Compressor versus QT Conversion
by Michelle Ngo
on
Jun 30, 2009 at 2:24:23 pm
Is it just me, but I am comparing video that I resized using two methods:
1. From Timeline Sequence, Export Using QT Conversion (change size & deinterlaced), as a H264 QT
2. Using a full res QT Export, then drop it into Compressor using the H.264 setting modified to the specs above.
To me, the 1st method looks better (text and picture look way sharper) which sort of bums me out because I don't think you can do a batch export of many sequences where you can change the size and deinterlace it as if you did one sequence.
Re: Compressor versus QT Conversion by Craig Seeman on Jun 30, 2009 at 3:03:23 pm
Quicktime Conversion and Compressor use the same compression engine. Compressor has much more control (such as Frame Controls and pre-processing filters) so Compressor encodes should look the same or better. Quicktime Conversion can't use Compressor Frame Controls for deinterlace so Compressor is always better in that case.
Re: Compressor versus QT Conversion by Brian Alexander on Jul 3, 2009 at 4:07:55 am
It's possible that you have an option turned on (or off) in compressor that is not allowing a good encoding. It's possible that creating your full size QT file straight from FCP is not being done correctly.
Because there are more features and settings in Compressor, there are more ways you can mess up your encode but it is pretty hard to mess it up in Compressor.
Here are a couple of Compressor tips which you may already know:
Make sure that your frame controls are turned on and output is set to progressive to deinterlace. Make sure your frame controls are active when resizing - use better or best (best takes forever, better is 98? as good).
For optimal quality you will do both of these processes as separate steps using ProRes as your intermediate codec. This will leave you with large files but the quality you get will be better than a quicktime conversion.
Suggested Workflow:
Quicktime Reference file (Export as Quicktime) -> Deinterlace -> Resize -> output to h.264. Long process but it is the best way to process video.
Re: Compressor versus QT Conversion by Michelle Ngo on Jul 7, 2009 at 2:18:32 am
I did more test and I am still lost.
Do you have an email that I can send you samples of the final output that I have from doing both the QT Conversion from FCP and from Compressor.
The QT Conversion is far superior no matter what I do in Compressor. The colors are more native to what I have in FCP and also the text look way crisper.
But due to the amount of footage I am getting, I really would prefer to be able to batch export stuff in FCP and then run all through compressor.
Let me know what I am doing wrong, but when you look at my samples it is very clear one is better than the other.
Re: Compressor versus QT Conversion by Michelle Ngo on Aug 4, 2009 at 10:45:39 pm
Brian thanks for your reply and sorry for the delay.
We survived and I needed a huge break from the whole thing.
I would love to take up on your offer. I am about to leave again for a week, but this workflow thing really has me scratching my head because I so want to use Compressor instead of QT Conversion as it will allow me to keep working on FCP as it compresses in the background.
Can you email me at mynogo@yahoo.com and I can give you all the ftp info.
