Difference between rendering as image sequence and as movie? Best Render Options?

[rishi sunak]

Hey guys, my question is simple and straight to the point, what's the difference between rendering as image sequence and as a movie?

I'm about to render my first ever animation and I am at a loss with render settings to be honest, could use as much information and help as possible.

Thanks in advance!

[surfer171]

If you want a straight to the point answer then basically image sequence takes a rather short time compared to render it as a movie. Second, you wouldn't get errors when you render as image sequence and lastly, your video would not corrupt when rendering image sequence.

You can wait a little longer for an in depth detail of the difference

[Zappy]

AVI files: Raw and uncompressed, meaning huge file-sizes (easily up to 4 gigabytes!). And if it reaches around 4 gigabytes in size, it will corrupt. This is because Source FilmMaker, as a 32-bit program, can't output files bigger than around 4 gigabytes. (Other programs may be able to do so, and maybe also export compressed AVIs that don't fill so much.) Due to the immense file-size and easy corruption with even just minute-long videos, don't use this.

MP4 and MOV files: Requires QuickTime, which has security holes, so if you have QuickTime, uninstall it immediately. Beyond that, using MPEG-4 compression makes everything too dark and saturated, and the H.264 compression codec makes everything too bright and de-saturated. (This is a Source FilmMaker issue, other programs can output these video types just fine.) Due to the wrong colouring, let alone the actual security holes in QuickTime which is required, don't use this either.

Image sequence: This will export every frame as an individual image. (So please export every session to a folder of its own, both for sake of management and making it easier to delete all the files when un-needed.) Sound will also be exported as a lone WAV file. This is intended for using a video editor to load all images and the sound and then save as a video. Doing this will let you set your own compression, so you can keep colours right and get a nice balance between quality and file-size, so this is definitely recommended... and usually the only viable option, too.

Sound only: This is just a lone WAV file. If you render part of an image sequence render, then render another part of it later, the WAV file won't fit the full render. Use this export option to export the sound for an image sequence render in one go. (Yes, you can pick up on image sequence renders at any time by setting the duration appropriately, and then use this to export the full sound file from start to finish.)



So, in short, AVI is broken and fills a lot, and MP4/MOV is broken and needs a program with security holes, so use image sequences.
To "compile" the video from an image sequence render, all you have to do is import all the images in a video editor (besides Windows (Live) Movie Maker), set the frame-rate of the images to be the frame-rate you exported at from Source FilmMaker, import the sound, and then save the video. No, you don't have to use specifically Blender, but here's a guide that explains how to use Blender for it:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=375229570 (It may sound daunting at first, but once you get used to it, it's not that bad at all.)

[rishi sunak]

Okay, that makes a whole lot of sense, thank you so much for the long and detailed answer, I appreciate it alot!

[Wayne]

Originally posted by Zappy:

AVI files: Raw and uncompressed, meaning huge file-sizes (easily up to 4 gigabytes!). And if it reaches around 4 gigabytes in size, it will corrupt. This is because Source FilmMaker, as a 32-bit program, can't output files bigger than around 4 gigabytes. Due to the immense file-size and easy corruption with even just minute-long videos, don't use this.

MP4 and MOV files: Requires QuickTime, which has security holes, so if you have QuickTime, uninstall it immediately. Beyond that, using MPEG-4 compression makes everything too dark and saturated, and the H.264 compression codec makes everything too bright and de-saturated. (This is a Source FilmMaker issue, other programs can output these video types just fine.) Due to the wrong colouring, let alone the actual security holes in QuickTime which is required, don't use this either.

Image sequence: This will export every frame as an individual image. (So please export every session to a folder of its own, both for sake of management and making it easier to delete all the files when un-needed.) Sound will also be exported as a lone WAV file. This is intended for using a video editor to load all images and the sound and then save as a video. Doing this will let you set your own compression, and also keep colours right and get a nice balance between quality and file-size, so this is definitely recommended... and usually the only viable option, too.

Sound only: This is just a lone WAV file. If you render part of an image sequence render, then render another part of it later, the WAV file won't fit the full render. Use this export option to export the sound for an image sequence render in one go. (Yes, you can pick up on image sequence renders at any time by setting the duration appropriately, and then use this to export the full sound file from start to finish.)



So, in short, AVI is broken and fills a lot, and MP4/MOV is broken and needs a program with security holes, so use image sequences.
To "compile" the video from an image sequence render, all you have to do is import all the images in a video editor (besides Windows (Live) Movie Maker), set the frame-rate of the images to be the frame-rate you exported at from Source FilmMaker, import the sound, and then save the video. No, you don't have to use specifically Blender, but here's a guide that explains how to use Blender for it:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=375229570 (It may sound daunting at first, but once you get used to it, it's not that bad at all.)

