on youtube I typically choose a higher bitrate than normal just in case. :p]]> generator=rsdiscuss&baseurl=https://staging.etf2l.org&feed=forum&forum=movie&topic=17177&post=311801 Thu, 16 Jun 2011 22:24:44 +0200 Reply by r7an https://staging.etf2l.org/forum/movie/topic-17177/page-1/?recent=311864#post=311790 generator=rsdiscuss&baseurl=https://staging.etf2l.org&feed=forum&forum=movie&topic=17177&post=311790 Thu, 16 Jun 2011 21:29:21 +0200 Reply by Mits.Nits https://staging.etf2l.org/forum/movie/topic-17177/page-1/?recent=311864#post=311781 Quoted from Ched

Don't get the idea that quality is entirely dictated by the framerate in which you recorded the footage. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-PZcOmkvvE&hd=1 was recorded at 24 FPS but I applied motion blur in a different way to the method used by most people. AKA: The method I learnt from Skyride ages ago.

The quality isn't dictated by the framerate, the smoothness is. And as i said, you can record at low fps, but sometimes you might get laggy footage.]]> generator=rsdiscuss&baseurl=https://staging.etf2l.org&feed=forum&forum=movie&topic=17177&post=311781 Thu, 16 Jun 2011 20:24:51 +0200 Reply by Plasters https://staging.etf2l.org/forum/movie/topic-17177/page-1/?recent=311864#post=311779 generator=rsdiscuss&baseurl=https://staging.etf2l.org&feed=forum&forum=movie&topic=17177&post=311779 Thu, 16 Jun 2011 20:16:40 +0200 Reply by Mits.Nits https://staging.etf2l.org/forum/movie/topic-17177/page-1/?recent=311864#post=311775 Quoted from .____________.

[...] I've been told never to render in sony vegas into lagarith avi, but simply uncompressed? Someone explain the difference to me :(

I haven't had any problems so far with lagarith, both with sony vegas and after effects. But i think (not sure though) that lagarith gives you an uncompressed avi with a smaller size than the uncompressed template that you're talking about. Quoted from rtan

there's obviously a lot of different opinions/ways of doing things. I record at 240, virtual dub the tgas to a lagarith lossless, then render at 60fps on vegas. now this doesn't give me good quality whatsoever and I'm not sure where I'm going wrong. I'll give what the youtube link says a go, but since im dealing with tgas first of all and not an uncompressed avi like he does i'm not sure what to do with that...

Well, it's pretty much the same as you were doing. Record tga's, compile them with virtualdub to an uncompressed .avi file, edit that file or more in vegas, render with the settings given in the beggining of the vid, then use Ripbot to the very last render]]> generator=rsdiscuss&baseurl=https://staging.etf2l.org&feed=forum&forum=movie&topic=17177&post=311775 Thu, 16 Jun 2011 19:16:15 +0200 Reply by r7an https://staging.etf2l.org/forum/movie/topic-17177/page-1/?recent=311864#post=311774 generator=rsdiscuss&baseurl=https://staging.etf2l.org&feed=forum&forum=movie&topic=17177&post=311774 Thu, 16 Jun 2011 19:16:08 +0200 Reply by illii https://staging.etf2l.org/forum/movie/topic-17177/page-1/?recent=311864#post=311773 Quoted from Mits

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfEVRZgBaLY Probably the best you can get. Example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-bItHRKA_g&hd=1

I've been told never to render in sony vegas into lagarith avi, but simply uncompressed? Someone explain the difference to me :(]]> generator=rsdiscuss&baseurl=https://staging.etf2l.org&feed=forum&forum=movie&topic=17177&post=311773 Thu, 16 Jun 2011 19:08:46 +0200 Reply by Mits.Nits https://staging.etf2l.org/forum/movie/topic-17177/page-1/?recent=311864#post=311770 Quoted from Monkeh

Yeah, I used to record at 120 but it always looked a bit blurry when I rendered at 30. Then I started experimenting and found that 'decimating by 4' in VDub made it look a lot sharper and cleaner and nicer.... Then, after some considerable time, I realised that I may as well just record at 30 in the first place! Whatever FPS I record at I get choppy, laggy movements in slo motion, but then it's the same if I watch a demo of mine at <20% speed, chop-chop-move-move-move-chop-chop. Supersampling sounds like the next thing I need to experiment with I s'pose.

Well, one thing you might want to experiment aswell is to, instead of rendering at 30 fps, render at 29.97 (final render). I've been seeing that in a lot of movies / clips, and it kinda gets rid of the extreme motion blur originated by high framerates, so you can have smoothness and a "clean" quality when watching the final result.]]> generator=rsdiscuss&baseurl=https://staging.etf2l.org&feed=forum&forum=movie&topic=17177&post=311770 Thu, 16 Jun 2011 18:50:30 +0200 Reply by Dukermons https://staging.etf2l.org/forum/movie/topic-17177/page-1/?recent=311864#post=311764 generator=rsdiscuss&baseurl=https://staging.etf2l.org&feed=forum&forum=movie&topic=17177&post=311764 Thu, 16 Jun 2011 18:38:47 +0200 Reply by Mits.Nits https://staging.etf2l.org/forum/movie/topic-17177/page-1/?recent=311864#post=311755 generator=rsdiscuss&baseurl=https://staging.etf2l.org&feed=forum&forum=movie&topic=17177&post=311755 Thu, 16 Jun 2011 18:03:03 +0200 Reply by adam-skyride https://staging.etf2l.org/forum/movie/topic-17177/page-1/?recent=311864#post=311754 generator=rsdiscuss&baseurl=https://staging.etf2l.org&feed=forum&forum=movie&topic=17177&post=311754 Thu, 16 Jun 2011 18:02:12 +0200 Reply by Dukermons https://staging.etf2l.org/forum/movie/topic-17177/page-1/?recent=311864#post=311753 generator=rsdiscuss&baseurl=https://staging.etf2l.org&feed=forum&forum=movie&topic=17177&post=311753 Thu, 16 Jun 2011 17:59:44 +0200 Reply by Mits.Nits https://staging.etf2l.org/forum/movie/topic-17177/page-1/?recent=311864#post=311751 Quoted from Monkeh

If you record at 240 and render at 30 then you'll have ermmmm, (engage maths plugin.....maths plug-in engaged....!), 8 frames of captured stuff crammed into EACH frame of the final render. To avoid it looking all blurry and horrible you'll need to do some funky "frame blending" stuff, of which I know nothing. This is 120 rendered down to 30: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPVzJk2JUVM fuzzy edges and 'blurring' from 4 frames per frame of render. 30 to 30 looks like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONZNaeRPiIk gl hf :)

I don't really get, you record at 30 fps?]]> generator=rsdiscuss&baseurl=https://staging.etf2l.org&feed=forum&forum=movie&topic=17177&post=311751 Thu, 16 Jun 2011 17:55:26 +0200