Creative Communities of the World Forums

The peer to peer support community for media production professionals.

Forums Canon DSLR Cameras From Canon 5D to Film out . Apple Pro Res 422 or Pro Res 422HQ

  • From Canon 5D to Film out . Apple Pro Res 422 or Pro Res 422HQ

  • Chris Fera

    January 25, 2011 at 6:35 am

    I shot a short film on the 5D Mark II and I am going to do a transfer to 35mm. Should I convert to Apple ProRes 422 or ProRes 422HQ? I read a few threads here and no one had a final answer. I know I am starting from an 8bit source but will I notice a difference once projected on a large screen? Also could I mix the two Apple ProRes 422 or ProRes 422 HQ on a ProRes 422HQ timeline? The reason for this would be making some of sequences, that require a better color correction, into ProRes 422 HQ and have a final output to ProRes 422 HQ. Your help would be very much appreciated thank you.

  • Michael Kammes

    January 25, 2011 at 7:07 am

    HQ will give you more latitude when color grading. It will really shine if you have some gradients; banding can sometimes appear less frequently with HQ than 422. Also, if you plan on doing motion effects, the less compression you use, the better.

    This does come at a price: It takes up more space on your drive, and the renders are longer.

    What about doing it the old fashion way: Cut at a low res, then online? Transcode the 5D to an edit friendly codec like ProRes Proxy or LT. This is easier for the CPU to handle and takes up less space. Then online/conform at an uber high Res – Cineform, ProRes 4:4:4:4, Uncompressed, etc. If you can afford a film out, you should be able to afford an online & conform session šŸ™‚

    ~Michael

    .: michael kammes mpse
    .: senior applications editor . post workflow consultant
    .: audio specialist . act fcp . acsr
    .: michaelkammes.com

    Hear me pontificate: https://michaelkammes.com/post-production/speaking-schedule/

  • Brian DeViteri

    January 25, 2011 at 5:20 pm

    I’d second the ProRes 4444 or Cineform codec choice for film out. Yes, the native original files do not really benefit from the extra bandwidth, but your color grading, effects, etc will all benefit from the greater flexibility.

    As a side note, you may want to check out some of the RED 4k workflows to compare and learn a bit from their workflows.

  • Chris Fera

    January 25, 2011 at 9:44 pm

    Thanks a lot! This makes sense. I should have done that. However I am already half way through with editing. I started HQ but then I realized it was taking way too much space on my two 2tb hard drives… then I went down to PRORES standard and I digitized all that was left with this codec. Now is it OK to keep editing mixing the two together and then conform everything to 444 to HQ? In this case should I leave my timeline settings to HQ (the way I started) or change to standard? Thank you so much for your expert advice.

  • Rafael Amador

    January 26, 2011 at 12:57 pm

    [Michael Kammes] “HQ will give you more latitude when color grading. It will really shine if you have some gradients; banding can sometimes appear less frequently with HQ than 422”
    Sorry to disagree. the only difference between all the Prores flavors (except 444) is more or less data-rate. So more or less re-compression. IMHO, Prores HQ is always the best choice. The only reason to reduce the data-rate is HDs space.

    [Chris Fera] ” Now is it OK to keep editing mixing the two together and then conform everything to 444 to HQ?”
    Forget about 444: First, because you are starting with 420 stuff. Second, because is a codec not yet fully developed. At the moment is only useful for very specific workflows (444 cameras and so), and if you are working with RGB applications like Color, AE, etc.
    rafael

    http://www.nagavideo.com

  • Michael Kammes

    January 26, 2011 at 3:26 pm

    Rafael:

    It’s OK to disagree šŸ˜‰

    The data rate is the result of more / less compression. HQ has less compression, thus, a major reason why the resulting file looks better.

    Look at something like 14:1. Crappy looking, right? Lots of info is lost during compression to make the file size smaller. Now look at uncompressed. Pristine! Very little compression.

    I highly recommend doing some tests to confirm visually, especially when blown up.

    ~Michael

    .: michael kammes mpse
    .: senior applications editor . post workflow consultant
    .: audio specialist . act fcp . acsr
    .: michaelkammes.com

    Hear me pontificate: Speaking Schedule .

  • Rafael Amador

    January 26, 2011 at 7:14 pm

    Hi Michael,
    Sorry I should have been more precise. What I wasn’t happy was about bringing the term “Latitude” or “banding” here. They have no relation with the Prores flavor you chose (10b/422).
    Against the opinion of many others, I think as you do, that the only reason to use other than Prores HQ, is storage or band-width constrains.
    There are many people advocating that Prores HQ should be used only when going 2K or up.
    This makes no sense at all. There is no relation between a compression scheme and the picture size.
    Cheers,
    rafael

    http://www.nagavideo.com

  • alberto anzani

    January 26, 2011 at 7:51 pm

    Hi guys,
    maybe the topic could be helpful. Sorry I joined the communty today.
    I shooted a movie with DVCPRO HD 1080 1280×1080 24p with panasonic and I used in Final Cut Media Manager recompressing all in AppleProres 422 HQ 1280×720 24p for editing.

    Now, for a film transfer I would like to use the native quality. So, if I do the inverse, compress the sequence from Proress 720 do Dvcpro1080, I am sure that the quality of the new Master clips will be igual with the native footage? All the color correction will be lost? I tried with 30 sec and it works everything, but I can’t see any difference in quality between 720 and 1080.

    My question is if I have to compress (reduce) all right but if I have to put more information in the clip
    enlarging the frame size, is media manager/final cut able to do really, putting back the infrmation that had discarded?

    I tried with EDL, but I got problems with the media reconnect.

    Could you help me? thanks a lot
    alberto from Comolake

  • Rafael Amador

    January 27, 2011 at 9:28 am

    Hi Alberto,
    Please post on the Final Cut Pro Forum.
    Cheers,
    rafael

    http://www.nagavideo.com

  • Chris Fera

    January 27, 2011 at 9:27 pm

    Hi guys, thanks for all the feedback. Nice work. My question though is still unanswered. Do you think you can mix Pro Res standard and HQ on the same timeline with settings at 422HQ? I think it makes sense to go HQ with sequences that will require more manipulation in post and stay standard with the rest as I really don’t notice any difference between the two once the material is screened. HQ really takes a lot of space and more time to digitize…

Viewing 1 - 10 of 18 posts

Log in to reply.

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy