Creative Communities of the World Forums

The peer to peer support community for media production professionals.

Activity Forums Apple Motion Should this really be a 12 hour render?

  • Should this really be a 12 hour render?

    Posted by Andrew Wilson on January 25, 2011 at 1:36 pm

    I haven’t been using Motion for long but I’ve been doing After Effects and Cinema 4D long enough to know that 12 hours seems like a long time for this project to render on a MacPro 8 core 3.0 with 9 gigs of ram.

    https://vimeo.com/19168169

    There are 11 lights and shadows and reflections but still… it’s rendered at standard def and the still images are all under 1500×1500. No depth of field… no motion blur. The floor is a color solid generator with width and height set to 4300×3000. I know that’s pretty big but is there a better way to generate the floor?

    Anyway… if you feel so inclined to look at it and let me know if you think it really should be taking this long to render or if there are ways you can suggest to speed things up.

    Also, there’s a weird 3d glitch at 5:05. The pictures go under the floor at the out point of the “Since 1946” graphic… which isn’t even part of that group. It’s its own layer right under the group of pictures affects. I extended the out point to when that groups of pictures is out of the frame but why would that happen?

    Thanks for your input…. Any other comments appreciated!

    Andrew Wilson
    WestView Digital Video & Design
    http://www.westviewdigital.com

    Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!

    This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Vimeo framework” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.

    Stephen Smith replied 15 years, 6 months ago 5 Members · 6 Replies
  • 6 Replies
  • Mark Spencer

    January 25, 2011 at 2:01 pm

    What video card are you using? That matters more than cpu or ram.

    Are you rendering at Normal or Best quality? Best takes much, much longer and most of the time doesn’t improve the result unless you are pushing close to vector objects.

    Also, you might want to deinterlace your footage when compressing for the web.


    Mark Spencer
    Freelance Producer/Editor/Motion Graphics Artist
    Apple-certified Master Trainer
    Author, Motion 4 from Peachpit Press
    https://www.applemotion.net

  • Andrew Wilson

    January 25, 2011 at 2:28 pm

    The video card is the ATI 1900 X or XT…. Can’t remember which one actually came with the computer. It was the upgraded card at the time.

    It’s rendered at best quality. The interlacing thing has me scratching my head a little. The Sequence is set to ProRes422 no field dominance and the clip properties have no field dominance. BUT I just checked my Motion Export settings and see that I checked field rendering on. Not quite sure why I did that. But wouldn’t it import into FCP with a dominant field by default? Would you suggest turning off field rendering in the export settings?

    I’ve gotten in the habit of doing all my stuff progressive even though a good chunk of it goes to cable for broadcast.

    Andrew Wilson
    WestView Digital Video & Design
    http://www.westviewdigital.com

  • Andy Neil

    January 25, 2011 at 3:52 pm

    I never use field rendering with a progressive project, and only rarely use it with interlaced; usually when an animation isn’t moving smoothly.

    Also, the Best rendering setting is what’s causing the extraordinary render time. Normal setting is fine for almost all renders, the exceptions being what Mark stated above. I’d always render Normal to begin with and only switch to Best if I had to for quality.

    Andy

    https://www.timesavertutorials.com

  • Andrew Wilson

    January 25, 2011 at 6:44 pm

    [Andy Neil] “Also, the Best rendering setting is what’s causing the extraordinary render time. Normal setting is fine for almost all renders, the exceptions being what Mark stated above. I’d always render Normal to begin with and only switch to Best if I had to for quality.”

    I’ve updated the video at that link. This time it was set to normal and took like 6 minutes to render. I was able to fix some chunky text issues I had by moving the text farther away from the camera and making the point size bigger.

    Is there a ‘continually rasterize’ button in Motion that’s similar to AfterEffects? I think that would have solved my chunky text issue without me having to move them around in space or doing a best render.

    Thanks to all for your input!

    Andrew Wilson
    WestView Digital Video & Design
    http://www.westviewdigital.com

  • Mpigott

    February 15, 2011 at 4:07 pm

    That’s quite the performance hit from normal to high.

    That scene would easilly be maybe 10 minutes with 3ds Max. so
    12 hours is harsh.

  • Stephen Smith

    February 15, 2011 at 4:10 pm

    Mark,
    How long is your project?

    Stephen Smith
    Utah Video Productions

    Check out my Motion Training DVD

    Check out my Motion Tutorials

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy