Rendering composition ends up huge

Hello,
I'm very new to AfterEffect so I appologize if this sounds obvious to other people. But I wonder why my output file is so big while the input files I've used to create the composition were not.
My input files are videos shot with a Canon 5D MkII and they are respectively 98Mb, 136Mb and 36Mb. I created a composition and added a warp stabilizer effect, that's it.
Then I render using the following ouput settings:
H.264 with bitrate encoding set to CBR 190 Mbps
Audio 48,000 Khz Stéréo.
This is as close as I could get to the original videos in term of picture quality, yet it's not quite as good even with these settings. And the problem is that I end up with a 1Gb mp4 file !
I don't understand how I can keep the hight quality of the input videos without increasing the file size....
Any help would be appreciated !
Thank you

I don't understand how I can keep the hight quality of the input videos without increasing the file size....
It's impossible. You're working off an already compressed format and add a second pass of compression on top of it. Image quality will always be worse than the original, especialyl since you're also applying a destructive process that distorts the source footage, changing any existing pixel patterns considerably so even if AE did some sort of pass-through encoding, it would still do a full re-encode since there is no original data left that would allow things like a fast transcode. Things are just as they are. If you want to retaain better image quality, you wil lhave to use intermediat workflwos based on image sequences or things like Quicktime files with Animation compression. That would also allow using tools like AME to achieve better compression results externally. Still, the original points stick: Compression on top of compression will never look like the original.
Mylenium

Similar Messages

Rendered composite doesn't show the layers I see in the edit window

In exporting or rendering a segment or a still frame of a four layer composite, I don't see the same effects applied that I see in the edit window. The composite is a luma traveling matte composited over a color corrected background, with a gaussian blur/line art adjustment layer ( that I found help for on this forum, thank you). But now when I try to output it, I don't get the adjustment layers. Any ideas?

Still not solved! Unfortunately a a restart did nothing....I tried that before I came on the forum. Here's a screen capture of what I see on screen [IMG]http://img104.imageshack.us/img104/4294/rubyscreencaptureft8.th.png[/IMG]
Here's the whole FCP screen
[IMG]http://img104.imageshack.us/img104/4294/rubyscreencaptureft8.th.png[/IMG]
And here's what I get when I output a still frame or a .mov self contained, even after rendering.
[IMG]http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/4724/rubyno2.th.jpg[/IMG]

File rendered in AE (is huge)

Newbie here.
So I animated a still photo in AE CS4, the animated image is 4 seconds, and the file is over 2GB and the playback with Quicktime is horrid, my whole computer starts to freak out as well. (I'm on a MBP 4 GB RAM) What do I need to do in order for the file not to be so huge and actually usable?
Thanks!

Mylenium is, as usual, correct.
I will try to answer your question without knowing the specifics.
The file you rendered is a lossless file. Meaning 0 compression. Ideal for sending files out of AE. That is what you should do. My friend Dave LaRonde at CreativeCOW.net explains why:
"Don't use AE to compress files for final delivery. The various compressors are there only to make quick 'n dirty files showing a project's progress to producers, clients, the kids, etc. AE is incapable of doing multipass encoding, a crucial feature that greatly improves the image quality of H.264 and MPEG-type files in particular.
Render a high-quality file from AE, and use a different application to do the compression. Popular ones are Adobe Media Encoder, Sorenson Squeeze and Apple's Compressor, which comes bundled with Final Cut Suite. Even compressing in Quicktime Pro is better than compressing in AE.
Making good-looking compressed files is almost as much an art as it is a science."
The data rate in a lossless file, such as the one you created is too high for your computer to handle. Nothing wrong with your RAM or your processor; it's the hard drive that can't keep up. It just cannot throw that much data out into your system at once. The only way to play back a lossless file like that is to have a fast RAID setup.
Now, as to how you "should" output your file, that really depends on how you're planning to show it. Most professionals render out an uncompressed file and use another compressor like Dave mentioned to do the final compression. Since you're only doing a 4 second animation, I'm guessing it's part of a larger project. Just import that file into your editing program and everything should be fine.
Ah, you responded while I was writing my response...but no matter; everything I said still stands.
Message was edited by: Szalam

IOS 7 End Call Huge Box hits cheek and hangs up!

The big Red End Call Box in IOS7 is to big and in a bad spot. When I put the phone up to my cheek, the button get hit and hangs up the phone, It's happen numerious times to me.
Why can't it be smaller and in a different location?

