Sorry, another newbe question or questions.

I have noticed that when I render movies in poser (unless I use uncompressed AVI's that won't animate properly) the picture quality is not anywhere nere as good as still images.  Is there a compressor I can use that would give as sharp an image as my stills or uncompressed AVI or am I just expecting too much?

I have another question quite closely related so hope it is ok to have this on the same thread,  what software is out there that would be good for editing and putting together short clips form poser without losing quality.  I've experimented with windows movie maker but the quality is not great.  I'm also wondering how I could make movies from the image files that can be exported on the movie settings tab.  Is there software available for that?  I did a search on google on 'creating movies from still images' but couldn't find any useful info.

Hope I haven't rambled too much.  I'd be greatfull for any advice.

You'll always get the best quality out of single rendered images vs exporting as a movie, at least in Poser that's the case.

Give Sony Vegas a try, you can import still images and set the time between them so you can you can control the speed that it plays it all back. The good thing about Vegas is that it's non-destructive so you can edit to your hearts content and not worry about the original source material.

Thanks JohnDoe641.  I'll look into Sony Vegas.  Probably a bit more than I can afford at the moment though but I could always give the free triel a go and see how I get on

There used to be sony movie maker for under $80 which was a sort of cut down Vegas.

try http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/moviestudiohd  under $50

Theres free stuff like Tmpgenc but try www.videohelp.com tools section.

any video editor is going to mess your pics unless you render at the correct frame size to start with.  xvid, divx and the windows movie maker codec are fairly good for compression and image quality.

Hi markschum.  Thanks for your advice.  What would be the most suitable frame size if that's not too much of a vague question?  I've been labouring over what resolution to use for rendering.  My monitor has a max of 1920 x 1080 but I've also rendered at 1600 x 900 with the same quality apart from when I zoom in.  If I render at 1920 x 1080 will it still display properly on a screens with smaller res?

I've downloaded a triel of Dvix but can't see any codec for them in the option in poser.  

Attached Link: saibabameuk

from Poser using PNG files 

This software also gives you a chance to use layering which cut's down render times.

The PNG illustration would have a background added in the sequence.

Then exported as a quick time .mov

I agree with JohnDoe641. There are many advantages of exporting as a collection of still images; and then using standard Video editing software to create the final movie. Here are some reasons:

1. If Poser crashes whilst creating the movie, the entire process must be repeated.
2. If Poser creates a series of images, then the User can examine the output whilst the job is running and cancel it and re-start it - without having to redo the same frames.
3. In standard video editing software is becomes easy to add titles/credits/copyright notices, create pleasant transitions between scenes; and add effects which cannot be done in Poser.
4. It becomes easier to generate movies of smaller sizes. For example, the large format movie (your 1920*1080) may be suitable for your monitor; but with video software it would be very easy to create a version suitable for YouTube or small devices. Afterall, a Phone user might not want a 300Mb movie on their small screen.  After I create my initial hi def image files, I use Adobe Premiere to generate all the required sizes.

Attached Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12KnAiFyiDo

Be Warned. There are some skimpy clothes in this one. It was all about learning how to make movies and less about content.

virtualdub allows assembly of individual pics into avi's has a gob of filters available can do most things other software do ... best of all... ITS  FREE

virtualdub.org

JAFO

When I started with video standard American broadcast standard or dvd was 720 x 480 (540 for square pixels)  . With higher definition tvs you can go larger or just use whatever you like if its for use only on a PC. again www.videohelp.com will have the standards.  

The bigger your images the longer a render will take , multiplied by the number of frames of course. I try to keep things small because my computer is single processor and low memory.

some standards are:

1080p (1920×1080 progressive scan)

720p  (1280 x 720)

480p (720 x 480)

if you are making dvds you need to check what your software will author.

One thing that has not been mentioned here and worth mentioning is something that should be considered when determining the resolution to render a scene at.

Render dimensions for an animation directly relate to the type of action that the scene will have.

For example:

If the scene is just someone standing there talking, you should render it a the same resolution that you plan on making the project, so you have lots of detail.

If it is a scene with a lot of motion, say someone running and the camera is moving, you do not need the max resolution. The frames with action that fast will tend to blur together when viewed, and max resolution is not needed. Putting a detailed primer scene right before it will make the person watching it think they are still seeing all the detail in the scene, but it isn't really there.

There are also scenes that will be rendered at high resolution, but use motion blur when rendering. That could be a scene with a lot of motion in the foreground, the camera is not moving, but other things that are being rendered in the background are not moving.

Planning all of this out with a simple script will save you a lot of rendering time.

Whatever program you decide on using to put it alltogether is just a matter of personal preference. Saving the renders as individual files is also the best way to go.

It gives you far more options than any video codec could ever offer.

Hi all.  thanks for all your sugestions.  I'm looking into Sony Vagus and can see that prices for diferent pages very greatly.  Can they all be used to put animations together from still images.  Also I've been looking into powerdirector 10 ultra 64 which seems to have good reviews and isn't too expensive.  Has anyone had expiriance with this?

Quote - When I started with video standard American broadcast standard or dvd was 720 x 480 (540 for square pixels)  . With higher definition tvs you can go larger or just use whatever you like if its for use only on a PC. again www.videohelp.com will have the standards.  

 

The bigger your images the longer a render will take , multiplied by the number of frames of course. I try to keep things small because my computer is single processor and low memory.

some standards are:

1080p (1920×1080 progressive scan)

720p  (1280 x 720)

480p (720 x 480)

 

if you are making dvds you need to check what your software will author.

Virtual Dub didn't like a movie I had that was 720 x 400.  It insisted on stretching the size to 720 x 480, so it had horizontal lines added.  I try to get sources at 720 x 480 ratio if I plan to save in DivX of AVIs using Virtual Dub.  Pinnacle Studio Ultimate 12 had no problem saving the 720 x 400 source to MPEG-4 for QuickTime.  It kept the ratio the same.  And MPEG-4 is about the same compression as DivX (file size-wise).

Quote - I'm looking into Sony Vagus and can see that prices for diferent pages very greatly

Sorry I meant packages, not pages

Quote - If it is a scene with a lot of motion, say someone running and the camera is moving, you do not need the max resolution. The frames with action that fast will tend to blur together when viewed, and max resolution is not needed. Putting a detailed primer scene right before it will make the person watching it think they are still seeing all the detail in the scene, but it isn't really there.

There are also scenes that will be rendered at high resolution, but use motion blur when rendering. That could be a scene with a lot of motion in the foreground, the camera is not moving, but other things that are being rendered in the background are not moving.

Planning all of this out with a simple script will save you a lot of rendering time.

It's not just resolution: the type of rendering you do can be optimized.

For instance, in a scene with a lot of fast movement, say a scene on a street with vehicles going by, you don't really need to have proper reflective glass (simple transparency will do), or even a proper reflective finish on the cars: a fake reflection map could work just as well. You might use shadow-mapping (if it's faster) than raytracing, and so on and so forth.

Toxic Wolf -  I only just got round to checking your youtube link.  I've seen this before on youtuve.  In fact it partly contributed to me buying poser 2012 in the first please.  Looks really good.  I've downloaded a trial version of Adobe premier eliments that I'm going to have a go at using if I can get my head round it.  Do you know where I can find some basic tutorials on line.  Last night I couldn't even figure how to create a short clip from my movie stills that I rendered in poser.