FORUMS: list search recent posts

prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444

COW Forums : DSLR Video

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Omar Itani
prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 2, 2010 at 4:26:31 am

i have a 60d and i noticed that the default format is 444. should i downsize?
i am going to be working with color because i shot with wrong white balance, i don't know if that will be a deciding factor or not.


Return to posts index

Richard Harrington
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 2, 2010 at 12:40:51 pm

Anything beyond 422 (not HQ, not 4444) is OVERKILL

You also have no need to work with color if all you want to do is fix white balance. Look at the Cow Podcat library for how to use the 3-way color corrector or check out our advanced title on FCP color corection.

With all of that said.... dont make more work than needed.

Richard M. Harrington, PMP

Author: From Still to Motion, Video Made on a Mac, Photoshop for Video, Understanding Adobe Photoshop, Final Cut Studio On the Spot and Motion Graphics with Adobe Creative Suite 5 Studio Techniques


Return to posts index

Omar Itani
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 2, 2010 at 1:16:31 pm

i'm sorry, i meant the default is 4444. 444 isn't a option. There's just 4444, 422 hq, 422, 422 lt, 422 prime, and apple intermediate codec.

okay so Richard what format do you recommend then? 422?

Also, what would i be doing in order to take advantage of 4444? (just wondering)

PS i was also going to match the color of all my scenes because i shot in different lighting

thanks


Return to posts index


Lance Bachelder
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 2, 2010 at 6:50:38 pm

You can create ProRES 444 by turning off the Alpha Channel (that's what the 4th 4 is) but it is an overkill format for transcoding DSLR footage unless you're working on theatrical feature but then you'd have a different workflow anyways.

I use ProRES HQ for everything - hard drives are cheap and I like having the HQ when I start color timing whether in FCP or Color. I disagree with any DSLR user who says all you need is standard ProRES or LT.

Like Richard said you don't need to go into to Color but it is a nice tool to use and I prefer Color to just timing in FCP. That said Magic Bullet Colorista II is a GREAT tool to use inside FCP, much more powerful than the 3-Way and has an easy-to-use Auto Balance tool to help with white balance issues.

Lance Bachelder
Southern California



Return to posts index

Omar Itani
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 2, 2010 at 6:52:45 pm

What are the benifits of working with 4444?


Return to posts index

Lance Bachelder
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 2, 2010 at 7:02:32 pm

4444 gives full color bandwidth on all channels plus an Alpha Channel which is need for graphics, fx and compositing work. I cannot see a visual benefit to using 4444 vs. 422 HQ when transcoding DSLR footage. But if you are shooting green screen stuff you'd probably want the extra info for keying.

Lance Bachelder
Southern California



Return to posts index


Omar Itani
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 2, 2010 at 7:04:48 pm

o thanks Lance!


Return to posts index

Tony Brown
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Aug 26, 2013 at 6:01:59 pm

To be fair to Lance Richard you stated "Anything beyond 422 (not HQ, not 4444) is OVERKILL"

Now whilst that may be true for the OP and DSLR in general its not a correct statement to make so globally or forcefully. I never shoot anything below 444 unless its high speed and it does make a difference. Maybe not for down the middle, well exposed, color correct WYSIWYG grades but when pushing the noise levels and digging deep........it can be the difference between amazing and in the bin.

I'd like to see the post guys face when he's told he's got to work with 422 all night to finish a job......"Richard Harrington said anything over 422 is overkill". If a demented man turns up at your door one morning who looks like he's had a rough night........

A little more clarity to your first response would have kept the thread a lot cooler.

Lance, grow up. You're right but.....Say sorry, play nice.


Return to posts index

Richard van den Boogaard
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 4, 2010 at 8:56:06 am

4444 output from a DSLR? Not in any current breed... unless you have a RED One/Epic or an ARRI Alexa, you're not getting RAW out of your camera. If anything, you're transcoding a 4:2:0 8-bit to a 4:4:4 10-bit file format. That's like taking a RAW still from a printed JPEG. Sure, you can play around more in post, but the colours were never recorded properly from the start.

