-
Mastering Confusion
I’ve recently finished an 11 minute short film shot on the EX1 in 24p/720p. We just got accepted to a festival, and suddenly have to send our film out to get an HDCAM copy made.
I need to send it out tomorrow morning, so I can’t wait until Monday to speak to someone at the transfer house. What format should I send them my film in that will preserve the best quality of video and audio?
Pro Res 422 HQ or Pro Res 4444 seem like the obligatory choices, but I’m wondering if there’s something I’m unaware of.
Thanks.
-
3 Replies
-
Hmm, no one answered this. I hope it all went well.
My own assessment would be ProRes 422 HQ would be fine but you really MUST speak to someone at the transfer house. If they can’t provide you that kind of info then maybe you should look for another transfer house. You can talk to someone to book a job so I’d think they’d be more than willing to get you an answer.
-
Craig, I know this is now an ‘old thread’ but I hope you see this.
I too have a ‘mastering’ problem now I’m producing in HD. I’m editing in ProRes HQ 422 and making BD’s from that. Many festivals request submission copies in either BD or DVD (I make those in BitVice, brilliant downscale) but for exhibition they generally want HD tape as Erick has related. Should we keep our files of a finished production in ProRes as a QT .mov file? All post houses here in London will take an HDCAM tape from that (at considerable cost!) but I was thinking of the subsequent archiving.
Michael Slowe
-
[Michael Slowe] “Should we keep our files of a finished production in ProRes as a QT .mov file?”
Hi Michael,
I understand that being able to archive in HDCAM must be great, but not keeping a copy as a digital file makes no much sense.
Prores is the best affordable option. Archiving 10b Uncompressed costs 8 or 10 folds more expensive without much practical advantages in terms of quality.
rafael.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up