ProRes HD really that good???

[Cory Caplan]

I finally put two and two together. I just assumed that prores was another Apple reality distortion, but this makes sense… people love it for keying, sure– because it smooths out and erases detail.

I actually prefer DV50 vs prores SD– I ran lots of factory auto footage through both, and believe me, the dv50 has more detail– at a smaller footprint. Much crisper looking– and much more like the original tape. Of course dvcpro50 is only 8 bit not 10 bit, so that is something to consider, but I think considering.

1) DNXHD came out a year and a half before hand.
2) Prores visibily alters the grain in the footage (Who here is actually shooting on a “lossless” system anyway?)
3) Apple is stupidly protective of the codec, — I can’t send my PC Avids dnxhd footage, nor can you even send macs that don’t have FCS a QT with prores (after effects artists, etc..) This is just childish protectionist bs.

I can, however, generate a DNXHD quicktime with FCS but no Avid and send it to another mac with no avid, and they can use it in aftereffects etc..

DNXHD, with very similiar bitrates, hides data in grain (It seems to me anyway) I find this much more aesthetically pleasing when working with grainy sources (just about any modern HD video camera or film transfers)

Most of my HD stuff is DVCPRO HD these days– either varicam or p2, and I notice smoothing taking it through color, and then through prores (which is now the only compression option– they disabled ‘same as source’– uncool guys.)
However, because Red camera uses a wavelet based raw data compression technology, this might actually be the best application for a codec that doesn’t like “noise.”

Keep in mind, though you may think that this “noise reduction” is a feature rather than a detractor– this means that edges aren’t as crisp as the original footage either…

Cory

[Jeremy Garchow]

Jesus? Immaculate conception and compression schemes? Call the Vatican.

[Cory Caplan] “I just assumed that prores was another Apple reality distortion,”

I respect your opinion. Where did you find smoothing out and erasing of detail?

[Cory Caplan] “I actually prefer DV50 vs prores SD–“

How so?

[Cory Caplan] “I ran lots of factory auto footage through both, and believe me, the dv50 has more detail– at a smaller footprint.”

Just curious, Cory. The footage originated from where? Factory Auto reminds me of my childhood:

1) You are right. That is a fact. Avid was developed before FCP.

2) Grain of the footage. Again, where is the footage originating from? (Anything that is recorded and preserved has been through some sort of compression, analog, digital, rods and cones.)

3) Yes. Politics. Awesome. 3rd party development has its privileges. That’s why there are 3rd party codecs that you can share between different sides of the aisle. It is Apple Final Cut Pro that runs and has been developed on MacOS only, at least since Apple bought the windows code.

Well, you have to admit quicktime lets you choose what codec you can send around to all your different apps as long as your OS understands it, right? Raylight has some cool DVcPro HD tools that allow cross platforminess.

Are you saying grain gets hidden in more grainy graininess?

There are plenty of p2 cameras, what size chip and what lens is the footage you receive being acquired on?

ProRes isn’t the only codec, you can always go uncompressed.

And the edges of the original footage are coming from where?

[Kaveh Pourshahidi]

Thanks Chris for your submission about the ProRes-articles. That WAS interesting reading.
We are going to do some test to capture HD-cam and SD with different codec. I guess the bottom line, as always, is finding the best harmony considering speed, storage size and prise in one ring side, and quality, quality and quality in the other ring side!

By the way, does anyone know if the new imac 2,5 and 2,8 is able to edit (not capture!) ProRes HQ without problems? I mean plain two layers editing?

Have a good one,

Kaveh