I'm afraid I don't understand your reply, AdeetyaVerma. Did you, perchance, mean to type: "Just dial RIGHT"? Either way, your reply makes no sense, nor does it provide any perceivable benefit. Nonetheless, I'm glad that it worked for YOU ;-)
In the interim, however, I've discovered what may turn out to be a solution for this problem. For some reason, iOS7 has rendered the proximity sensor ineffective... or at least LESS effective. While searching for others with similar concerns, I came across a 33 minute video dissertation on the subject. It went into great detail on how to completely disassemble the iPhone 4 to fix the problem. It seems that too much light bleeds into the sensor, thereby negating its ability to properly detect that the phone is held up to the user's face. Apparently this has always been a problem with the iPhone 4, but one that was made more evident with the release of iOS7.
As an alternate, and much less invasive solution, I simply changed my screensaver to a much darker one. This effectively reduces the light being created by the screen and thereby bleeding into the sensor. So far, this seems to work. I'll reply back, if it does not help over the long term.

*** Does rendering Pro_res make a huge quality difference?

I'm curious about sometime. A videographer friend of mine swears by pro-res and claims that it significantly increases the quality of her work. We both shoot in HDV. She is capturing via Pro-res while I am capturing HDV and editing HDV. My question is, if I change the sequence settings to Pro-res and render it out, while I notice an increase in quality in my work or is the real trick capturing in Pro-res in the first place?

It depends on what you do to your video.
If you have tweaked every shot (as in colorgraded, which I hope you have),
then essentially rendering in Pro-res will be better looking.
It will render it "up" to the better resolution and better compression.
GFX would certainly look better in Pro-res then HDV (HDV like DVCAM is too compressed to make GFX look good).
But then it does depend on what you will be out putting to.
If you just "master" out to HDV,
then possibly leaving the whole thing in HDV is fine,
as the up-res of Pro-res will be lost when you record to tape.

Interlaced footage not rendering correctly

Hi Everyone,
I have made a series of 10 second ads that all share the same graphical ending that contains a logo and text that flies in and then settles. The ending was generated purely in After Effects but is a little time consuming to render so I created a pre-rendered quicktime movie in pro-res 4444 as the ending needs an alpha channel. This pre-render was rendered as a pal interlaced upper field first clip, I have re-imported the render which is correctly interpreted as upper field first and replaced the source in my new comps. When I render out a new ad as interlaced the end frames after the logo has settled appear to have been rendered as interlaced interpreted footage in a progressive comp and give me jaggy edges instead of smooth aliased ones around the logo and text although the preceding motion seems smooth.
I have had to revert to the original un-rendered composition thus drastically increasing my render times but the output is correct.
To check wether this is a codec issue I re-rendered the ending to Animation codec but this produces the same results.
Has anyone else experienced anything like this ?
I am using After Effects CC 2014 on Mac OS X 10.9.4
Cheers
Nic

OK, I have partially solved this issue. I had forgotten that I had sped the duration of the ending up by 50% so as to fit correctly. When I use the original comp (sped up in the master comp) it renders correctly but when using the original length interlaced pre-rendered file (which is then sped up by 50% in the master comp) I get the error I described in the OP.
What this seems to mean is After Effects is only using a single field of each frame of an interlaced movie if you speed it up using AE's time stretch. Thus effectively halving the resolution of the frame and producing the jaggy effect visible on the curves of the text.
Is that how AE has always done this and is there a way around it with frame blending or such? Although I have rendered out a clip that was sped up before rendering that now works correctly when I re-import it I am concerned about using time stretch on other interlaced footage in the future.
cheers
Nic

Compositing buffers from multipass render of 3D project

Does anyone have a "Cheat Sheet" or advice regarding the stacking order and transfer modes to use for compositing all the different buffers when doing multipass rendering from a 3D software package (Lightwave 9.5 in my case...)?
What I'm looking for is the best way to achieve the exact same look as you get from the full render to use as a baseline or starting point.
I can get close, but not quite the same. Would love some advice from someone who does this on a regular basis!
I use After Effects CS3 if that has any bearing on your response...
Thanks!