Richard van den Boogaard
Freelance cameraman • Glidecam Operator • Editor • YouTube expert


Return to posts index


Richard Harrington
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 4, 2010 at 1:25:38 pm

422 HQ is OVERKILL.

422 is more than adequate for material.
With that said... I typically edit native and only transcode finished sequence to 422 (if then)

Richard M. Harrington, PMP

Author: From Still to Motion, Video Made on a Mac, Photoshop for Video, Understanding Adobe Photoshop, Final Cut Studio On the Spot and Motion Graphics with Adobe Creative Suite 5 Studio Techniques


Return to posts index

Lance Bachelder
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 4, 2010 at 5:28:27 pm

Dumb statement - stick to writing books.

Lance Bachelder
Southern California



Return to posts index

Richard Harrington
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 5, 2010 at 3:32:34 am

Lance..

You say stick to writing books like I don't actually make video for a living. I have spent a long time creating video and working with formats. I also am pretty good add analyzing tech and testing things thoroughly.

In fact I was one of the first 10 people picked by Apple to be certified as an instructor for FCP.

Converting footage shot on a DSLR to HQ or 4444 is a waste of time and disk space.

If you'd like to prove otherwise... feel free to run the tests I have... put the stuff through scopes... analysis and more.

Of course... I guess I don't really know what I'm talking about. Writing 28 books, producing 4,000 podcasts and managing 7 years of NAB conferences.... I guess I just do video as a hobby these days.. Oh wait... I run a production company.

Don't be such an ass.

Richard M. Harrington, PMP

Author: From Still to Motion, Video Made on a Mac, Photoshop for Video, Understanding Adobe Photoshop, Final Cut Studio On the Spot and Motion Graphics with Adobe Creative Suite 5 Studio Techniques


Return to posts index


Lance Bachelder
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 5, 2010 at 6:21:39 am

You're right Richard! Who needs quality anyways? MP3's are fine for music, Avatar probably should have been shot with a DVX100, and what do we even need these crazy big chips for - 1/3" chips are fine!

You're a prime example of that old adage- those that can do, those that can't teach. Rewriting manuals isn't exactly gonna win you any Pulitzer's pal. I was cutting a million dollar feature on Final Cut 1 in June of 99... just weeks after it was introduced at NAB at the Sands if you were there.

I looked for you on IMDB... you know that industry standard thing we use in motioon picture and television industry? Didn't see anything for you? My last TV series had 4 to 5 million viewers every week and won an Emmy... my latest feature was shot shot with DSLR's, what'd you shot your last feature or national TV series on?

I've done more testing transcoding footage than you could ever dream of over the past decade - but I'm doing it for TV shows and movies with multi-million dollar budgets. Broadcasters here in LA demand everything - QC is a bitch! Drives are cheap! So I use HQ when I use ProRES! I use Filmscan 2 when I use Cineform. I use DNxHD 175 or better when I deliver on Avid. I use HDCAM SR over HDCAM... I use Dual Link SR when I can...

Don't be a moron...

Lance Bachelder
Southern California



Return to posts index

Richard Harrington
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 5, 2010 at 1:32:54 pm

Look at the original question that started thus thread. Do you think your suggested workflow us right for him?

Not saying HQ irrelevant. Just not an issue for DSLR originated.

Richard M. Harrington, PMP

Author: From Still to Motion, Video Made on a Mac, Photoshop for Video, Understanding Adobe Photoshop, Final Cut Studio On the Spot and Motion Graphics with Adobe Creative Suite 5 Studio Techniques


Return to posts index

Richard Harrington
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 5, 2010 at 2:44:15 pm

Let me regurgitate then (http://images.apple.com/finalcutstudio/docs/Apple_ProRes_White_Paper_July_2...)

