Loading...
> >

About making a video rendering

foxyfoxfurriesfoxyfoxfurries Posts: 325
in Daz Studio Discussion

Hey! I really like to make comics but I also want to try the video animated part.

I try do something with it but when I render its not render for me as MP4 and it makes a lot of pages.

How can I render with MP4 or some video file and what's the best setup to make videos? If someone have some good video that show it I will be happy.

Thanks!!! :)

Comments

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 100,791

    That sound as if you are rendering an image sequence, which is really the best way to go - you can render in chunks, you can rerender any parts that don't work 9or start again after a crash), you can apply imagee ffects to the renders if needed, or fix minor issues, among other things - then put the images together with a video editor, which will give you more choices over format, quality, and compression.

  • TheMysteryIsThePointTheMysteryIsThePoint Posts: 2,946

    See if there is a port of FFMPEG for your OS.

  • Willy2Willy2 Posts: 175

    Creating a video with images is the best way to proceed.
    First, you make your renders in jpeg format.
    Then you can assemble the images with a utility.
    Personally, I use JPGVideo which creates files in avi format, without loss of definition, which I can then compress.
    To download JPGVideo, go to the publisher's website:

    http://www.ndrw.co.uk

  • stripe6499_9253833ae8stripe6499_9253833ae8 Posts: 134

    I've just started looking at animations and I found this start guide. Daz Studio Animation Tutorial: Step by Step - RenderGuide.com. I found it fairly useful, but I'm a little unsure why the advice is to render a set of images and then compile them into a video rather than just render it as an .avi. Any enlightenment would be welcome.

  • Willy2Willy2 Posts: 175

    If you are making very short videos, these two methods are equivalent.
    But working with images is more flexible
    If you make a video directly with compression, you won't be able to improve the quality of the image, unless to make a new render (which can be very time consuming)
    With images jpg you can crop very easily with a small Python program of a few lines. Of course, other modifications are possible.
    Then, with images, you can abruptly stop rendering at any time without losing the rendering work (only the image being rendered will be lost)
    Also, the advantage of using images is that you don't need a powerful video editing software.
    However, if you render directly to uncompressed AVI, it's the same as using images. Because the uncompressed AVI file can be turned into jpg images with a utility.

  • WendyLuvsCatzWendyLuvsCatz Posts: 38,204

    grab Hitfilm Express for free

    https://fxhome.com/product/hitfilm

  • charlescharles Posts: 845

    I have had some really good results with Daz animation..however..it takes FOREVER to render a few seconds!

     

    Instead I've adopted a method of realtime animation using the Unity Bridge. One could also do this with Unreal.

     

  • stripe6499_9253833ae8stripe6499_9253833ae8 Posts: 134

    Thank you for the advice, explanations and links. Most helpful.

  • Sven DullahSven Dullah Posts: 7,621
    edited November 2022

    stripe6499_9253833ae8 said:

    I've just started looking at animations and I found this start guide. Daz Studio Animation Tutorial: Step by Step - RenderGuide.com. I found it fairly useful, but I'm a little unsure why the advice is to render a set of images and then compile them into a video rather than just render it as an .avi. Any enlightenment would be welcome.

    Because rendering to image series is the only working option, simple as that. Rendering to movie, which I've used for over ten years, is now broken, thus reduced to merely a cosmetic thingy. 

    Post edited by Sven Dullah on
  • Sven DullahSven Dullah Posts: 7,621

    Richard Haseltine said:

    That sound as if you are rendering an image sequence, which is really the best way to go

    It's actually the only available option, isn't it... 

  • stripe6499_9253833ae8stripe6499_9253833ae8 Posts: 134

    Sven Dullah said:

    stripe6499_9253833ae8 said:

    I've just started looking at animations and I found this start guide. Daz Studio Animation Tutorial: Step by Step - RenderGuide.com. I found it fairly useful, but I'm a little unsure why the advice is to render a set of images and then compile them into a video rather than just render it as an .avi. Any enlightenment would be welcome.

    Because rendering to image series is the only working option, simple as that. Rendering to movie, which I've used for over ten years, is now broken, thus reduced to merely a cosmetic thingy. 

    Odd. I rendered to movie today and it worked fine... admitedly it took 5 hours to do a 60 frame series, but I got a working avi out of it. 

  • PerttiAPerttiA Posts: 10,024

    Sven Dullah said:

    stripe6499_9253833ae8 said:

    I've just started looking at animations and I found this start guide. Daz Studio Animation Tutorial: Step by Step - RenderGuide.com. I found it fairly useful, but I'm a little unsure why the advice is to render a set of images and then compile them into a video rather than just render it as an .avi. Any enlightenment would be welcome.

    Because rendering to image series is the only working option, simple as that. Rendering to movie, which I've used for over ten years, is now broken, thus reduced to merely a cosmetic thingy. 

    The 20+ something animations I have done, I have rendered straight to movie without any problems, but I'm using DS 4.15 

  • Sven DullahSven Dullah Posts: 7,621

    PerttiA said:

    Sven Dullah said:

    stripe6499_9253833ae8 said:

    I've just started looking at animations and I found this start guide. Daz Studio Animation Tutorial: Step by Step - RenderGuide.com. I found it fairly useful, but I'm a little unsure why the advice is to render a set of images and then compile them into a video rather than just render it as an .avi. Any enlightenment would be welcome.

    Because rendering to image series is the only working option, simple as that. Rendering to movie, which I've used for over ten years, is now broken, thus reduced to merely a cosmetic thingy. 

    The 20+ something animations I have done, I have rendered straight to movie without any problems, but I'm using DS 4.15 

    Yeah I went from 4.9 to 4.20, see this discussion. 

  • Sven DullahSven Dullah Posts: 7,621
    edited November 2022

    stripe6499_9253833ae8 said:

    Sven Dullah said:

    stripe6499_9253833ae8 said:

    I've just started looking at animations and I found this start guide. Daz Studio Animation Tutorial: Step by Step - RenderGuide.com. I found it fairly useful, but I'm a little unsure why the advice is to render a set of images and then compile them into a video rather than just render it as an .avi. Any enlightenment would be welcome.

    Because rendering to image series is the only working option, simple as that. Rendering to movie, which I've used for over ten years, is now broken, thus reduced to merely a cosmetic thingy. 

    Odd. I rendered to movie today and it worked fine... admitedly it took 5 hours to do a 60 frame series, but I got a working avi out of it. 

    What DS version did you use?  Macuser here, maybe it works on Windows?

    Post edited by Sven Dullah on
  • stripe6499_9253833ae8stripe6499_9253833ae8 Posts: 134

    Sven Dullah said:

    stripe6499_9253833ae8 said:

    Sven Dullah said:

    stripe6499_9253833ae8 said:

    I've just started looking at animations and I found this start guide. Daz Studio Animation Tutorial: Step by Step - RenderGuide.com. I found it fairly useful, but I'm a little unsure why the advice is to render a set of images and then compile them into a video rather than just render it as an .avi. Any enlightenment would be welcome.

    Because rendering to image series is the only working option, simple as that. Rendering to movie, which I've used for over ten years, is now broken, thus reduced to merely a cosmetic thingy. 

    Odd. I rendered to movie today and it worked fine... admitedly it took 5 hours to do a 60 frame series, but I got a working avi out of it. 

    What DS version did you use?  Macuser here, maybe it works on Windows?

    Daz 4.21.0.5 and yes, Win 11 user here. So maybe it's a Mac issue with the movie?

  • Sven DullahSven Dullah Posts: 7,621

    stripe6499_9253833ae8 said:

    Sven Dullah said:

    stripe6499_9253833ae8 said:

    Sven Dullah said:

    stripe6499_9253833ae8 said:

    I've just started looking at animations and I found this start guide. Daz Studio Animation Tutorial: Step by Step - RenderGuide.com. I found it fairly useful, but I'm a little unsure why the advice is to render a set of images and then compile them into a video rather than just render it as an .avi. Any enlightenment would be welcome.

    Because rendering to image series is the only working option, simple as that. Rendering to movie, which I've used for over ten years, is now broken, thus reduced to merely a cosmetic thingy. 

