Hi Everyone,

I have a plan for a 10-15 minute Music Video, thats as much I'm going to reveal about it for now, its not a commercial project but a fun personal one, I wanted to be a surprise when I finally release it.

I want to get my facts straight before I dive deep into it, since it will consume a lot of my personal time and as well render times.  I have done a bit of research already and would like to get some opinions from you fantastic people.

Resolution:
"Full HD" (1920x1080 pixels) I figure might as well work with the highest HD resolution and than downgrade if I decide to release as Flash or DVD.

Frame Rate: 24, 25, 30?? This is where things get confusing for me, I was told that if I want a film-like quality, I need to add a 1/48th second motion blur to simulate film shutter and render at 23.976 fps.

I was also told that to get a faster yet progressive look, I should render at 29.97.

and Finally I was told that to get a silky-smooth motion, I should render at 59.94 and interlace into 29.97 using a utility program like avisynth.

its important for me to get these facts straight right at the start of the project, rather than figure it out in the middle of it and have to re-start.

Output Format:
Sequenced BMP? PSD?  I have done some tests to uncompressed AVI and the results are strange and I'm not sure if its because its too demanding on my system or not.  So should I output to single images and assemble them in something like Sony's Vegas studio?

any advice suggestions would be appreciated.

Render Nodes:
I'm going to utilize 2 Desktops and 2 Laptops.  The desktops are single core, but the laptops are dual core.  Off the top of my head, I think Carrara 6 Pro allows for 5 Nodes?  Now does that mean that each core is considered a Node? or 1 PC = 1 Node?  Any suggestions on optimizing render using Multiple PC's?

If you have time to render in thsi resolution, go for it!
The frames... basic: 24 for movies and 30 for video (look for standard Pal or Ntsc format)
Output: ALWAYS any bitmap format, so if your render crahs you can go from where it stopped. If you want to do a post edit like add some effects go for PSD files or TGA, almost all video editor like them.
I want to see your work at CL  too!!

Very cool. I want to see it too.

 24 fps is for film, certain HD formats and certain SD formats. 25 fps is for SD PAL, 29.97 is for SD NTSC and 54.94 (60) is for 720 p HD video.

.psd format in sequences is the best format if you plan on using non-destructive editing tools like AE or FCP since you can also export the alpha and g-buffer channels for extra effects or corrections later on in post production.

Regarding render times, since I produce for both SD and HD clients, make careful decisions about sizes. Doubling the size of the render image requires four times the amount of rendering time. So, for a fast render, 90 seconds per frame for 30 minutes of animation at 30 fps means 54000 frames and 81000 seconds - 56.25 hours of rendering - all this with no render issues or re-renders. Using particle effects or special effects from within Carrara can easily multiply render times by a factor of 5-10. All this in addition to simply doing the animation work. 

I was talking to some folks from ILM at SIGGRAPH last year and the the scenes they were doing for Raiders of the Lost Ark were taking 24 hours per frame on their internal render farm of about hundred quad cores. The final rendering was sent out to a very large render farm so that it would  be completed in time. You can never have too much speed.

Quote - If you have time to render in thsi resolution, go for it!
The frames... basic: 24 for movies and 30 for video (look for standard Pal or Ntsc format)
Output: ALWAYS any bitmap format, so if your render crahs you can go from where it stopped. If you want to do a post edit like add some effects go for PSD files or TGA, almost all video editor like them.
I want to see your work at CL  too!!

I was told rendering at 60FPS than using a tool to convert to 30FPS would give it a smooth look, it kind of looks crazy to render that many extra frames than to throw them away.

Ok so when I render the bitmaps do I leave it to default 72 DPI?? does it matter if the end result is video?

I havent quite thought about adding any post effects via photoshop with batch processing.. maybe I can ad motion blur or something?

Oh and what is CL that you are referring to?

 Another standard trick is to render at about 80 percent actual size and then rez up in post production - if you are looking  for a "real world" media look. It provides a little fuzz and takes the edge off of computer perfection.

Most of my special effects I do in post production because it's simply faster than rendering. Additionally, I can then tweak any special effects without having to rerender the base art.

I plan to use Vegas Video for editing.. and from the feedback so far, it sounds like I should go with the .PSD file format.

My scenes so far are simplistic made of geometric shapes and some text.  I have one scene that uses the particle emitter.  the other ones don't (so far).

The scene with particles is 10 Seconds so at 24fps it adds up to 240 Frames.  A single frame on take 56 seconds.  So it would take 3.5 to 4 hours in a single machine to render??

This is the reason I want to render on multiple machines. :)

And I can confirm what Mark is saying about a Single Frame taking 24 hours to render... I watched a show on Pixar and they were saying the same thing.

Now I wish I had the skill to produce an image as good as a single frame from one of those movies. :)

Quote -  Another standard trick is to render at about 80 percent actual size and then rez up in post production - if you are looking  for a "real world" media look. It provides a little fuzz and takes the edge off of computer perfection.

Thats a cool Tip!! :)

Ok so 80% of 1920 x 1080 would be 1536 x 864.. Cool.. I'll try that and see how it looks. :)

Yeah.. I want the end result to look good but not sterile.

