I've read a lot of threads in the forum and I am yet to figure out whether it is best to render individual frames and compile in a movie editor program or whether to keep on playing with the animation codec settings, any hints or tips would be really well recieved as would any advice on choice of codecs .

It's better to render individual frames, except possibly for a first-draft trial in preview mode.   Rendering an animation in Firefly can take several days.  If you use the internal codecs you're stuck; you either have to devote the computer entirely to Poser or stop the rendering early and lose the whole thing. 

Separate frames gives you full flexibility in editing afterward.

rendering in seperate frames has advantages as Ockham says.

You still need to know what codec to use when creating the movie in a seperate application.  xvid is free and gives a good compression rate. For streaming the bitrate is important.

Yes Image files ,export to say final cut , then export .movie .

I use export Quick Time Apple intermediate Codec.

Now tell me you are not a Mac user!

guess it depends on what you plan on doing after. If I plan on a 5 sec or so gif I do uncompressed avi, if I plan on edditing later I use what codecs my moive editing soft imports. Dunno if theres a speed dif in single frames over my way, single frames is a safer way if anything goes wrong u can recover from where it went wrong (sorta lol )

So find a way that suits you, your comp and the software you have  but most of all have fun

exporting from poser: the best codec is no codec IMVHO.  sharing a video rendered in poser: for iphone/ipad it's mpeg-4/h.264, whilst google uses flv.  if video is just for viewing on one's own computer, there are dozens of codecs, many of which have been suggested here in many threads with the same question, but none of 'em are standards, hence if ya try to post a vid using one of those geek codecs anywhere, few or none will be able to view it AFAIK. ye'll be deluged with the question "how do I view this?" from users who've only seen flvs on google.  quicktime was sposeta become a web standard, but many users hate it and can't get it to work. YMMV.

you can use virtualdub or avidemux to merge the rendered images, they are 2 free applications and both do a good work.

About the codec, yes Xvid is a great choose, you can visit:

www.videohelp.com

There you can find all the video tools in the market, free or not and most of the codecs.

The things that really bug me about people saying render single frames out is this: First you have to learn yet another program and then do the extra work to do not only build the animation in that program but you also have extra work to sync up any audio you used. Unless you're making a movie for some major feature film project, which would mean using Poser is counter productive to begin with, you're better off rendering to your animation file in Poser with your audio track already loaded. That's this animators opinion.

thanks a bunch chaps and chapesses, I really do appreciate the advice, (cheers ockham for your scripts, im always using one or the other)........and no lol, i'm not a mac user..

I have been working on an animation for some time and have just been saving all my scenes to render at a later time when i'd resolved the issue......of stills or movie export.

Once again I find myself humbled by wiser, more experienced older users pmsl

 I wish I had a pc that would truly support my rendering wishes,(and like a lot of people I have to bolt on, upgrade what I can, when I can) but my lottery ticket didn't come up again damn,,  until it does I guess I'll just have to remain a well meaning amateur with dreams of grandeur..........

cheers guys :)

Quote - The things that really bug me about people saying render single frames out is this: First you have to learn yet another program and then do the extra work to do not only build the animation in that program but you also have extra work to sync up any audio you used. Unless you're making a movie for some major feature film project, which would mean using Poser is counter productive to begin with, you're better off rendering to your animation file in Poser with your audio track already loaded. That's this animators opinion.

The definitive determinant of whether you render to single frames or not, is can you reliably render the whole animation without Poser crashing.
Once you get close to the answer No, then you really don't have much choice about using other software, as splitting up an animation into chunks will require assembling them later.

Quote - > Quote - The things that really bug me about people saying render single frames out is this: First you have to learn yet another program and then do the extra work to do not only build the animation in that program but you also have extra work to sync up any audio you used. Unless you're making a movie for some major feature film project, which would mean using Poser is counter productive to begin with, you're better off rendering to your animation file in Poser with your audio track already loaded. That's this animators opinion.

The definitive determinant of whether you render to single frames or not, is can you reliably render the whole animation without Poser crashing.
Once you get close to the answer No, then you really don't have much choice about using other software, as splitting up an animation into chunks will require assembling them later.

See, now there's your assumption that's wrong. Poser doesn't crash on long animations for everyone! It certainly hasn't for me. It also depends on how you define long animations. If your talking long panoramic shots of outdoor scenery, I use Bryce for that. I use Poser for dialog or figure scenes only in animation. Also, I'm not making major motion pictures. I've rendered animations up to 3000 frames without a crash.

My bigest gripe is that whenever animation is brought up, rendering out images is always the first reccommendation when it's not always the best choice for the project. Let the new users know their options and don't write off a perfectly viable method just because it's not your preferred method.

Quote - exporting from poser: the best codec is no codec IMVHO.  sharing a video rendered in poser: for iphone/ipad it's mpeg-4/h.264, whilst google uses flv.  if video is just for viewing on one's own computer, there are dozens of codecs, many of which have been suggested here in many threads with the same question, but none of 'em are standards, hence if ya try to post a vid using one of those geek codecs anywhere, few or none will be able to view it AFAIK. ye'll be deluged with the question "how do I view this?" from users who've only seen flvs on google.  quicktime was sposeta become a web standard, but many users hate it and can't get it to work. YMMV.

That is soooo my life with videos!!!  Some years back I went so far as to do a google search for mass packages of codecs and installed them, only to find out that I still couldn't view what I was trying to view.

