Exporting QT Conversion "Uncompressed 10-bit 4:2:2" Gives Better Quality?

A friend who does not believe that File>Export>QT Movie gives the best results has told me that she has experimented with "Uncompressed 8 and 10 bit", also H.264 and got better quality when viewed on her computer.
I don't think she has tried to view them on anything else as she is looking for ways to backup her material.
I can't believe it myself and feel that there may be something odd about the way she is viewing these on her computer.
Here is part of the email she sent me, so feel free to comment on any of the points:-
+While experimenting I've found that making uncompressed QT8 or QT10 bit files result in a much clearer image, fuller colour and better depth but also produce files that are 80Gb and100Gb respectively for an hour of film, much too large to store. Exporting a simple QTM file uses about 14Gb.+
+So I decided to export to tape and I'm happy with the quality on these. Then, for back-up, I thought I'd make QTM movies and also H264 (which is supposed to be the format with the longest life - viewed from this point in time) which are of course small files by comparison.+
+This I did and compared the quality using Quicktime playback. The H264 films were clearer and had better colour depth than the QTM films (not nearly as good at the 8 or 10bit ones though). But - the ratio is different! The H264 films appear narrower in the QuickTime Player window than the QTM files! A comparison of the file info shows the same dimensions - 720 x 576. (Original film is 720 x 576)+
I think her comment about the narrowness of the H.264 images will be connected with square and non-square pixels?

Your friend is talking about standard definition video. Yes, uncompressed will produce better results, but unless you have the hardware, like a very fast RAID, to support it, it pretty pointless, especially if you're going to recompress it.
H.264, while very good, will not produce better results. I have no idea where the view that this codec has the longest life has derived from. H.264 is a line of codecs that go back to H.262 and H.263. There is a successor to AVCHD called HEVC, which is H.265 I guess, and within a few years there may be an H.266.
H.264 may show better color for computer display, but the original format is DV PAL, which is designed, not for computer display at all, but specifically for television display.
Indeed the aperture needs to be adjusted on the images to make them match in aspect ratio.

Similar Messages

  • Best way to export as a uncompressed 8 bit file

    I'm trying to import a HD quicktime clip into final cut express. Trim it on both ends and then export it as an Apple uncompressed 8bit 4:2:2 file. What is the best way to do this without creating any artifacting or compression?
    Pretty new to final cut....
    Thx

    Put the video in an HD sequence. Trim the beginning and end. Make sure nothing is rendered. Export to QuickTime conversion, set the codec to none.

  • Bit rates, file type, MP3 encoders, quality settings etc.

    Can someone provide me with or point me to a good explanation of various sound file types and settings and how it relates to sound quality and disk space? I've been importing tunes, recording some streams etc. and I realize I need a definitive source to explain to me how I can get the best sound quality, with all the variables involved: bit rate (64, 96, 128kbps etc.), file type (AIFF, WAV, MPs etc.), MP3 encoder (Apple lossless, AIFF, AAC etc.) Thanks in advance.....

    OK. The following is my opinion.
    iTunes supports 5 formats. WAV and AIFF are uncompressed and lossless. Apple Lossless Encoding (ALE) is compressed and lossless. MP3 and AAC are compressed and lossy.
    WAV, AIFF, and ALE give the same quality as a CD but are too bulky for use in an iPod. The practical choices are MP3 and AAC.
    AAC gives better quality for a given bit rate. However, it is not as widely supported as MP3. Many non-Apple players cannot handle AAC. So choose between MP3 and AAC accordingly.
    Both AAC and MP3 allow you to select an encoding bit rate, usually in the range of 32 to 320 kb/s. That number affects the audio fidelity of the compressed file as compared with the CD quality original. Given that you will be using a good stereo at least part of the time, I suggest go no lower than 192.
    You can do a web search and find listening tests, etc. You can also take a couple of tracks, rip them at 192, 256, and 320, and see if you notice anything better with the higher numbers.
    Enjoy the music!

  • Exporting uncompressed 10 bit 4:2:2 in FCE4

    Hello All,
    I am experimenting with my SD card and SD card writer on my new 21.5 iMac and I have a question about exporting.
    I have a clip of video that is 1 minute and 30 seconds long and when I went to the export menu I clicked on export>using quicktime conversion> and then it gives you several options. I exported the same clip to my HD. I exported the first clip as H.264 and the second time as Uncompressed 10 bit 4:2:2 Afterwards I looked up the info on the clips and the H.264 clip took up 304.4 MB of space and the Uncompressed 10 bit 4:2:2 took up 2.5 GB of space When I played them on my iMac screen the Uncompressed image looked only about 10-15% better than the H.264. Is that normal? I think I remember reading that 4:2:2 only made a big difference for special effects.
    My question is: if I export my video as H.264 and "burn" it to an SD card will can I give this to people who have a PC and will they be able to view it in that same quality (as long as they have Quicktime)?
    The H.264 that I have "burned" to an SD card looks a lot better than the same video after I have burned it to a DVD in iMovie.
    Thanks for your help.
    Mike