    Odd. I rendered to movie today and it worked fine... admitedly it took 5 hours to do a 60 frame series, but I got a working avi out of it. 

    What DS version did you use?  Macuser here, maybe it works on Windows?

    Daz 4.21.0.5 and yes, Win 11 user here. So maybe it's a Mac issue with the movie?

    Ok that seems to be the case, tks for confirming! 

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 100,791

    Willy2 said:

    Creating a video with images is the best way to proceed.
    First, you make your renders in jpeg format.

    I would advise using Tiff or PNG - they are lossless and give you an alpha channel/transparency for compositing.

    Then you can assemble the images with a utility.
    Personally, I use JPGVideo which creates files in avi format, without loss of definition, which I can then compress.
    To download JPGVideo, go to the publisher's website:

    http://www.ndrw.co.uk

  • benniewoodellbenniewoodell Posts: 1,969

    If you want to render animation sequences quicker, PNGs is the way to go because you can render the animation in layers, which takes hours off of your renders. I don't know what GPU you have, I have a 3090 and I render in 4K to downgrade to 1920x1080 in after effects. So I render a character, it takes 45 seconds to a minute per frame for women, I can get it down to 20-30 seconds for some dudes depending on if they have facial hair or not. If it's a couple of characters, add a little more time. Then you render the background separately, and you can typically set it to like 88% completion (or if you use the post denoiser, I find 300 iterations more than enough). Then you render anything in the foreground separate and layer it all in after effects or something. 

    Now the great thing about this also is, if you have a static camera, you only need to render the background one time and if you feel you have to let it go to 95% completion, it's not going to be anywhere near as much time as rendering it hundreds of times. If you have a moving camera, I'd recommend setting the limit to 300. I use Daz professionally as a freelance animator and I rarely go above 300 iterations for environments with the post denoiser on. And it's still going to be faster rendering the background 200 frames by itself than the background with the character(s) with hair and all that stuff. 

    You can't do any of this if you render it as an AVI. Yes, studios like Pixar use render farms to render everything together at once, but 2D animation was always done in layers because it just makes sense and saves so much time. It's really neat if you ever get a chance to see the contraption Disney created to give that three dimensional look for 2D animation, it's like 8 layers or something for the background. I can't remember the name of it, but I'm sure you can google it. But seeing that made me realize years ago that rendering everything together was a huge time waster.

    Hope this helps!

  • foxyfoxfurriesfoxyfoxfurries Posts: 325

    Richard Haseltine said:

    That sound as if you are rendering an image sequence, which is really the best way to go - you can render in chunks, you can rerender any parts that don't work 9or start again after a crash), you can apply imagee ffects to the renders if needed, or fix minor issues, among other things - then put the images together with a video editor, which will give you more choices over format, quality, and compression.

    Wow thanks for everyone here that help and share!!! I dont know how to replay everyone so thanks to all of you!

    but one last question if I move the hand lets say in frame 94 and want to change it how can I do it? or it can't be changed? 

  • marblemarble Posts: 7,500

    foxyfoxfurries said:

    Richard Haseltine said:

    That sound as if you are rendering an image sequence, which is really the best way to go - you can render in chunks, you can rerender any parts that don't work 9or start again after a crash), you can apply imagee ffects to the renders if needed, or fix minor issues, among other things - then put the images together with a video editor, which will give you more choices over format, quality, and compression.

    Wow thanks for everyone here that help and share!!! I dont know how to replay everyone so thanks to all of you!

    but one last question if I move the hand lets say in frame 94 and want to change it how can I do it? or it can't be changed? 

    I'm not sure I understand your question but I would say that you have to do that back on the timeline, not during or after the render. I tend to use the Graph Editor for retrospective changes like that but then I use the older Graphmate rather than the later DAZ timeline Graph View.

    As for making a video from an image sequence, I have tried lots of video editors including the paid-for Sony product but none come close to the free version of DaVinci Resolve. It is incredible what they give you for free compared to the few professional additions they include with the paid-for version.

