APPLE FINAL CUT PRO: Apple Final Cut Pro X FCPX Debates FCP Legacy FCP Tutorials

Re: So is FCPX earth shattering, or should I just move on to Adobe?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

VIEW ALL   •   ADD A NEW POST   •   PRINT
Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index   •   Read entire thread


Aindreas Gallagher
Re: So is FCPX earth shattering, or should I just move on to Adobe?
on Feb 9, 2014 at 11:13:54 pm
Last Edited By Aindreas Gallagher on Feb 9, 2014 at 11:25:51 pm

[Bret Williams] " Or, for that matter, the video they hand you without having to run it through a converter."

yes I suppose, but it stills feels slightly mucky to be basing an entire project on the kinds of computational mathematics in an avchd file. if 4K - that joke we're supposed to care about, that people can't perceptually see from an average viewing distance relative to 1080P, takes hold, then in acquisition terms, we're looking at some variant of h265, which makes everything worse in triplicate.

H265 takes three times as long to encode to a delivery codec, they are hammering the colour space, and unlike the shift to HD - there is no appreciable benefit to the viewer. in standard seated settings, they can't tell the difference. also the compression degradation negates the fact that they've got a threadbare larger raster.

HD made appreciable sense because it was transformative to the viewer. 4K makes absolutely no such sense. the viewer can't resolve the difference relative to 1080P at standard viewing distances - particularly after its been hammered by the kinds of compression required to make it function for delivery.

It feels like snake oil being sold by a large group of desperate parties on the production end. yes its nice to have blow up - and that was the truth of HD while it was mostly backend, but given that 4K means nothing to consumers, and will resolutely continue to mean nothing to consumers as their films measure less than 1080P vertically, and they can't even tell the difference between 4K and 1080P, nevermind 1080P and 720P - 720P which benefits from lower compression..

4K just feels a bit like bullsh*t.

If the sole justification for a massively expensive backend re-ordering is the ability to mindlessly blow up shots, which kind of really never works past 20-30 odd percent anyway no matter what.. is that the justification for an entire jump in magnitude for production? so we can scale stuff up?

is that actually the logic for this incredibly expensive proposed shift? because god knows film and television aren't touching it with a barge pole.
again: that minor point - current (and you'd better believe for the long term), digital cinema packages measure less than 1080P vertically. They've done their perceptual math. Cinemas are going to sit on that one off digital delivery investment for an incredibly long time.

what are we doing? why are we entertaining this? why aren't we pushing for end to end 1080P 10/12bit per channel production to delivery -
given 1080P is an apple retina display in the living room/cinema context?

why is anyone buying all this 4K bullsh*t?

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Posts IndexRead Thread 


Current Message Thread:





© 2019 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]