That's odd, I've outputted an uncompressed MP4 that equated to 12.1gb and 11.6gb, only corruption there was, was a missing thumbnail. Is it only an issue with AVI, because I have yet to see it.

[Zappy]

Originally posted by Billy Joel:

That's odd, I've outputted an uncompressed MP4 that equated to 12.1gb and 11.6gb, only corruption there was, was a missing thumbnail. Is it only an issue with AVI, because I have yet to see it.

Considering Source FilmMaker requires QuickTime to export MP4s and MOVs, it may be possible that Source FilmMaker is outputting temporary files that QuickTime then stitches together on its own, with QuickTime being able to exceed 4 gigabytes per file.

(But also considering Source FilmMaker requires QuickTime to export MP4s/MOVs, you shouldn't be able to export MP4s/MOVs straight from Source FilmMaker... unless you have QuickTime installed, in which case you should uninstall it, after which you shouldn't be able to export MP4s/MOVs straight from Source FilmMaker.)

[Wayne]

Originally posted by Zappy:

Originally posted by Billy Joel:

That's odd, I've outputted an uncompressed MP4 that equated to 12.1gb and 11.6gb, only corruption there was, was a missing thumbnail. Is it only an issue with AVI, because I have yet to see it.

Considering Source FilmMaker requires QuickTime to export MP4s and MOVs, it may be possible that Source FilmMaker is outputting temporary files that QuickTime then stitches together on its own, with QuickTime being able to exceed 4 gigabytes per file.

(But also considering Source FilmMaker requires QuickTime to export MP4s/MOVs, you shouldn't be able to export MP4s/MOVs straight from Source FilmMaker... unless you have QuickTime installed, in which case you should uninstall it, after which you shouldn't be able to export MP4s/MOVs straight from Source FilmMaker.)

If that's the case, then depending on if the discussion creator wants RAW or not (like I do), then they should get QuickTime. What I do, is I export raw MP4/AVI and then I encode the file as H.264/H.265 with my own custom settings in the application "Handbrake", so I reduce the file size to less than 1/500 of the raw size without much loss, or I can encode it to where the size is <1/100 the size with higher bitrates and better encoding methods and have almost unnoticeable loss, if I want to have a better looking version that is better for uploading to YouTube rather than sending it to friends through skype, which is usually depending on video length about 10-100MB. If you don't already, I recommend doing that rather than piecing together image sequences. I at least recommend comparing the two in your own time to see which is quicker and more effective, depending on your needs.

NOTE: Don't worry about QuickTime being "vulnerable". The only potential damage is if you download and execute a video that exploits those vulnerabilities, but the only harm they can cause is an application crash or memory corruption (leading to crash, but no other harm should be done). It isn't something that can get you ratted or give you a virus, so it's perfectly safe in regards to actual security.

If you don't believe me, refer to this page: https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-49/product_id-1212/Apple-Quicktime.html

[Wayne]

Originally posted by Zappy:

Originally posted by Billy Joel:

(But also considering Source FilmMaker requires QuickTime to export MP4s/MOVs, you shouldn't be able to export MP4s/MOVs straight from Source FilmMaker... unless you have QuickTime installed, in which case you should uninstall it, after which you shouldn't be able to export MP4s/MOVs straight from Source FilmMaker.)

Read what I said above. I explained what I do personally and also why QuickTime isn't something you should be worried about and why you should consider downloading it.

[rishi sunak]

Seems like theres more than one way depending on what I'm exactly doing, I guess since the animation will be small part of a video I'm working on, I will most likely be rerendering it through Sony Vegas as well, if that's even a viable option that doesn't damage quality, file size and rendering time does not matter that much to me as much as quality does in general.

[Wayne]

Originally posted by Blocked:

Seems like theres more than one way depending on what I'm exactly doing, I guess since the animation will be small part of a video I'm working on, I will most likely be rerendering it through Sony Vegas as well, if that's even a viable option that doesn't damage quality, file size and rendering time does not matter that much to me as much as quality does in general.

I feel the same way, and in that case I would export in raw like I do and just encode in handbrake with a custom preset to get the most quality but still reduce file size, which is the best option for quality. A 60 second raw file will be over 10gb, so encoding is necessary for uploading and versatility. I would say that if you set the RF quality to about 10, the encoding quality to placebo and the encoding level to either 4.0 or auto, you'll have the smallest file size with optimal quality. I also recommend setting the audio to have one track set to the AC3 codec with a bit rate of 640kbps. If the quality loss is too noticeable for you with those settings, set the RF quality to a lower number such as 6 (in which a lower number is less lossy but too low reduces purpose for encoding). I'm sure you wouldn't see loss at all as far down as 5 RF, but you should mess around with it to determine that yourself.

