HDCAM SR vs ProRes 4444

[Russell Lasson]

Maybe I can bring some focus on why I even thought to compare the two.

1. HDCAM SR is considered a standard for archiving high-end projects. But the availability of decks in smaller markets is very low. So for independents who still want to master at a high quality, they’ve had to back up DPX files. Now I would consider backing up ProRes 4444 files just as good of a backup. It’s also easier to restore and make dubs of if you don’t have a HDCAM SR. It’s really just a great option for mastering on a budget. For around $3k, someone can buy an LTO-4 drive and backup whatever they want. They can also restore it when ever they want too instead of having to send an HDCAM SR tape out to another facility to get a dub on a $100K+ deck.

2. HDCAM SR has been used in the “poor man’s digital intermediate” in the industry and has proven to be an acceptable workflow. A properly configured ProRes 4444 workflow could create a digital intermediate option that would literally allow the files to be mastered on a single desktop systems using Final Cut Studio. They could do all the editing, effects, titles, and color correction on a single computer without sacrificing any technical quality. This could easily save some money.

NOTE: They still might end up with a crappy looking film depending on who is doing the editing, effects, titles, and color correction! It might be a crappy film regardless depending on the writing, directing and acting! But FCS doesn’t help with that much!

Someone mentioned this conversation being a moot point because studios and networks determine delivery requirements. Of course. Don’t expect them to come out and say that they’re really happy about Apple’s new Final Cut Studio and will now accept non-quality controlled ProRes 4444 files for broadcast. That’s just silly.

But the other two workflows that I’ve mentioned I believe are viable for some independents that have a good technical head on their shoulders.

-Russ

Russell Lasson
Colorist/Digital Cinema Specialist
Color Mill
Salt Lake City, UT
http://www.colormill.net

[Gary Adcock]

[Erik Lindahl] “a) Film > Telecine > HDCAM SR > Uncompressed 10-bit 1080i50 in FCP
b) Film > Telecine > HDCAM SR > Digibeta > Uncompressed 10-bit PAL FCP
“

OK Erik.,

both of these signals are Single Link 4:2:2 HDSDI signals.

You will gain nothing by converting to 4444 on capture except headaches- That being said- make sure that all the GRAPHICS are delivered in PR 4444 to maintain the alpha channel playback, but there is nothing to gain unless you are planning on capturing direct from the telecine as DUAL LINK and capturing as PR4444.

[Erik Lindahl] “My second and main question is, since it’s what I deal with a lot more on a day-to-day basis, it’s ability to work as a finishing format compared to Uncompressed or Animation across generations and in heavy post-works flows. “

your workflow now is Uncompressed 4:2:2- why not try the current versions of PRHQ first? It is completely replaced Uncompressed on my systems, with ZERO client complaints or conditions.

As for Testing — I am still about 2 weeks out from publishing that data, but my initial testing is not showing any loss or degradation with ProRes 4444 as compared to a pristine HDCamSR 4:4:4 master.

gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows

Check out
https://www.aja.com/kiprotour/

Inside look at the IoHD
https://library.creativecow.net/articles/adcock_gary/AJAIOHD.php

[Erik Lindahl]

Well one issue we have today is a lot of post-intense jobbs we do look worse in the end going down the Uncompressed 4:2:2 10-bit road than using Animation RGB (4:4:4 of course) even when our final output is Digibeta or 4:2:2 MPEG2 files (30 mbit i-frame). I think this is due to Apples 4:2:2 codec having no chroma filtering hence keeping 4:4:4 through our post-work-flow and letting either Episode or our Kona 3 card do the down-sampling to 4:2:2. The end-result is better.

Moving to ProRes the 444 codec would be the interesting thing there.

1. Color resolution
2. Choice of working in RGB

Moving to and from applications like After Effects a RGB codec is by far the preferred as rendering times and issues accrue with Uncompressed-non-RGB media. But perhaps the ProRes 4:2:2 HQ codec offers the same choices now?

Erik Lindahl
Freecloud Communication
————————

[Erik Lindahl]

I very much think ProRes 4444 will find it’s way into different areas for sure, especially if it holds similar compression levels as HDCAM SR which is accepted as a high-end intermediate format. Given it holds similar quality as HDCAM SR, it will however still take some time until we really can utilize it as say a HDCAM SR replacement.

It’s defiantly not a MOOT point to discuss this however rarely do you capture, edit, master and deliver in the same format. Our general high-end workflow today for TV-adds are:

[Recording] 35 mm film > [Transport] HDCAM SR > [Edit] Uncompressed QuickTime > [Output] MPEG2

We then keep a Digibeta and AIT-4 tape master (AIT-tape holds the Uncompressed QT files).

The future could very well mean you erase HDCAM SR and Uncompressed QuickTime IF ProRes 444 holds good enough quality. With a tool like the KI Pro, interesting things CAN happen in the future.

Erik Lindahl
Freecloud Communication
————————

[Hector Berrebi]

Dear gary

i don’t think i have to state again my appreciation for your knowledge and experience…

and i’m definitely not trying to start a discussion with you on things you know 100 times better than me

i do however feel like clarifying, and on that occasion ask a question

[gary adcock] “My question is why are you comparing ProRes to a HDCAM SR format that is not used in the context you describing ? So what are comparing ProRes too, some obtuse theory?”

i didn’t compare…

i did add to an existing discussion a piece of info i know of from publications and theory.

As this info is found virtually anywhere you read on SR decks or format specs, usually with no warning, explanation or footnote to state that it is extremely uncommon practice, how should i treat it?

should a practice be ignored just because its uncommon?

even in the confines of a theoretical discussion?

i will remember to add how rare and complex it is as of now…

[gary adcock] “(there maybe 1 or 2 SRW1’s that are capable of this type of capture in all of Israel)”

🙂

there are maybe 1 or 2 SRW1’s AT ALL in Israel, and most probably none capable of this type of capture

looking forwards to read your ProRes 4444 article.

all the best

hector

Hector Berrebi
Schibber Group
prePost Consulting

[Gary Adcock]

[Hector berrebi] “i did add to an existing discussion a piece of info i know of from publications and theory.
As this info is found virtually anywhere you read on SR decks or format specs, usually with no warning, explanation or footnote to state that it is extremely uncommon practice, how should i treat it?
“

Sorry hector, I did not see it that way,
The issue I have discussing the reality and the theory without at least a working knowledge of the process confuses everyone.

If you were going to discuss theory, why not state that? Or include other workflows that are just as esoteric so that the readers understand that you are discussing it as hypothetical. When comparing 880 Mbps to ProRes4444 why not also discuss the Phillips D6 that is still the only truly uncompressed capture on tape or the Panasonic’s D5 deck can actually have less compression than HDCamSR at 880Mbps?

Since I know of NO way to actually compare the 880 Mbps HDCamSR Data stream to A ProRes 4444 file can do (I checked with about everyone that could possibly answer that question in the US and Japan)

My Point is that since there is absolutely no way to be able to judge your 2 selections against each other why use that as the point of comparison?

Thats why Apple chose to compare the new codec’s to Uncompressed 10bit.

gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows

Check out
https://www.aja.com/kiprotour/

Inside look at the IoHD
https://library.creativecow.net/articles/adcock_gary/AJAIOHD.php

[Chris Filiano]

i think prores 4444 is ideal for digital intermediate and visual effects workflows.