Which Avid HD Codec is recommended?

[Michael Kammes]

What did you edit and finish at? Transcoding that to 1:1 or DNxHD220x (if you didn’t finish at that) is just wasted space – no quality is added.

If it means anything – for comparison, DNxHD145 is broadcast quality.

Visually, DNxHD220 is virtually indistinguishable from 1:1, even at the scope level. 1:1 also takes up (ballpark) 10x more space than DNxHD220. Do you have that kind of drive space?

~Michael

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

[Aaron Nowakowski]

Thanks Mike – I finished using DNxHD220 and 1:1 for titles/gfx renders.

[Michael Kammes]

Did some calculations:

DNxHD 220x @ 30min = 49GB.
1:1 10bit 1080i/59.94 @30 min = 250GB

So, not exactly the 10x, but it’s a solid 5x.

I think DNxHD220x will be fine. That being said, if this is only thing going on a hard drive, then why not buy a couple cheap 1TB drive and use them (after all, 3 backups or it’s not a backup, right?)

~Michael

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

[Michael Phillips]

This makes it easier to get storage size and needs and compare them side by side:

https://www.avid.com/US/resources/avid-storage-calculator

Michael

Michael Phillips

[Aaron Nowakowski]

Is Avid 1:1 the same as Avid 1:1x?

[Job Ter burg]

The latter is 10-bit (x), the first is 8-bit.

[Aaron Nowakowski]

Thanks Michael great resource!

[Aaron Nowakowski]

Does 1:1X introduce more of a lossless compression than DNx? If these QTs are brought back into Avid down the road will the quicktime get re-compressed upon import? Still a bit fuzzy about the differences between these two codecs and having trouble finding something online about it.

[Michael Kammes]

The files will NOT get recompressed on the import if you export DNxHD media. If you reimport, Avid will recognize that the file is DNxHD and simply wrap it into an MXF wrapper. You can also link via AMA, which does no transcoding as well.

Bumping up 220 to 1:1 will only help later if you plan do do high end effects and grading. Visually you will NOT see a difference…period. If you are that concerned about it, export a short test at 220x and at 1:1 and see if you can spot a difference.

You can look at it this way: If you cut at 220x, and did fx at 1:1, and export at 220x, then your graphics will be technically be compressed, although I doubt you will see any difference. If you export at 1:1, graphics are untouched and your footage is bumped up….and no visual quality loss (or gain), and it will just take up extra space on the drive.

Since you will be archiving this (I’m assuming to disk?), go out and buy 2 or 3 cheap 500GB or 1TB drives. Archive to both, put them on the shelf. regardless of the codec, you wont be touching them, and they will both fit on 1 drive…heck, do both 😉

~Michael

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

[Job Ter burg]

1:1 means uncompressed. No compression. Not losless, no compression at all.