"Apple ProRes 422 (HQ): Boasting widespread adoption across the video postproduction
industry, Apple ProRes 422 (HQ) offers visually lossless preservation of the
highest-quality professional HD video that a (single-link) HD-SDI signal can carry.
This
codec supports full-width, 4:2:2 video sources at 10-bit pixel depths, while retaining its
visually lossless characteristic through many generations of decoding and re-encoding.
Apple ProRes 422 (HQ) can be used both as an intermediate codec to accelerate
workflows for complex, compressed video sources and as an affordable, highperformance
alternative to uncompressed 4:2:2 video."

"Apple ProRes 422: Apple ProRes 422 offers nearly all the benefits of its big brother,
Apple ProRes 422 (HQ), but at a significantly lower data rate. It provides visually
lossless coding performance for the same full-width, 10-bit, 4:2:2 sequences as
Apple ProRes 422 (HQ) with even better multistream RT editing performance."

http://images.apple.com/finalcutstudio/docs/Apple_ProRes_White_Paper_July_2...

also see

http://images.apple.com/finalcutstudio/resources/white_papers/L342568A_ProR...


As far as the rest... Lance. I choose not to work in Hollywood. I have no interest in it. The world of video is much bigger than IMDB. I've had the joy of working on PSAs for many top tier folks. I also get to work on other projects folks in the advocacy, health, and education space (that get watched much more than 5 million views). With all of that said... this is NOT about you or me. I am Not attacking your professional credibility.... this is about helping people... Not "toss yours on the table." Find it odd that you feel the need to attack another leaders credibility.

But I'm done trolling....

Omar... do what you feel is best for you. Personally, I stick to native editing as long as possible until I've narrowed down which clips are going to be used. Use any of the methods I suggested to do this.

When that's done, go ahead and transcode if working in Final Cut Studio. Go right to the source and read the white paper from Apple I mentioned above.

The simplest way I can say it is that Robust codecs are great if you capture to them to begin with or are at lest using the same bit depth and

Follow this advice from Apple

Apple ProRes Codec Visible differences (1st gen.) Quality headroom
ProRes 4444 Virtually never Very high, excellent for multi-gen. finishing
ProRes 422 (HQ) Virtually never Very high, excellent for multi-gen. finishing
ProRes 422 Very rare High, very good for most multi-gen. workflows

So if you plan to swap your shots around between multiple workstations and users because you are doing heavy VFX or Color Grading work outside of color.... or you're going to be doing things like output for digital cinema go for it.

of course if you were doing those things, I'd encourage you to use a Alexa or a Red.

Just my opinions... let the personal attacks on credibility commence

Richard M. Harrington, PMP

Author: From Still to Motion, Video Made on a Mac, Photoshop for Video, Understanding Adobe Photoshop, Final Cut Studio On the Spot and Motion Graphics with Adobe Creative Suite 5 Studio Techniques


Return to posts index


gary adcock
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 5, 2010 at 5:37:56 pm

Don't be a moron...

Lance,

This was an EXTREMELY offensive post to another forum leader.

And frankly you do not have a clue about ProRes, there is absolutely NO reason to take a highly compressed h.264 file and balloon it by using either PR444 or PRHQ. Rich is only mirroring MY recommendations, so I am the one you should be attacking,

What, by passing to another codec you some how create additional quality? It will NEVER be more than what was a shot, by forceing the file to a higher level codec all you are doing is taxing the CPU and storage without any gain in quality.

When using ProRes standard the 8 bit materials are carried in a 10bit container and it will only convert to 10bit
when rendered or modified, however with HQ it will force the 256 levels of 8bit content to fully expand into the
1024 levels of every time you open or play the file, limiting the performance on all but the most powerful machines.

I have done these tests all the way back to film with standard, HQ and 4444 and I stand by my tests, DSLR footage gains absolutely nothing from processing in anything more than ProRes (SQ)

gary adcock
Studio37

Post and Production Workflow Consultant
Production and Post Stereographer
Chicago, IL

http://blogs.creativecow.net/24640



Return to posts index

Ashish Ranglani
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Dec 2, 2011 at 11:18:57 am

Thanks for all the help, i was going through this thread as I am going to edit a feature film to be shot on 5DMKII.
I Read the complete post but was still unable to get a few questions answered.