Yep.
I have been searching there as well and found the tutorial you mentioned, and lots of other info as well...but I get the feeling that most Lightwavers either do everything in one pass or render the buffers and hand it off to the next guy in the pipeline, so very few of them have actual hands on knowledge of the actual compositing end (beyond dealing with depth maps and alpha channels and such...)
(I don't mean that as a bad thing, there are some extremely talented folks on that forum and the have helped me a lot!)
The most detailed tuts I have found on the process, they all seem to be using Fusion instead of After Effects. Admittedly I don't know anything about Fusion (other than I can't afford it!), but I don't believe it works the same way. I believe it has a nodal system rather than layers, and doesn't seem to use transfer modes (at least the way I understand them...)
I did find a book on the subject, so hopefully that will give me the info I need. In the meantime, if there are any AE gurus out there deal with this sort of workflow, I sure would appreciate a little help!
Thanks for passing the link my way Mylenium!
I don't post here very often, but I do search for help here from time to time and you seem to really help a lot of folks here, including me

I'm getting poor image quality when rendering PDF grahics

I have a PAL 1920x1080 50i ProRes 422 timeline, when I add PDF images from a Power Point I have to enlarge them about 100% to fill the frame adequately. When these clips are rendered they end up with the text loosing definition and showing jpeg like artifacts. They are 1006x760 pixels. Is there a solution? Should I go back and try to get hold of the original slides?

Thanks everyone for the help, in the end I bought a PP/PDF converter and made TIFFs from them. (Tinyware PDF Converter) Not great but better than before. It was the fact that the image appeared fine in the canvas until I rendered it, it was only then that the text looked bad. This extractor seems to work ok, the methods on various blogs only worked if you have Office for Mavericks, Page extracts PPs but not to image files.
Thanks again.

Rendering problems in PR?

What can I do to correct a rendering problem I have in PR? The rendering starts normally and then the number of previsualisations and the number of images still to rendre suddenly start increasing infintely. The rendering never ends. Do you know what the problem is?

Not a clue.
FAQ: What information should I provide when asking a question on this forum?

Rendering Problem-24p

Hi, I shot some footage on a dvx100 and captured it to my fcp 5.0 using the advanced pulldown removal. (First, was this correct?) Now every time I bring a clip from the browser to the timeline, it needs to be rendered, which casues a huge waste in time. With other footage that was shot regulat 30i I never had this problem of having to render everytime i brought something into the timeline.
Did I do something wrong? Thanks for any help,
Noah

Glad to help.
I see that you marked this as ANSWERED, but didn't give any indication as to what post helped and solved your question. Next time, please do this, so people may know.
New Discussions ReponsesThe new system for discussions asks that after you mark your question as Answered, you take the time to mark any posts that have aided you with the tag and he post that provided your answer with the tag. This not only gives points to the posters, but points anyone searching for answers to similar problems to the proper posts.
If we use the forums properly they will work well...
Shane

Image montated to illustrator is HUGE!

I edited a photo in Photoshop to be 14x14cm.
I opened AI and opened a worksheet the size 14x14cm (image to cover the whole worksheet).
However the image gets HUGE al over the screen, a lot outside the worksheet even if its just 14x14cm.
I have been told touching the image in any kind (even dragging it down to suit the worksheet) will affect the quality of the image, is this true?
I tried .eps and .tif format but both ended up huge in AI:(
Someone please help.
What format should I use to get it to only cover the worksheet when imported to AI?

Jacob Bugge wrote:
KJD,
Just set the size in the Transform panel.
I have been told touching the image in any kind (even dragging it down to suit the worksheet) will affect the quality of the image, is this true?
No.
I don't know about the "No" scling in Illustrator is not a good idea. If you scale down in Illustrator your ppi will increase per cm if you scale up you it will as well and the image will not reproduce to well if you scale up and loose too much of the ppi.
So what you have been told is correct do not do it.
first of all I just save 14x14cm image and placed it in a 14x14cm ai document and it is perfectly the same size as the placed image.
So that brings us to what is going wrong on your end
Can we see a screen shot of the image with the image size window opened in Photoshop and the screen shot of the new document window in AI?
That should tell us some.
By the way what kind of document are you creating in Illustrator?

How can I use the MPEG-2 DVD format for video rendering?

I have been trying to make a DVD out of my brother's wedding footage, but I've run into a wall. I would like to render out my footage in the .M2V format (MPEG-2 DVD), but I'm not given the option to use it. The only MPEG format I'm given is the .H264, and that doesn't work as well. How can I install the .M2V codec?

You should either:
Render to a suitable production codec and then compress for DVD in your authoring application.Use the Render Cue to render a PhotoJpg at NTSC or PAL file using default frame sizes for your AE rendering composition, then drop in Encore for authoring.
Open your AE project in Adobe Media Encoder, pick the composition you want to render from the list and pick the MPEG 2 for DVD preset.
Open Adobe Encore, select File>Dynamic Link>Import After Effects Composition and then set up your timelines and menu's as you like and select Build DVD.
All DVD authoring programs will compress standard def video in just about any format for DVD. After Effects, however, will not do multi-pass rendering which is required for high quality MPEG compression.