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 100,791

    foxyfoxfurries said:

    Richard Haseltine said:

    That sound as if you are rendering an image sequence, which is really the best way to go - you can render in chunks, you can rerender any parts that don't work 9or start again after a crash), you can apply imagee ffects to the renders if needed, or fix minor issues, among other things - then put the images together with a video editor, which will give you more choices over format, quality, and compression.

    Wow thanks for everyone here that help and share!!! I dont know how to replay everyone so thanks to all of you!

    but one last question if I move the hand lets say in frame 94 and want to change it how can I do it? or it can't be changed? 

    Just rerender the frames that have changed and rebuild the animation from the images, as long as you didn't delete them after an early compilation into a video file.

  • stripe6499_9253833ae8stripe6499_9253833ae8 Posts: 134

    benniewoodell said:

    If you want to render animation sequences quicker, PNGs is the way to go because you can render the animation in layers, which takes hours off of your renders. I don't know what GPU you have, I have a 3090 and I render in 4K to downgrade to 1920x1080 in after effects. So I render a character, it takes 45 seconds to a minute per frame for women, I can get it down to 20-30 seconds for some dudes depending on if they have facial hair or not. If it's a couple of characters, add a little more time. Then you render the background separately, and you can typically set it to like 88% completion (or if you use the post denoiser, I find 300 iterations more than enough). Then you render anything in the foreground separate and layer it all in after effects or something. 

    Now the great thing about this also is, if you have a static camera, you only need to render the background one time and if you feel you have to let it go to 95% completion, it's not going to be anywhere near as much time as rendering it hundreds of times. If you have a moving camera, I'd recommend setting the limit to 300. I use Daz professionally as a freelance animator and I rarely go above 300 iterations for environments with the post denoiser on. And it's still going to be faster rendering the background 200 frames by itself than the background with the character(s) with hair and all that stuff. 

    You can't do any of this if you render it as an AVI. Yes, studios like Pixar use render farms to render everything together at once, but 2D animation was always done in layers because it just makes sense and saves so much time. It's really neat if you ever get a chance to see the contraption Disney created to give that three dimensional look for 2D animation, it's like 8 layers or something for the background. I can't remember the name of it, but I'm sure you can google it. But seeing that made me realize years ago that rendering everything together was a huge time waster.

    Hope this helps!

    TY Bennie! That is a fantastic explanation and guide. I tend not to do much post render work, but I see how it can help in animations now. I'll be trying this out.

  • foxyfoxfurriesfoxyfoxfurries Posts: 325

    benniewoodell said:

    If you want to render animation sequences quicker, PNGs is the way to go because you can render the animation in layers, which takes hours off of your renders. I don't know what GPU you have, I have a 3090 and I render in 4K to downgrade to 1920x1080 in after effects. So I render a character, it takes 45 seconds to a minute per frame for women, I can get it down to 20-30 seconds for some dudes depending on if they have facial hair or not. If it's a couple of characters, add a little more time. Then you render the background separately, and you can typically set it to like 88% completion (or if you use the post denoiser, I find 300 iterations more than enough). Then you render anything in the foreground separate and layer it all in after effects or something. 

    Now the great thing about this also is, if you have a static camera, you only need to render the background one time and if you feel you have to let it go to 95% completion, it's not going to be anywhere near as much time as rendering it hundreds of times. If you have a moving camera, I'd recommend setting the limit to 300. I use Daz professionally as a freelance animator and I rarely go above 300 iterations for environments with the post denoiser on. And it's still going to be faster rendering the background 200 frames by itself than the background with the character(s) with hair and all that stuff. 

    You can't do any of this if you render it as an AVI. Yes, studios like Pixar use render farms to render everything together at once, but 2D animation was always done in layers because it just makes sense and saves so much time. It's really neat if you ever get a chance to see the contraption Disney created to give that three dimensional look for 2D animation, it's like 8 layers or something for the background. I can't remember the name of it, but I'm sure you can google it. But seeing that made me realize years ago that rendering everything together was a huge time waster.

    Hope this helps!

    Thank you very much for all of you!!! It helps me a lot! I dont know how to replay everyone in single messages so hope you see my thanking!!!

    About what you write bennie thanks I have 3080 TI and I will try it out! THANKS  

Sign In or Register to comment.