The main advantages to rendering to frames then compiling later, if there's a screw up, you don't need to render the whole thing again, (eg you forgot to make character A turn to the left 30 seconds in), you can start / stop rendering from any point in the sequence, (so if poser crashes, power goes out, you just want to check a few frames in the middle of the animation, etc), you can control codec options more easily, (compression, bit rate, etc),  choose codecs not supported by Poser, (Divx, QT, FLV, Mpeg, etc etc)...

plus, rendering to frames means you can do many tricks like overlaying an animation over other footage by rendering the animation to PNG or TGA that support alpha channels.... the list goes on.

If you are doing animation for anything more than the proverbial shits and giggles, then the safest, most flexible way is to do uncompressed frame rendering. Once you have the frames, yes, you -will- have to learn how to use some form of video editing software. However, you can start with something as simple as Quicktime Pro. And a quick google will reveal several freeware video editors. The benefit is simple; you can run the frames through the editor, compress them with one codec....and if you don't like the result, simply reload and use another codec. And frames make it easier to do postwork. Say you do a scene on a starship bridge with pre-purchased set pieces. You take a frame into Photoshop (or PSP, or any of the shareware or freeware photo editors that support layers and transparencies), make a mask to remove the display graphics, invert that mask as a template, create new displays (and animate those), then batch process the lot and superimpose the images in the correct sequence. Animated console readouts in exactly the same way the pros do it. A bit tedious, but the result can change an animation. Codecs behave best when they are fed uncompressed audio and video streams; remember that any compression algorithm has a mathematical pattern to it. And that pattern being interfered with by another pattern leads to artifacts of the worst kind. And the only solution there is to start over with a different compression pattern. You only want to compress things =once= (I use Adobe Premiere Pro and After Effects. Mainly because I got into them cheaply, and have been upgrading every other iteration or so. These are -not- the only ones out there by any stretch. And any app has weaknesses and strengths). If you intend audio, decide exactly what kind right from the start. If just speech, then a semi-decent mike plugged into the computer can suffice.... Just remember that quality is paid for. The better the mike, the better the sound. Always record in raw .wav format with no compression. It takes space, but you don't run into distortion issues when you compress already compress audio. If you intend musical scoring and/or sound effects, then an audio editor is a must. Most of them will display a video stream (even frames) so you can synch your sounds to the images. There are freeware multi-channel audio editors (I use Adobe Audition, simply because it works so well, and integrates with my other editors).

Poser works just fine with Mpeg4, DivX as well as Xvid if you have the proper codec installed on your system. I've rendered directly to all three codecs without so much as a burp.

I've exported avi and frames. Experience has taught me that frames is the way to go and frames offer greater flexibility for editing.

I often do a short avi preview render as a test only.

Nolos.

ok guys preciated, no need for a war though lol.....my only concern with rendering frames, is the need to render a keyframe every second to recompile a smooth animation, for short facial or speech shots, I would as Mr Bean says, render an animation so I don't have to retime the audio.

It might be just me, but Ive found rendering frames and recompiling them doesnt always give the smoothest animation on close ups, seems a bit jittery.....

I shall as the x factor contestants constantly say, take all this info on board, and run with it before the axes of avi meet the flails of frames :)

Quote - Poser works just fine with Mpeg4, DivX as well as Xvid if you have the proper codec installed on your system. I've rendered directly to all three codecs without so much as a burp.

Oh, I have too, for testing and preview at realtime speeds. But there is no getting around one simple fact; if a power flicker or OS burp crashes a frame output render, then all I have to do is pick up after the last good saved frame. If a codec output render bombs, you have to start over from the beginning. If each frame is only taking a minute or so, probably no biggie. If you have 20 hours invested and are only a third of the way there (and with GI, shader tricks, raytracing, etc, you can easily get large per frame time requirements), well, that was a day wasted a a lot of power used for nothing. If you're having stuttering issues mysticeagle, what framerate are you using? If it is too low, and you don't have some form of motion blur enabled or posted in, then you can perceive it. 24fps is too slow without motion blur; that if film frame speed, and the smoothness there depends on the fact that you get blurring on the film due to the exposure time. For pure digital, 30fps should be considered the minimum. Of course there are other things that will enhance the effect: poor lighting choices for the scene can create it, for example. And trust me, this is nothing more than friendly sticking up for favorite position, backed by experience. You get output either way. The only questions are in speed, safety and flexibility. Frames -do- take up more storage space...and you will want to make sure you have a CD/DVD burner to back them up onto, or and external hard drive. But as long as you have those frames, you can create as many .mp4s, avi's, xvids, ect as you want. Sure, there is conversion software out there to change one format into another, but the result is....unpredictable (mosaic artifacting, anyone?). And if you lose or damage your source output, and don't have it backed up, you are SOL.

I render frame by frame to a folder. Then I take all of the picture frames and transfer them to adobe macromedia flash to automaticly animate it. It rendering and animating more simple for me.

Check  some of my work:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59cZ-xclCsg&feature=channel_video_title

I prefer to render to QT with no compression. I do a few test renders first, like stills and perhaps some set to preview so I can check the figure movements.  Then I set it to render and go to bed. I just wish Poser would let me shutdown when it is through rendering instead of asking me if I want to save again.

So I guess the real answer is just like everything else lol, it boils down to preferences and equipment(or money as i prefer to call it).....it would be interesting to know what sort of system the average poser artist uses, maybe the mods could run a survey to see whether the norm for renderosity members is high end high spec, or just average joe spending 8 hours a night rendering at low res, dreaming of the day they can upgrade and see the fruits of their labours in high spec high def...........as for me, i sort of fit into the average joe category with a few upgrades.........once again thanks chaps n chapesses..................:)