Photoshop CS6 & Doc Size & File Size???

Working on a collage and have a relatively scall document, 6"x10" at 300dpi and used the Place command to add images and arrange and have 14 layers. The images were resized to fit using the Transform scale too. Was watching the document size at the lower left of the document window and it showed that the Doc was 34.3 M/178 M. Looked good so I went to save the beast as a PSD. At 75% of the save it threw an error message saying the document was greater than 2GB in size. Hmm, why did the doc size show otherwise. So ended up saving as a PSB whic worked. But the responsiveness of my system went to hell until I shut down Photoshop. I mean it was almost unresponsive. Starting Photoshop again, opening the PSB and making a few changes and my system was flying again. So maybe processing the PSD then throwing the error managed to grab all the resources.
So maybe there are two issues I have seen, one is Photoshop reporting the wrong doc size and the other bad error processing?
Photoshop CS6 with the latest patch applied, Windows 7 x64 with 16GB RAM, i7 processor.
Here are a couple of screen shots that show the doc size problem
Mike

Noel Carboni wrote:
I appreciate your desire to make Photoshop work the way you want it to, but why not consider placing the images as flattened raster layers? Work at a higher resolution if you're concerned about losing quality in moving them around and rotating them, but you should really ask yourself: Why do I want to fight with this ridiculous "smart object" embedding scheme and fight with such a huge file size instead of doing it the prudent way and ending up with a file that's much more efficient?
Noel
I can not answer for Mike but I can tell you why I do collages some what like Mike placing user image file in as they are. Populated Collages done that way are still Photoshop Layer Documents and can be tweaked by the user. If you flatten and change image files on the user you destroy work that they have done creating layered images so they can be tweaked using these layers. The way I look at it is populated collages are works in progress untill they ready for final output. Flattening and Pasting in resized image are destructive processes and may even change composition by croping images. I feel it best not to distroy users work if at all posible. Let the user do that if they wish to. Using Smart Object let user use any image file they want, Any size, resolution and Image format that Photoshop support. If the user chooses to use RAW files, PSD files or any other it their choice and they may have a good reason to use PSD files for a given collage. When the collage is ready for final output the user is free to flatten and save a compressed jpeg if the wish to save disk space and keep a copy of the collage. They do not have to save a layered collage if they don't wish too. They only need to that if the batch process collage for later tweaking or the want to continue to work on the collage at some future date. You don't fight you use smart object. They are only huge if you save layered files their rendered layers are not huge. If the filel is falttened the total rendered flat layer is just canvas size.

How to smooth edges?

Hi all,
I am in hopes that someone can tell me how to smooth the edges of the numbers in the attached image?
Thanks for any advice, hints. etc.

Hi.
Here's a little more food for thought.
Noel and Paulo have offered good suggestions for getting very close to the desired result. But the characters might still need a little tweaking.
Before I tweaked, I would convert the character to a vector path. And do my tweaking on the path. Refining the path should be fairly simple, and when you're done you have a character that can be scaled to your hearts content and it will be crisp.
Taking Paulo or Noel's method as a starting point, Ctrl+Click on the layer thumbnail then Alt+Click on the "Make work path from selection" button at the bottom of the Paths pallet. In the pop up, select a Tolerance value. 1or 2 pixels if your character is small. Higher if it's larger. Experiment to get the best effect. You will now have an editable vector path. It needs to be edited.
Then using the Direct Selection Tool (A)and the Pen Tool (P) you can perfect the letter. There is no drawing with the Pen Tool. Just adding and deleting points. Some points will have to be converted from corner to smooth and vice versa. Some will need to be moved a little. I selected the point or points then used the arrow keys to nudge them.
Below is my finished vector path. As you can see, on this particular font most of the handles are vertical or horizontal. Part of what gives this font its characteristic shape. And it makes things a little easier. Once a point is in the right position, just hold down the Shift key while you drag the handle to adjust the curve. Mostly points will have to be deleted. The fewer the points the better. But no less than you need. They're cheap. (Caveat: Make sure you rename your work path. Otherwise, if you make a new path, you'll lose it.)
Below, the path is rendered at 3 sizes, Huge, Large, and Actual Size of the screenshot. They are all crisp. Make it big as a barn and it will still be crisp.
Anyway, if you're going to be fiddling around with fonts, I'd suggest you learn vectors if you don't know them already. The scalability is necessary. As Noel said, Ps is not ideal for this. But the vector tools in Ps are quite good enough to get you going. If you are comfortable with paths, you can convert the Magic Wand selection directly into a path and not refine it first as Noel and Paul suggested. That's what I did. It won't look as good as a converted selection modified by Noel or Paulo's method at first, but it may not be any harder to perfect.
Once you have the path perfected, you may also convert the path into a Custom Shape. Then using the Shape Tool (U) you can drag and draw the shape to size. You can create a Shape Tool Library for the font. See the Help Files for details.
Another note about this font. The circles at the end of some of the letters are really circles.You can use this to your advantage when tuning up the letters.
That should be plenty to chew on top of what the others have already put on your plate.
Peace,
Lee