Can you tell me firstly, we should shoot at 24fps on the 5D right and not 25?
2. I am planning to edit with FCP as offlate I have been using FCP so getting back to premiere would be not difficult but little discomfort, Also I prefer the 3 way CC on the FC rather than PPro CS5. So my question what sequence settings should I keep if I import the 5D files directly??
and as I have learnt from reading posts and experience on field FC does not support 5D original files.
Now we plan for a UFO release and would dump the final edit on a digi beta, So what format should I convert the 5D footage in order to edit in FCP keeping in mind that im going to color corrent in FCP only ...
ProRes 422 HQ is good enough to be blown up for a theatre release ?
or should I do something else ?

3.Also is it possible to directly import 5D shot footage in FCP and start editing ?

4. Should I avoid all this and just import 5D files in Premiere Pro CS5 ?

5. What should be my output keeping in mind theatre release, if i plan a dumb on the digi beta ?

6.Some suggested editing in Premiere Pro and then exporting to FCP for CC so is it advisable ? If yes then what should the workflow be like ( formats and other sequence settings while importing to fcp I'll export the xml from PPCS5 to fcp but in fcp will it show me red color render timeline?

7.What should my overall workflow be like ?


Thanks a lot in advance...please answer my querries really thankful to you.

will ask a few more members if you dont mind.

Thanks
Ashish


Return to posts index

Arsen Bortnik
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Sep 27, 2014 at 4:35:09 pm

Richard, you are absolutely right, and 100% more qualified than most to have accurate knowledge on the topic. For those that don't know codecs, perhaps they are not educated in it enough, though it's a whole other ball game to act like you know what you are talking about (not directed at anybody, just general) for example, if you take a Ford Mustang and "transcode" it to a Lamborghini body kit, on the surface it will look like a Lamborghini, but when it comes time to take it for a test drive, it will have the same performance as the original Ford Mustang, there is nothing you can do to change that fact, but to get the genuine Lambo - much like if you shoot with 420 there is nothing you can do to transcode it to get 422 or 4444 - all you will have is a nice wrapped file on your drive that says 4444 for example, just like the Mustang Lambo exterior, and in that 4444 file you will find your original 420!


Return to posts index


Garrett Gibbons
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Sep 27, 2014 at 6:48:30 pm

Arsen, that's a great analogy!

My one footnote to that is though your source footage may have been acquired as 4:2:0, depending on the grading/VFX work you do, you will probably want to be working in a 4:4:4 or at least 4:2:2 color space to retain the new data that has been added to the original image.

http://www.garrettgibbons.com


Return to posts index

Richard Harrington
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 5, 2010 at 3:43:41 am

To further explain Native Editing

1. In FCP... can import H.264 straight and do a cut down to determine which soundbites you need, b-Roll, etc. Assembly sequences. You can then use media manager on this.

2. In Premiere Pro, Avid MC5, Sony Vegas – You can import and edit material WITHOUT transcoding. You can work with the material in a more robust color space, add effects, etc.

Personally, I do #2... working in Premiere Pro for DSPr material. I then send out an FCP sequence with media (via XML export) and go to Apple Color at 422 if needed. Sometimes we just Color Correct with Premiere Pro or Color Finesse in AE.

As of this writing... the ability to record out the HDMI port is not really there, so writing 4:2:0 then trying to bump it up to a beefier format is really not going to go very far.

If you were shooting a photo as a JPEG, then you converted to a Photoshop or DNG, you just wouldn't get the same flexibility as shooting in a camera raw format. I'm not saying to master back to H.264 (which would be like opening a JPEG and saving a JPEGH out – more compression than wanted).

I hope this gives clarity... Lance feel free to start insulting me again.

Richard M. Harrington, PMP

Author: From Still to Motion, Video Made on a Mac, Photoshop for Video, Understanding Adobe Photoshop, Final Cut Studio On the Spot and Motion Graphics with Adobe Creative Suite 5 Studio Techniques


Return to posts index

Stephen Martin
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 5, 2010 at 7:52:46 pm

Last year I worked with one of the major networks as they transitioned from analog to digital. The engineering departments in both NY and LA unanimously agreed that ProRes (not HQ or 4444) is the perfect intersection of quality and file size. The shows they are archiving are are all shot on 35mm, vipercam and the like. If ProRes is good enough for one of the major networks, I can tell you it's more that good enough for DSLR footage.

Steve Martin


Return to posts index

Robbie Carman
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 5, 2010 at 8:34:28 pm

[Stephen Martin] "he engineering departments in both NY and LA unanimously agreed that ProRes (not HQ or 4444) is the perfect intersection of quality and file size. "

I second that. I grade nearly a 125-130 hours of programing a year for Discovery, Geo, PBS and without question from talking to all QC departments for DSLR or other 8-bit sources ProRes (SQ) is recommended. In fact LT is acceptable in many cases (roughly equivalent to DVCPRO HD) depending on the level of programing.

Gary's explanation is technically accurate for sure, and I'll go one further. Over the years I've found (myself guilty of this sometimes) that because a "better codec" is available people convince themselves of perceptual differences in quality when none exist.

And Lance, calling people morons now matter who they are, skill level, or question they ask or statement they make is simply unacceptable in my opinion, but especially in an environment like the COW. We all have different opinions and because someone differed from your opinion doesn't give you carte blanche to act like a 3 year old. Success. Technical aptitude, creativity and the ability to give advice aren't measured by an IMDB listing, a codec someone uses or a piece of equipment they own.

Robbie Carman
----------------
Colorist and Author
Check out my new Books:
Video Made on a Mac
Apple Pro Training Series DVDSP
From Still To Motion

Twitter
Blog


Return to posts index

Garrett Gibbons
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 5, 2010 at 10:10:09 pm

ProRes is an excellent codec in all of its varieties.

For DSLRs, you can do tests on your own to confirm what I've found: converting the h264 from the Canon DSLR into ProRes 422 HQ will not improve the quality of your footage. The acquired footage is so lossy that I've actually found that ProRes LT is the sweet spot to balance size and maintain quality from a DSLR.

If you are recording an HDMI/Composite feed straight from the camera, or if you're working with RED or an EX3, convert to ProRes 4444 to maintain as much quality in that uncompressed signal as possible. Your 7D or 5Dii is essentially shooting JPEG video frames (meaning that the image is compressed; not MJPEG format on a Canon), and converting JPEGs to TIFF doesn't add quality that didn't exist before. You certainly will continue to degrade your footage if you convert to AIC or ProRes Proxy, but if the final output is SD or med-size web video, the degradation won't be significant for some producers.

http://www.garrettgibbons.com


Return to posts index

gary adcock
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 6, 2010 at 1:23:07 pm

[Garrett Gibbons] " converting the h264 from the Canon DSLR into ProRes 422 HQ will not improve the quality of your footage. The acquired footage is so lossy that I've actually found that ProRes LT is the sweet spot to balance size and maintain quality from a DSLR."

Garrett,
while then PRLT variant is the sweet spot, I advise using the PRSQ to give you a little more headroom and quality, so that nothing is lost in the editing and grading process.

There is Not really any advantage with converting between 2 equal codecs, however by using the next level of quality that you are gaining the benefits without over taxing your system, storage etc...

gary adcock
Studio37

Post and Production Workflow Consultant
Production and Post Stereographer
Chicago, IL

http://blogs.creativecow.net/24640



Return to posts index

Phil Kennedy
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 8, 2010 at 4:06:16 pm

I'm new to video production (old to still photography & graphic design) and much of the technical discussion is still over my head (but I'm a fast & avid learner!).

