Animation quality..

[shikodesign2000]

Hi,

 

I'm attaching a still from a part of my interior animation, and then please go to my site http://www.3dshore.com, animation page, then download the second thumb for the same interior, it's a small part, you'll notice that the animation is too blurry, and not good quality instead of the still, can you please tell me why?

[Koper]

Hey Sherif, you work is looking much improved, very good.

 

What image sampler are you using? , (if in doubt, use bute force and turn it to 'fixed')

[Crazy Homeless Guy]

i would say that the blurring in the video has to do with the codec compression. try writing out an uncompressed AVI, and see if it is blurry. ...but beyond that, you should always use a blurring AA filter for animation, it looks like you are using a sharpening filter.

[Brian Smith]

i would say that the blurring in the video has to do with the codec compression. try writing out an uncompressed AVI, and see if it is blurry. ...but beyond that, you should always use a blurring AA filter for animation, it looks like you are using a sharpening filter.

 

I'd have to agree that it's mainly due to compression. Try Sorenson 3 and you won't have this problem. It's the best compressor for general purpose distribution (as far as I'm aware).

 

But even if you have no compression you are bound to have problems if you dont use a blurred filter. I recommend the video filter and though it is blurred, it's usually necessary. You might get away with the Area filter if you're camera moves slow enough and you dont have small thin areas of high contrast. Good image sampling of course helps.

 

Also, make sure you use the clamp out and subpixel mapping options to get rid of those aliased edges and white dots in the reflections.

[shikodesign2000]

Thanks very much for your valuable replies and let me reply on each:

 

1-AdriaaN : Thank you very much for your gentel words, but please tell me

where can I find "bute force"? is it AA filter?

 

2-travis : I try to escape from AVI compression for the high files size output,

so I used divx instead.

I think the sharp filter is better than the blurry one, cause it gives

you sharp edges, and clear image, am I right? or you have an

explaination for this? cause in the end we search for the best

image possible in stills&animations.

Thanks anyway for your reply, but plz explain to me how the blurry

filter will give high quality.

 

3-Brian: It seems that I can't get this compressor, at least in present, so,

I'll try the video filter, though it'll give blured result, I'll see and

get back again.

 

When you said "You might get away with the Area", did you mean

that I don't use Area filter? or I use it?

 

Finally, Please tell me where can I find these stuff:

"clamp out and subpixel mapping"??

[Brian Smith]

sorenson 3 is one of the options that comes with max...you have it. it's a .mov file. save the individual images for each frame (jpgs, tif, png etc) and use ram player to load them and then just save as a mov file. check this link out if you want to know how to use ram player or video post. http://www.friendsofed.com/samples/1590595572.pdf

 

i didnt mean that i thought you were using the area filter...you definitely arent because your image is too sharp. i recommend reading week 6's article of the Visualization Insider...it explains antialiasing pretty good.

 

clamp output and subpixel mapping are options in the color mapping rollout. you really need these for your scene

[sterealkey]

@ Brian Smith

 

Where can I sign up for the vizualization insider newsletter?

[shikodesign2000]

Are "Subdivisions" and "Sample size" in Light cache rollout can affect the quality of the final animation scene?

 

I'm just asking, cause when I make the "Subdivision" 1000 then 1500 then 2000 the final quality didn't change at all??

[shikodesign2000]

Is there any specific way to make the final animation scene sharp and not blurry, I mean clear image??

[Crazy Homeless Guy]

2-travis : I try to escape from AVI compression for the high files size output,

so I used divx instead.

I think the sharp filter is better than the blurry one, cause it gives

you sharp edges, and clear image, am I right? or you have an

explaination for this? cause in the end we search for the best

image possible in stills&animations.

Thanks anyway for your reply, but plz explain to me how the blurry

filter will give high quality.

 

the AVI was simply to test your scene with no compression, not for final output. if your scene was blurry with no compression, then the problem you are having lies in a step before you compressed it, but i don't think it does.

 

if you want to understand why your final animation was blurry, then you need to understand the basics of how compression works. not the super complicated stuff, just the basics. think of still images for a second. an uncompressed lossless image file is your highest quality. you then work down from the compressed file, most likely compressing it into a lossy jpeg format. your goal is to get the file small, while retaining as much detail as possible. i am sure you have experienced highly compressed jpeg files before. they tend to blur and artifact become visible as the compression becomes greater.

 

jpeg compression simply worries about the space around each pixel, and how the jpeg format can create an algorithm to store that information in a smaller file. now, when you are talking animation compression the issues expand into 2 directions. how each pixel compares with the pixel next to it, and how each pixel compares to the pixels in the frames before it, and after it. it can become quite complex depending on the codec, how complicated the scene is, and how small of a file you want. often it takes hours for this analysis to happen. fortunately for us, this is a highly researched and developed area, and it is improving everyday. ...but in the end, it is going to be a trade off between quality and file size.

 

the problem with a sharpening filter is that it alters the image, and the alteration is slightly different from frame to frame. this is going to cause dancing and moire patterns as the video plays through. which is not a desirable effect. if you use a blurring filter, the frames will naturally blend better, and hide moire patterns better frame to frame. this will create a higher qulaity product in the end,

 

another problem you are going to have with a sharpening filter will be file size. because you are compressing the file, the algorithm/codec is going to try to compare the pixels in the 2 directions mentioned above; before it, after it, and next to it. ...and like i said above, there is no guarantee that the pixels in the frame before or after a sharpening filter are going to be the same, or close enough for the computer to interpret. the computer is going to have to work overtime trying to come up with a way to make the pixels smooth and logical. it will take more file space to do this, because it has to compress more information. if your goal is a small file size, the the codec is going to start blurring, and smoothing the image to keep the file size down. you basically have more detail pixel to pixel, so the same animation with the same compression setting will look better if the frames were rendered with a blurring filter, than a sharpening filter. since the image is already slightly blurred using a blurring filter, the codec can use the file space more effeciently and use extra file space in other areas to increase the quality.

 

you can run all the tests you want, but that is basically the case.

 

now, if you are still wanting an animation that is clearer than what a blurring filter can provide, there are options for that, but you don't want to do it, because in another thread you are already worried about rendering time. if you used no additional AA filter, and cranked your min/max subdivision settings up, you can probably create an animation that is nice and clear. ...but we are talking a min of 4 or 6 on the subdivisions, and you will probably not get the file size down to something that you can distribute via download and still have it clear. cranking your subdivisions that high will likely increase your render times by 3 or more. ..but this will only look clear on a computer screen, and will not translate well to other digital mediums. so it is not worth considering.

 

i don't know if this made sense, and i am sure i missed several reasons for using a blurring filter, but i suggest you follow the countless experiments people have done, and not try to reinvent the wheel on this one. animation compression is one of the more complex and difficult things people will struggle with in 3d.

[shikodesign2000]

Travis,

 

Thank you very much for the time you spent in explaining these valuable information.

 

Ofcourse, I'll make many tries, I don't think this week, cause I just have a work to do, I'll return in animation trials when I finish immediately.

 

I just want to ask you that if I want to make super animation, shall I go to the "Render Farm" without any thinking? and is this way I'm using will not give the high quality of the render farm, not even 60% or 70% from it??

[Crazy Homeless Guy]

if you have less than 4 machines or so dedicated to only rendering, then i would probably recommend a render farm service.