FORUMS: list search recent posts

Re: prores 422 hq vs prores 422 vs prores 444

COW Forums : DSLR Video

Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index   •   Read entire thread

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...


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

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

Posts IndexRead Thread 

Current Message Thread:

© 2018 All Rights Reserved