Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I really hop that i am just missing something, but I am still seeing anything I export from Media Encoder in 2D when it comes from after effects. it works if I export it in After Effects, but it takes a ridiculous amount of time and I can't see out my projects this way. Does anyone have any insight?
I'm exporting 3D text, and shape layers. I can provide any screenshots or other information necessary.
but I am still seeing anything I export from Media Encoder in 2D when it comes from after effects.
because it is not supported for encoding through AME. if you insist on using the obsolete Raytraced renderer, you should render to an intermediate codec in Ae and encode that video file in AME. in CC2017 the C4D Rendering does the same things the Raytraced renderer did only better and because it uses CPU and not CUDA GPU (that still did not work when set to Cuda renderer in AME), it will encode ju
...Copy link to clipboard
Copied
but I am still seeing anything I export from Media Encoder in 2D when it comes from after effects.
because it is not supported for encoding through AME. if you insist on using the obsolete Raytraced renderer, you should render to an intermediate codec in Ae and encode that video file in AME. in CC2017 the C4D Rendering does the same things the Raytraced renderer did only better and because it uses CPU and not CUDA GPU (that still did not work when set to Cuda renderer in AME), it will encode just fine.
same setup in Ae:
Raytraced
C4D
Encoding in AME
Raytraced
C4D
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Ok great, I have no loyalty to the Ray-Traced renderer that's just the way I learned it. i will try the cinema 4D and report back. Thank you.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
If you have a GPU that can accelerate the ray-traced renderer, it might be faster. That's the one big reason I know for why one might stick with it. If you're not using a GPU to accelerate the ray-traced renderer, the C4D renderer is faster. There are a couple of things the C4D renderer can't do yet (like cast shadows set to only), but it's mostly an improved replacement.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
If you have a GPU that can accelerate the ray-traced renderer, it might be faster. That's the one big reason I know for why one might stick with it. I
I have Cuda card (GTX 970) and ray-traced is performing slower in interactivity and also render times in similar quality settings.
There are a couple of things the C4D renderer can't do yet (like cast shadows set to only), but it's mostly an improved replacement.
Thanks for pointing out they are not exact matches. some features are missing from the C4D renderer. here's a comparison of enables and disabled features for both renderer engines. not quite the same but the performance is great though...
Enabled Features
Disabled Features