-
Apple Pro Res 422 & 422 HQ cross platform (Mac/PC) for AVC-I 100 2/3″ 10-bit cam originated media
If the source is high-quality 10-bit 2/3″ 1080p cam shot with $30-80K EFP lenses with AVC-I 100 codec, will Pro Res 422 be sufficient? I read somewhere that Pro Res is suitable for 8-bit and Pro Res 422 HQ for 10-bit source. I personally can’t discern between Pro Res & Pro Res HQ. Maybe highly detailed scenics with lots of gradient will benefit fr Pro Res 422 HQ. But for general people shot, Pro Res 422 looks pretty darn good. Have over 8,000 hours of media. Don’t want to choose the wrong codec here. Any comments? Insights?
Only Pro Res is cross-platform with Windows. I tried the native AVC-I 100 Apple Quicktime and it will not read on PC/Win platform. Quicktime is uncertain. Need cross-planform workflow. Don’t like to use the pristine P2 (unwrapped) media due to issues with relinking and camera spanning. Rewrapped intermediate codec like Pro Res works great with FCP X & Premiere CC.
-
3 Replies
-
ProRes 422 is a 10 bit codec across the board. The flavour you choose (LT, 422, HQ, etc) really comes down to the bitrate and how much compression you want to apply. For a feature film, I probably wouldn’t go less than HQ but for most other purposes regular 422 is probably good enough.
——
(For some reason I can\’t edit my own posts so apologies in advance for the stupid mistakes and bad English that I can\’t go back and fix)
Jeff Kirkland | Video Producer & Cinematographer
Melbourne, Australia | Twitter: @jeffkirkland -
HD 1080 or less ProRes422. Over HD, say 2K or above ProRes422 HQ.
Warren Eig
O 310-470-0905email: info@babyboompictures.com
website: https://www.BabyBoomPictures.comFor Camera Accessories – Monitors and Batteries
website: https://www.EigRig.com -
[Warren Eig] “HD 1080 or less ProRes422. Over HD, say 2K or above ProRes422 HQ.”
ProRes scales the bitrate with the resolution, so HQ and 422 both scale up the bitrate appropriately for higher resolution sources. According to Apple: “ProRes 422 (HQ) codec offers the utmost possible quality for 4:2:2 or 4:2:0 sources (without an alpha channel)”. The choice is simply one of bitrate vs perceived quality. Can you tell the difference looking at 422 and 422 (HQ) side-by-side? Is having the most visually lossless option worth a larger filesize? That’s how you determine.
Personally, I stick with HQ as I source my footage in 4:2:2 and 10-bit.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up