[rishi sunak]

Originally posted by Billy Joel:

Originally posted by Blocked:

Seems like theres more than one way depending on what I'm exactly doing, I guess since the animation will be small part of a video I'm working on, I will most likely be rerendering it through Sony Vegas as well, if that's even a viable option that doesn't damage quality, file size and rendering time does not matter that much to me as much as quality does in general.

I feel the same way, and in that case I would export in raw like I do and just encode in handbrake with a custom preset to get the most quality but still reduce file size, which is the best option for quality. A 60 second raw file will be over 10gb, so encoding is necessary for uploading and versatility. I would say that if you set the RF quality to about 10, the encoding quality to placebo and the encoding level to either 4.0 or auto, you'll have the smallest file size with optimal quality. I also recommend setting the audio to have one track set to the AC3 codec with a bit rate of 640kbps. If the quality loss is too noticeable for you with those settings, set the RF quality to a lower number such as 6 (in which a lower number is less lossy but too low reduces purpose for encoding). I'm sure you wouldn't see loss at all as far down as 5 RF, but you should mess around with it to determine that yourself.

Thanks for the suggestion, I'll be sure to give this a try as well and see what works out best, it'll be a hassle but if I don't do it now then I'll surely do it later down the road.

Also, I have noticed that when I rerendered the AVI file with Sony Vegas the size went down a good bit as well, didn't check quality however, but it does seem like a viable option for me as well besides using Handbrake.

[Wayne]

Originally posted by Blocked:

Originally posted by Billy Joel:

I feel the same way, and in that case I would export in raw like I do and just encode in handbrake with a custom preset to get the most quality but still reduce file size, which is the best option for quality. A 60 second raw file will be over 10gb, so encoding is necessary for uploading and versatility. I would say that if you set the RF quality to about 10, the encoding quality to placebo and the encoding level to either 4.0 or auto, you'll have the smallest file size with optimal quality. I also recommend setting the audio to have one track set to the AC3 codec with a bit rate of 640kbps. If the quality loss is too noticeable for you with those settings, set the RF quality to a lower number such as 6 (in which a lower number is less lossy but too low reduces purpose for encoding). I'm sure you wouldn't see loss at all as far down as 5 RF, but you should mess around with it to determine that yourself.

Thanks for the suggestion, I'll be sure to give this a try as well and see what works out best, it'll be a hassle but if I don't do it now then I'll surely do it later down the road.

Also, I have noticed that when I rerendered the AVI file with Sony Vegas the size went down a good bit as well, didn't check quality however, but it does seem like a viable option for me as well besides using Handbrake.

I don't know how good the encoding software is for SV9, but I know that the most technically informed people tend to use handbrake. I don't know all of the facts, but from observation, handbrake is the best option.

[rishi sunak]

Update for those who may come back to this thread in the near future and are looking for help, I rendered my animation as an image sequence and then rendered it fully through blender, the result was quite satisfying and I don't think it will be any better.

Animation was 1 minute and 20 seconds, file size was 65megabytes, I rendered it as 30FPS.

[Leitmotif]

Originally posted by Blocked:

Update for those who may come back to this thread in the near future and are looking for help, I rendered my animation as an image sequence and then rendered it fully through blender, the result was quite satisfying and I don't think it will be any better.

Animation was 1 minute and 20 seconds, file size was 65megabytes, I rendered it as 30FPS.

Umm... this is embarrassing...but...can u show the animation, pls.

[rishi sunak]

Originally posted by BenteODos:

Originally posted by Blocked:

Update for those who may come back to this thread in the near future and are looking for help, I rendered my animation as an image sequence and then rendered it fully through blender, the result was quite satisfying and I don't think it will be any better.

Animation was 1 minute and 20 seconds, file size was 65megabytes, I rendered it as 30FPS.

Umm... this is embarrassing...but...can u show the animation, pls.

Here it is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SwjX7-Al4lA&t

I don't think you will enjoy it too much, it is simply a small part of a bigger project I am currently working on, and you will most likely be left confused due to the fact that it is without context.

But hey, why not?

[Wayne]

Originally posted by Blocked:

Originally posted by BenteODos:

Umm... this is embarrassing...but...can u show the animation, pls.

Here it is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SwjX7-Al4lA&t

I don't think you will enjoy it too much, it is simply a small part of a bigger project I am currently working on, and you will most likely be left confused due to the fact that it is without context.

But hey, why not?

I think it's pretty neat.

I'm considering comparing an image sequence in blender vs video exported raw then encoded.
When I finish my latest project I'll message my opinion on the quality of each at approximately the same file size.