AVCHD Conversion

I am currently shooting SD, but am researching moving to HD.
So far, my research has concentrated on HDV, since that seems to be PRE7's preferred HD format. But truth be told, I'd rather use flash or HDD storage than the miniDV tapes that HDV requires.
So let's say I went with AVCHD. Not being a masochist, I don't want to edit AVCHD directly, so I started investigating AVCHD conversion programs. Based on 2 options presented by Steve in a January post:
AVCHD Upshift. If I understand correctly, this will
Transfer my AVCHD footage from my camera to my computer
Optionally de-interlace 1080i footage
Create a MPEG .m2t file for editing
Voltaic HD. Again, it seems like it:
Doesn't actually do a transfer from camcorder to harddrive
(Optionally?) de-interlaces 1080i footage
Creates an AVI file for editing
Dang. As usual, I ended up with more questions that when I started. And here's where I need help...
Is MPEG .m2t the same thing as HDV?
If a converter (e.g. Voltaic) doesn't actually transfer the files from camcorder to hard drive, how would I do that? PRE?
What's the best way to split the AVCHD files by timecode? Would I use HDVSplit on the .m2t files created by AVCHD Upshift? What about the AVI files created by Voltaic HD... would I just run Scenealyzer against the huge AVI file?
Is de-interlacing required/desired? Is the conversion tool the best place to do this, or should I leave it interlaced and let PRE handle it upon output? I'm assuming my final output would be BluRay, but so far nobody in my family has BluRay so I might be forced to (temporarily) create SD DVDs somehow...
Given a choice between converting AVCHD to HDV(?) or AVI, which would PRE7 be happier with?
What about quality? It seems like HDV is king. Some people say AVCHD is equivalent (or close or better), but it seems like AVCHD quality can vary more widely than HDV based on what camcorder you're using. Also, would converting AVCHD to HDV (or AVI) result in quality issues?
I've also seen several interwebs posts saying AVCHD is more the consumer-targeted format, while HDV is more pro/prosumer-oriented. I don't care about that so much, but I would like to create the best videos I can with the least problems.
Whew! Sorry for so many questions, but they all seem related. Let me know if you think they should be separate posts???

Thanks, Paul.
I'm sorry if I'm being dense, but I still don't get what happens if I define the project as AVCHD > 1920x1080 and then try to add AVCHD assets that have been "Upshifted". An Upshifted video will be 1920x1080 m2t file (correct?), so...
It seems like an AVCHD PRE project would have the right pixel dimensions (1920x1080) but be expecting the wrong file format (m2ts AVCHD).
While a HDV PRE project would have the wrong pixel dimensions (1440x1080) but be expecting the right file type (m2t).
So... what would happen if I defined a AVCHD project and added a correct dimension / wrong format Upshift file?
And what would happen if I defined a HDV project and added an incorrect dimension / correct format Upshift file?
If I understand correctly, and HDV project would accept the file, but constantly have to render it (red line over clips) due to the incorrect dimensions? Would that rendered file end up "stretched" (or compressed, not sure), or would it be OK?
Still not sure what an AVCHD project would do. Would it constantly have to render due to the incorrect format?
And what would be a better rendering... the HDV converting the pixel dimensions, or the AVCHD project converting the file type?
Your trial idea is good, but the problem is that if I get an AVCHD camcorder, and can't find a suitable conversion/workflow, I'd be stuck trying to natively edit AVCHD - which would not be good! I'd have to return the camcorder. I know an HDV camcorder would work. But I like the idea of the AVCHD workflow, so I'm leaning that way but definitely nervous
Thanks so much for your patience!!

Rendering composition ends up huge

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for