KeyShot Forum

Technical discussions => Rendering => Topic started by: Zander85 on September 24, 2011, 09:41:31 AM

Title: Seamless turn table
Post by: Zander85 on September 24, 2011, 09:41:31 AM
I have rendered a piece of jewelry spinning 360 degrees. It is 100 frames at 30 fps and it is 6:10 secs long. When I play the video in various media players (VLC, Quicktime, Real Player, Windows Media Player, Creative) it does not loop seamlessly. I have opened the rendered avi in after effects and duplicated the video to make sure the video was seamless and in fact it is. It's just that when I play the rendered avi in a media player and loop it, it jitters. I have even tried removing the last frame and re-rendering the avi and that does not correct the issue. Anyone know what I am doing wrong? ???
Title: Re: Seamless turn table
Post by: Zander85 on September 24, 2011, 10:06:49 AM
The swf. is seamless just not the avi. What compression format will get me seamless TTs?
Title: Re: Seamless turn table
Post by: Zander85 on September 24, 2011, 12:09:24 PM
So I haven't found a video format that doesn't add jitter other than .swf. But I guess .swf will work for now so for now I am rendering in KS and then doing post in mostly After Effects and rendering pngs out from there and then compiling the png files in Matrix. Still getting some artifacts but not too many and there is a tiny bit of jitteryness but Ill try re-rendering in KS with a higher FPS.
Title: Re: Seamless turn table
Post by: JeffM on September 26, 2011, 10:43:25 AM
Did you try .mov output? I often use that for loop-able videos.
Title: Re: Seamless turn table
Post by: Zander85 on September 27, 2011, 07:30:05 AM
Thanks Jeff the .Mov file works pretty well (still a tiny jitter), but not nearly as noticeable as the jitters and flashing in the avi loops.
Title: Seamless turn table
Post by: gypephyhoks on November 18, 2011, 01:19:10 PM
The BRPXQZME approves of .adx, just thought youd like to know not.  After all, those MUGEN kiddies love it.

P.S. "seamless" music looping is good.  "seemless", ironically, is not good. an unfortunate misspelling for sure.