-
DNxHD 444 vs Prores 4444
Hi all,
Google failed me, and my lunch break is only that long.
I am about to grade a feature, and was supposed to get prores 4444. Now it looks like it might be DNxHD 444 instead. AFAIK it’s the same bit rate and everything, and I will not use any alphas.So my question is; has anyone done a comparison in quality between the two? Worked with them, conformed with them? I figure they are virtually indentical, but the DNxHD-version is not burdened with an Apple-only mantra?
Thanks in advance,
Andreas
_________________________
Color
VFX -
10 Replies
-
The two file formats look very similar on paper were the DNxHD files created in camera or converted?
-Rob-
Robert Houllahan
Director / Colorist
Cinelab Inc.
http://www.cinelab.comMAHC-PRO 6-Core 3X GTX285 20Tb SAS Wave Panel Panny 11UK SDI Plasma. Light-Space CMS + Hubble
-
Thanks Rob,
The files will come from a conform-session on Resolve, where the original files were ProRes straight from the Alexa camera. However, with the current difficulty to export Prores from Windows we tried DNxHD.
/ Andreas
_________________________
Color
VFX -
I not add another round of encoding to already existing ProRes.
Either ask for the original Alexa files used and reconform
or ask for DPX.
Maybe show them a test how double encode will look .
If they dont care, why should you 🙂A slice of color…
DaVinci 9b3 OSX 10.8
MacPro 5.1 2×2,4 24GB
RAID0 8TB
GTX 470 / Quadro 4000
Extreme 3D+Colorist / Aerial footage nerd
https://vimeo.com/saschahaber -
[Sascha Haber] “If they dont care, why should you :)”
because if the end product looks bad they blame the colorist?
-
You did not do your job then…neither did your colleague , the post producer.
A slice of color…
DaVinci 9b3 OSX 10.8
MacPro 5.1 2×2,4 24GB
RAID0 8TB
GTX 470 / Quadro 4000
Extreme 3D+Colorist / Aerial footage nerd
https://vimeo.com/saschahaber -
not always that simple to just pass the blame backwards…
http://www.4Kfinish.com | owner-colorist | Hollywood, CA
-
In theory they should be the same in different containers. But why not stick to the camera-files? Your Windows will read them. And then you can finish of by delivering dpx or dnxhd depending on the receiving platform.
-
Hi,
You’re all quite right. The reason is that there is over 80TB of camerafiles, which will take too long to transfer once we get going. Hence, the need to shorten it down a bit.
We just scored a Mac-Resolve for testing purposes earlier today though, so the whole discussion suddenly turned purely hypthetical.
Thanks all for your answers and insights,
Andreas
_________________________
Color
VFX -
Ahhh , so we are talking Arri Raw now ?
Well, 80 TB is something..
But even if they encode everything to 3k DPX it won’t be more than 4TB if you go for selected takes.
My point was , it needs some planing to not get lost in the data jungle when doing a feature, and simulating it on a 5 min piece can be the difference between a smooth ride and a vacation in post pro hell 🙂A slice of color…
DaVinci 9b3 OSX 10.8
MacPro 5.1 2×2,4 24GB
RAID0 8TB
GTX 470 / Quadro 4000
Extreme 3D+Colorist / Aerial footage nerd
https://vimeo.com/saschahaber -
Hi Sascha,
Nope, no feature – just a veeeeery long TV-series (and the files are Prores QTs).
I quite agree with doing proper tests (not just a few minutes), so we’re gearing up for doing a full 1-hour random episode and clock all different parts of it.
Cheers,
Andreas
_________________________
Color
VFX
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up