Hi Gunther,

I was wondering.

You made those templates for exporting time lapse sequences with LR, but you're using AE or Premiere Pro yourself for exporting your videos, correct?
If so, why is that?

What's the advantage for using AE or Premiere Pro as export medium?
I'm not that familiar with those programs and video editing,
but I see that many time lapse photographers are using them, and their results are seemingly better than mine

Does it have to do something with the compression that each program use and that those video editing programs are supporting more than just one?

So, (many questions, I'm sorry, but that's why there's a forum I suppose)
could you tell me a bit more about the differences between these options?

Also, because I'm already exploring AE, what are the preferred export settings, there're too many, so I'm lost :p

Thanks in advance

Hi, for normal sequences I use the PRO templates I offer (the free ones doesn't have enough bandwidth).
Some times I take the sequence directly into After Effects, the advantages are:
- you can export truly lossless (usefull for some sequences but not necessary for all)
- AE renders a bit faster
- You can apply further postprocessing if needed
- You can batch render more than one sequence over night one after each other

The advantage of using Lightroom are:
- quicker workflow
- no fiddling with codecs and settings
- in 95% of all cases the quality is really, really good with the PRO templates
- No need to buy the expensive after effects and perhaps an addtional codec like cineform

So - it depends of the case. If you are lost in AE I recommend using the easier LR workflow. AE is a rather complex Software that I cannot explain in a couple of words here. Normally people have their reasons for spend so much money for a software like after effects and they know what they want to do with it.

This post was last modified: 2013-01-04, 22:14 by 1tio1.

Hi, for normal sequences I use the PRO templates I offer (the free ones doesn't have enough bandwidth).

I bought them and use them all the time. But mostly I find my result a bit 'flat'. It doesn't possess that professional look that I see with your videos or from other more professional time lapse photographers.

Some times I take the sequence directly into After Effects, the advantages are:
- you can export truly lossless (usefull for some sequences but not necessary for all)
- AE renders a bit faster
- You can apply further postprocessing if needed
- You can batch render more than one sequence over night one after each other

So in Lightroom, which compression is used then?

So - it depends of the case. If you are lost in AE I recommend using the easier LR workflow. AE is a rather complex Software that I cannot explain in a couple of words here. Normally people have their reasons for spend so much money for a software like after effects and they know what they want to do with it.

I wanna make my results better than they already are.
Here's a link to my best so far, imo. (downloading will probably give you a better idea)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/sqdntnzwqvhjxm...ht%202.mp4

It's a holy grail test, exactly like you explained in the eBook. Exported with your 30fps 1080p PRO template.

Also, an additional question. Using AE, do you post-process your time lapse before or after rendering most of the time? What's the best thing to do without losing quality.
Editing the exported time lapse footage or edit the sequence before rendering. And I mean after you run through LRT and LR for editing the single frames. So only more advanced and additional editing you can't do in LR or LRT.

Hope it's a bit understandable.

Anyway thanks a lot already!

I bought them and use them all the time. But mostly I find my result a bit 'flat'. It doesn't possess that professional look that I see with your videos or from other more professional time lapse photographers.

I wouldn't think this has necessarily to do with the used compression.

I just watched your video - it's very fast and so the clouds eat up a lot of the compression bandwith, but even so, the quality is really good. I wouldn't expect you to get a better result just by rendering in After Effects. I think the sequence is a) to fast and b) it could be processed better (with Lightroom / LRT).

So in Lightroom, which compression is used then?

It's mp4/h.264 with up to 100MBps.

I wanna make my results better than they already are.

You'll have to practice. Especially image post processing in Lightroom. Use slower scenes, they give you better results.

Also, an additional question. Using AE, do you post-process your time lapse before or after rendering most of the time? What's the best thing to do without losing quality.

I do 99% of the processing in Lightroom. I usually don't do any color grading in After Effects. In AE I only stabilize or add some motion blur.

Hope I could help!
All the best,
Gunther

This post was last modified: 2013-01-05, 18:59 by 1tio1.

I just watched your video - it's very fast and so the clouds eat up a lot of the compression bandwith, but even so, the quality is really good. I wouldn't expect you to get a better result just by rendering in After Effects. I think the sequence is a) to fast and b) it could be processed better (with Lightroom / LRT).

You'll have to practice. Especially image post processing in Lightroom. Use slower scenes, they give you better results.

I think I have overdone is a little bit. As an independent frame it looks great, but when assembled as a video it's a total different story, so maybe I should be a little more subtle with my editing. (also it's been rendered at 30fps, way too fast, I know, it looks a bit jerky sometimes)

Anyway, thanks for the great help!
That's probably enough for now. Those were some questions I already had a long time in my head, so now that's cleared I can move on :p

P.S.: I'm going to Iceland within a month, so when my time lapse is finished, you'll hear something from me