I've been informed (in several sources) that the native h.264 footage captured by my 5DII is too compressed and unsuitable to import into FCP for editing and that it must be first converted to ProRes 422 using Compressor.

Richard...I interpret your entry as indicating that it's OK and preferable to import the original h.264 file into FCP and then transcode the edited version to final output. Is that correct?

If not, what IS the best workflow? Most of my startup projects will be instructional videos output to DVD and web downloads, so not the highest quality...yet.


Return to posts index

Richard Harrington
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 8, 2010 at 6:21:17 pm

I prefer to native edit in Premiere Pro... then export a FCP sequence to online in Color

BUT you can import straight h.264 into FCP. No color correction, filters, effects transitions... just cuts.

Do rough strings.. trim b-roll down, get soundbites right.

Then use Media Manager to bump that up to ProRes 422

Then do actual edit. The goal here is to cut down delays and wasted storage caused by transcoding everything.

Richard M. Harrington, PMP

Author: From Still to Motion, Video Made on a Mac, Photoshop for Video, Understanding Adobe Photoshop, Final Cut Studio On the Spot and Motion Graphics with Adobe Creative Suite 5 Studio Techniques


Return to posts index

Phil Kennedy
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Nov 8, 2010 at 6:42:43 pm

Thanks, Richard...Your suggestions make sense and are appreciated!

I have only FCP for now (when comparing the two initially I had read user reports of crashing issues with Premiere CS5 on Macs. I've had similar on-going issues with Dreamweaver CS4 on my 2007 MacPro so I shied away from potential problems and chose FCP. However, getting Compressor to behave itself was a frustrating 3 day saga!)

I'll have to read up on the Media Manager step.


Return to posts index

Ashish Ranglani
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Dec 2, 2011 at 11:34:08 am

Hi Richard,

Once again a few queries left unanswered after reading the post and threads,

So we are shooting on 5D mkII and I am planning to edit it on FCP, so as u have suggested in many posts, that you prefer editing it in Premiere Pro CS5 and then Color correct in FCP, can u help me with what workflow I should have importing the CS5 XML to fcp.
Please help.

Also we are going to export the final product on digibeta for UFO release and then the concerned people will make prints of it.
So what should I trans code the 5D footage to if I plan to edit purely in FCP.

Thanking you. Please help


Return to posts index

Edmar Flores
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Aug 19, 2013 at 6:25:36 pm

To Whom It May Concern:

I've directed a music video recently and normally I would have my editor do the editing. However, I'm taking on the task. I filmed all dialogue scene in RAW and everything Large Format on a Canon 60D.

My question would be, do I edit NATIVE and transcode the final cut?
Does it make sense just to TRANSCODE all footage (422 ProRes HQ) using MPEG Stream Clip as well? I plan to output for Youtube, Vimeo and projection.

Lastly, is color a better option then FCP coloring system?

Thank you again,
Edmar


Return to posts index

Garrett Gibbons
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Aug 19, 2013 at 7:56:31 pm

Hi Edmar!

Unfortunately, the 60D doesn't record raw video – it's a highly-compressed h.264 codec that is recorded in camera, which is awful to edit.

I highly recommend the following workflow:

• Import original h.264 files to disk
• Transcode original h.264 files to ProRes 422 or ProRes 422 HQ (ProRes 4444 is overkill for footage that was compressed in camera)
• Edit & color using ProRes files
• Export a ProRes master file
• Transcode the ProRes master file to h.264 for delivery on YouTube, Vimeo, etc....
• Delete ProRes footage, retain smaller h.264 source files in archives (because if needed you can generate the ProRes files again in the future)

http://www.garrettgibbons.com


Return to posts index

Nathaniel J Opgenorth
Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444
on Dec 16, 2013 at 5:28:00 am

Actually someone saying they recorded RAW video on a Canon DSLR isn't that out there anymore with Magic Lantern...that said I naturally assume its meant that its H264 unless someone specifies other in the post. In the case of H264 I don't need to repeat what others have said 100x in this thread but Canon RAW from Magic Lantern is a 14-bit (well 14-bit padded to 16-bit) DNG image sequence with no chroma subsampling so it takes full advantage of ProRes 4444 from the start (minus the alpha channel of course). 12-bit 4:4:4 in a compressed format is SOOO nice when working from high quality sources, apart from image sequences I can't think of a better codec thats similar.