Unless you are shooting with a video camera there is no reason to render at 23/976 or 29.97. Those fractional frequencies are the legacy -bound nonsense of video cameras and even today there is no real reason to keep those frequencies.. If you were to shoot film you would be bound to, as it should be, integer frame rates. 24fps is your best bet unless you want to target PAL-format markets but even in that case you can convert from 24fps to 25fps.
Shutter speed is the same. If you shoot video then your shutter speed should be, normally, 1/half-frame-speed. So, if you shoot 24fps it's 1/48th of a second or 1/60th ofd a second for 30fps. But be aware that with digital cameras there is no absolute. You can shoot with the shutter at 1/24th for added light or even with the shutter off. They used shutter of with the Sony F23 on the set of "Public Enemies" 
If you're rendering from a 3D package you are not bound to the physics of the shutter unless you want to acheieve a given effect.

I think some of the advice I was given initially was to get that Film-Like effect or Smooth Silk-Like look.

I will certainly try  the new advice I've gotten here and see what I get.

Please let us know your results. I'm very interested in this subject as well.

Quote - I think some of the advice I was given initially was to get that Film-Like effect or Smooth Silk-Like look.

Actually film or 24fps is the one that gives the "smooth" look. The debate about "film look" started when people tried to use video cameras to produce movies. DV cameras were made to match NTSC TV sets, which have a frame rate of 30fps split in two interlaced fields that get rendered at 1/60 second. Besides the frame rate, the shutter speed is responsible for the "crisp" look of video because a higher speed rate, 1/60 instead of 1/48 of film, creates less motion blur.
So, even if you convert 30fps to 24fps there is lttle that you can do to reduce the sharpness caused by the faster shutter and the elusive "film look" remains elusive. With the introduction of digital cameras able to shoot true 24fps, like the JVC HD100, the film look is more achievable.
When generating clips from a 3D package you are not bound by technical limitations of the camera. You can use any frequency that you want. If you want to achieve a film look then you need to follow the same rules that are used by traditional cinematographers.

Light your scene to use shadows skillfully to give a sense of depth. Look at what Gordon Willis has done with the Godfather. Willis would use as few lights as possible. He liked to remove lights instead of adding them. Artistic  lighting  is the main ingredient, IMHO, of film look.
Second, use depth of field to guide the attention of the viewer, to isolate. Again, less is more.
Then use frame speed and motion blur to give that soft look of film. Film is shot at 24 fps. Period. Change of speed is only used to create slow-motion or weird effects like the 6 fps streaks of "Domino"
It also makes sense to stay at 24fps in order to save render time.

Good luck with your project.

I will do several renders with all the settings mentioned and see visually what they look like.

I will than post results.  10 second scene shouldnt take long.

Good luck with this.  I thought I'd throw my experience in to the mix, as well.

Mark has hit the frame rate info on the head, and his trick about up-ressing the footage is a great one.  I've also used a slight post production blur trackmatted with an edge detection in AfterEffects to soften up edges a bit.

One word of warning:  Carrara's alpha channel is a little weak when you're using motion blur.  Carrara's motion blur (use the vector blur) is quite good, but Carrara doesn't seem to know what to do with the alpha channel under the blurry parts.  For that reason, if I'm rendering something that I'm going to composite atop live footage, I render it against a pure green solid and key it using Keylight in AE.  The blur keys just fine in Keylight, and the built-in spill supression takes care of any odd coloration in the semi-transparent areas.

Hope that's helpful.

 - Dex

A lot of postwork video apps (like your Vegas) allow for adding motion blur as a filter. A touch of that would take off some of the excess crispness that rendered animations typically have. And if you need more blur, that way is also less expensive than producing it natively in Carrara. (Carrara renders multiple frames and then averages that in order to produce the blur effect.)

In regards to blur, what if I apply bluring using photoshop in a batch job?

Blur in postprocess is perfectly fine and it's actually the preferred method since it can be applied at the very last render, leaving you with a faster workflow. I don't remember if Carrara can do it but just ion case, some 3D apps can create a separate pass to output motion vectors. You can use that later on to calculate motion blur accurately. Otherwise, whatever PS or AE can do will look good.

I'm taking notes guys, thanks for sharing your knowledge and experiences on the subject.

You might want to consider using another program for compositing...

You can create your 3D stuff in Carrara as Quicktime movie files with alpha's
I'm also using Anime Studio Pro 5.6 for composing the alphas and using the camera's with the Z-depth and particle effects within ASP to do all the stuff that would take up more time to do in the 3D app.
Also Project Dogwaffle is another great tool to use to create additional animated effects like adding distortion (heat haze) and particle effects.

I'm just doing a small 30 second blurb for a friend of mine, but you can really make up a lot of time with planning out your project with additional tools.

Quote - You might want to consider using another program for compositing...

You can create your 3D stuff in Carrara as Quicktime movie files with alpha's
I'm also using Anime Studio Pro 5.6 for composing the alphas and using the camera's with the Z-depth and particle effects within ASP to do all the stuff that would take up more time to do in the 3D app.
Also Project Dogwaffle is another great tool to use to create additional animated effects like adding distortion (heat haze) and particle effects.

I'm just doing a small 30 second blurb for a friend of mine, but you can really make up a lot of time with planning out your project with additional tools.

Sounds a bit advanced for my current knowledge/skills.

I've heard people refereing to using Alpha's  thats something I havent wrapped my head around yet.

I'll be sure to post a little tutorial on this, once I'm finished... I have one week left on my deadline (I'll keep ya's posted...re: NBC NASCAR Ohio race, Aug 8th )