I have a 38 minute movie I have created in motion and when I render the movie the sound plays twicw as fast and it renders in slow motion. I have done this before with smaller movies and have had no problems. It also says it will take like 20 hours to render. Is there a good setting and how can I insure my audio is matching up? Lately I have been using AE because it is much more stable but Motion is very cool in its real time playback. Any suggestions on a good render setting so I can send this off to have it burned to DVD? Can I send this to FCP and have it render faster and better with audio matching up?
Well now I have lost my sound....I wished I would have stayed with AE. Next time it is AE. Apple needs to put Motion back into beta. It's buggy software at best. Anyone wanting to know, Adobe After Effects is proven and Motion is experimental. Don't use it unless you are working on something you don't care about.
I've had similar problems to what you've described, but as I looked deeper, it was because I was trying to export out at a different setting than what I had setup for my project. Example: Having an HD project at 60p, but then trying to export out at SD 29.97.
Typically, what I like to do is export out at Sequence Settings (typically Animation with Alpha - even if I don't need Alpha) and then use FCP, Compressor, or QuickTime to compress to the format I need. This has worked every time for me.
I will say that the render times in Motion are huge even on my not too shabby machine. Take for instance, the 30 min infomercial I've been working on since 8 am yesterday morning, non-stop for 28 hours (minus about 5 hours for renders).
Winston A. Cely
Editor/Owner | Della St. Media, LLC
Sound it out: Nu-clear, not nu-cu-lar.
Mac Pro 3GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon
4 GB RAM | Final Cut Studio 5.1.4 | Aja Kona LHe
[Dave Montague]Apple needs to put Motion back into beta. It's buggy software at best. Anyone wanting to know, Adobe After Effects is proven and Motion is experimental. Don't use it unless you are working on something you don't care about.
I've used Motion on hundreds of projects with very little problems. A matter of fact, a lot of them I completed faster in Motion then I would have if I used AE. I'm not sure why you created a 38 minute long movie. Motion works best if you break your projects into pieces. I would leave the editing to FCP and the Motion Graphics to Motion.
"Motion works best if you break your projects into pieces. I would leave the editing to FCP and the Motion Graphics to Motion."
I agree with Stephen - Motion should not be used for long-format projects. It's real time rendering is great, but it can't keep 30 min movies in cache.
To speed up your project, flatten or "bake" your movie comps, especially backgrounds and things that won't change too often as you tweak your project. Staying organized in the grouping of layers helps immensely, 'cause you can bake those groups down separately and re-import them back into your project. And yes, FCP and Motion are meant to work hand-in-hand. A 30 minute project should be edited in Final Cut, with gfx/fx added in Motion.
Here is a good sample. I created an open for a TV show a few months back. It is in HD and has a lot of elements, motion tracking, etc. It started to slow down Motion so I could not work in real time. I choose to work on it in sections and put the sections back together in Final Cut Pro. The final results are really cool and you can't tell that it's not seamless.
I could have built the whole thing in one project file but I didn't want to compromise real time playback. To see for yourself check out the TV Show Open for 1000cc Raw Thrill.