For H264 I usually start at ProRes LT or ProRes SQ and if I start to go through more than 3 generations I just subsequently render out ProRes HQ but I've done compression tests in photoshop to compare the loss of info over multiple generations and its quite impressive. For any skeptics just open up Photoshop CS6 or whatever version you have and take screen shots of your original footage and your ProRes footage and make two layers, set the ProRes footage to difference and then adjust the exposure and you'll see compression artifacts. I was plain shocked to see how miniscule the difference between codecs was, I'm convinced ProRes HQ is 95% as good as Uncompressed 10-bit 4:2:2 and I'm quite happy as Uncompressed 10-bit is so beyond my storage capacity for anything but tiny projects. I might post a video showing how to do this in Photoshop and then pictures for comparison but its likely someone already has done this.

Anyways that was an old post so I digress...happy shooting>editing>enjoying!


Return to posts index

Omar Itani
Re: Richard, Lance, Robbie, Gary, Stephen, and everyone else!
on Nov 9, 2010 at 12:39:06 am

i just wanna first thank everyone for putting their two cents into this. i had no idea that video formats were such a controversial topic, haha.
Richard, that was a great idea, just cutting first then converting. i am going to do that from now on.

anyways i have partly finished editing the footage which i asked about before i imported it and now i was wondering if you guys could critique it (only 30 seconds long). The white balance of my first couple of shots was set to fluorescent instead of sunny but i THINK i fixed it in post. please, what ever you think needs improvement, tell me. i really want this to be a good commercial and you guys seem to have a lot of experience from what i read of yalls' posts.

there is sopposed to be 2 funny parts: when i give the illusion that the son has gone a long way in the desert and at the very end. Did you guys get both of the jokes the first time you watched it?

here is the link (please watch in HD):






PS My skies dont match up. in the conversation the skies are blue but after that the skies switch from blue to white with a tint of red. i was thinking about leaving the conversation skies blue and then change all other blue skies to match the white ones. i already tried using the color corrector to change the color but it doesnt work very well because of the clouds in the skies. i have searched the internet and this forum for a solution but have not found anything. anyone have any ideas?


Return to posts index

Bryan Mailer
Re: Richard, Lance, Robbie, Gary, Stephen, and everyone else!
on Nov 28, 2012 at 8:49:49 am

Wow. I opened a thread trying to figure out whether I should convert my AVI files to Prores422 for editing purposes...and a hockey game broke out!


Return to posts index

Dick Kennedy
Re: Richard, Lance, Robbie, Gary, Stephen, and everyone else!
on Dec 12, 2013 at 10:20:08 pm

I'm a bit nervous about bumping a discussion that has run for 3 years and clearly drew blood, but...

I'm part of an enthusiast/amateur film-making collective. We've made two shorts so far.

We shoot on DLSR (Nikon D800, since you ask) and have just acquired a Ninja-2. So we'll be recording from the 10-bit HDMI output direct into ProRes, rather than scrunching stuff into H.264 first.

Mostly, our work will be output to DVD/Blu-Ray, although we'll be submitting to festivals, so there is a chance of projection.

And I edit on FCPX on a MacBook Pro (i7, 8GB RAM), so large files can be an issue.

So the question is ... ProRes 422 or 422 HQ?

As a lifelong pro photographer, I am somewhat anal about image quality. On the other hand, I hate watching my life slide by as the MacBook grinds away rendering clips. The cost of disk space doesn't worry me. Bytes are cheap.

I'll be doing my own tests, 'natch, but would appreciate insight from more experienced people.


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]