We all know how atrocious the rendering times are in Cool 3d.but if your project is say 15 secs, long and just before rendering you reduce the no. of frames to 25 the project is now only 1 sec.long.If you then take your 1 sec. project into Mediastudio and slow the speed to bring the time back to 15 secs.will the quality of the project be seriously reduced?
I saved over 1 hour on a project using this method but cannot yet test the quality on a large sceen TV.On a small monitor it looks ok.
Comments please.
Rendering trick?
-
- Advisor
- Posts: 12002
- Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:45 am
- System_Drive: C
- 32bit or 64bit: 64 Bit
- motherboard: Hewlett-Packard 2AF3 1.0
- processor: 3.40 gigahertz Intel Core i7-4770
- ram: 16GB
- Video Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 645
- sound_card: NVIDIA High Definition Audio
- Hard_Drive_Capacity: 4TB
- Monitor/Display Make & Model: 1-HP 27" IPS, 1-Sanyo 21" TV/Monitor
- Corel programs: VS5,8.9,10-X5,PSP9-X8,CDGS-9,X4,Painter
- Location: Kansas, USA
-
- Posts: 14383
- Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 7:20 am
- System_Drive: C
- 32bit or 64bit: 32 Bit
- motherboard: Equium P200-178
- processor: Intel Pentium Dual-Core Processor T2080
- ram: 2 GB
- Video Card: Intel 945 Express
- sound_card: Intel GMA 950
- Hard_Drive_Capacity: 1160 GB
- Location: Birmingham UK
I haven't tried it but I would anticipate a jerky end result.
Without the correct number of 'natural frames' then the Video Editing program would have to invent the missing ones - probably by duplicating existing frames.
I would expect that the more frames that are generated the smoother the end result - ideally 25 fps for PAL | 29.97 fps for NTSC.
Without the correct number of 'natural frames' then the Video Editing program would have to invent the missing ones - probably by duplicating existing frames.
I would expect that the more frames that are generated the smoother the end result - ideally 25 fps for PAL | 29.97 fps for NTSC.
-
- Advisor
- Posts: 607
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 9:08 am
- Location: Brussels, Belgium
I would vote against it, for the reasons Steve pinpointed.
This would give horrible results except in one single case: a 50% speed of interlaced video. All casual viewers are fooled by this one.
If you want to reduce time either make it smaller in size and zoom in your video editor, it will be less visible; or better reduce the output quality and smoothness of the project in Cool3D.
This would give horrible results except in one single case: a 50% speed of interlaced video. All casual viewers are fooled by this one.
If you want to reduce time either make it smaller in size and zoom in your video editor, it will be less visible; or better reduce the output quality and smoothness of the project in Cool3D.
This my understanding of it.
I have been proven wrong on several occasions in my life. It's not going to improve.
I have been proven wrong on several occasions in my life. It's not going to improve.
-
- Advisor
- Posts: 12002
- Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:45 am
- System_Drive: C
- 32bit or 64bit: 64 Bit
- motherboard: Hewlett-Packard 2AF3 1.0
- processor: 3.40 gigahertz Intel Core i7-4770
- ram: 16GB
- Video Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 645
- sound_card: NVIDIA High Definition Audio
- Hard_Drive_Capacity: 4TB
- Monitor/Display Make & Model: 1-HP 27" IPS, 1-Sanyo 21" TV/Monitor
- Corel programs: VS5,8.9,10-X5,PSP9-X8,CDGS-9,X4,Painter
- Location: Kansas, USA
This may be easier done with PAL, then NTSC, due to the odd frame rate NTSC uses. I also feel that it would not produce a quality rendering.
However there are alternatives and one such can be found in the following thread: http://phpbb.ulead.com.tw/EN/viewtopic. ... 984#119984
However there are alternatives and one such can be found in the following thread: http://phpbb.ulead.com.tw/EN/viewtopic. ... 984#119984
Ron Petersen, Web Board Administrator
-
- Posts: 80
- Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:34 pm