    Hi(Bonjour)!
    H.264 is not a production format, it's a delivery one.
    Try animation codec for compositing effect outside FCE. Burn data DVD for large file or copy them on external hard drive.
    What is you original shooting format?
    +My question is: if I export my video as H.264 and "burn" it to an SD card will can I give this to people who have a PC and will they be able to view it in that same quality (as long as they have Quicktime)?+
    It should be played on PC side.
    Michel Boissonneault

  • EXPORTING- DV NTSC vs Uncompressed 8-bit

    I've been routinely exporting final sequences using the DV NTSC setting (same as my sequence setting). However, I noticed some graphics were coming up flat.
    After asking around, someone suggested outputting to Uncompressed 8-Bit and it totally worked.
    This leaves me utterly confused though:
    - Should I always output to Uncompressed 8-bit ?
    - Should I change my sequence and capture settings to Uncompressed 8-Bit?
    - Is everything I've done prior not as high a resolution as it could be?
    Help- Please!

    It depends on how you are exporting to uncompressed.
    If you are exporting straight from a DV sequence in FCP, it will most likely use your existing rendered material to create the frames in the uncompressed file. These renders will have had DV compression applied, and possibly compounded if you have filters, motion tab changes, etc.
    However, if you export using Compressor (from your sequence in fCP), it will use an uncompressed image buffer for any rendered material, which can avoid compounding the DV compression. This ccan also be a good way to get better results out oof still or clips that have motion applied - By nesting the animated clips into an uncompressed sequence, I can sometimes get better results than by animating the clip right in the DV sequence.
    To capture Uncompressed, you'll most likely need a capture card or box such as an AJA Io, Kona, etc. I don't believe that the mac can transcode FW DV to uncompressed on the fly during capture. I use my Io to capture DV material as uncompressed, but there is a digital-analog-digital conversion that happens, as well as a significant shift in color and luma (blacks get pretty crushed).
    You also need spacious and fast enough storage to work exclusively with Uncompressed. Uncompressed 8-bit takes up about 90GB per hour, compared to about 13GB per hour of DV.
    DV is a compressed format, and a bit lossy, but since DV is generally captured and output digitally, there is no generation loss as such. The only time there is additional loss is when DV material in re-compressed, such as when material is re-rendered. This is the only case in which working in an Uncompressed sequence can offer better results. If you plan to work exclusively in Uncompressed, then caapturing or converting your media will be necessary to make your clips native to your sequence settings and avoid all that rendering.
    Keep in mind also that if you are exporting mpeg for DVD with compressor, there should be no difference in exporting a DV sequence directly, or exporting an uncompressed sequence with DV clips in it.
    Hope this helps -
    Max Average

  • Exported dvpal 720by576 file to uncompressed 10 bit

    help help help please
    i have a client that i edited a 26minute film for,i captured the footage as dv pal 720by576 edited as the same and exported as a quicktime ,current settings .
    now the client needs the file sent to the states and has asked for it to be uncompressed ,
    can i import the dv pal file and then export that as a uncompressed 10 bit file ,which i have done and there is a noticable difference in quality on my computer monitor.10 bit looks great but the playback is prone to stop&pause
    is that because of memory or is there a problem in the process of exporting a dvpal to uncompressed file.
    as they want to broadcast this ,which should i do send the dv pal file or the uncompressed 10bit.
    any help is appreciated.
    cheers
    simon

    I wouldn't have thought the camera footage would look any different. If you have stills, text or other graphics they will certainly look cleaner if you put them onto an uncompressed timeline. If this is the case then there may be a case for sending an uncompressed file.
    As stated by lots of people in lots of posts, the computer monitor is only an approximation of the final output. For a start it is non-interlaced. For critical assessment of image quality you need to be looking at a good quality PAL (in your case) monitor. If you don't have an analogue capture card you aren't going to be able to do a valid comparison between your DV timeline and your Uncompressed timeline. The only way you are going to be able to get an output to your monitor without an analogue capture card is through your firewire, which will take you back to DV anyway.

  • Is Exporting "None" Compression better than "Uncompressed 10 bit 4:2:2"?

    i am trying to finish my first HD project on FCP. it's a stop-motion film which uses sequences of large jpgs (image size3504 x 2336). I have used the scaling feature in FCP to scale the image to fit into a 1920 x 1080 framing.
    when my sequence settings are "Uncompressed 10 bit 4:2:2", and i export a quicktime with "Uncompressed 10 bit 4:2:2" compression, i get slight blockiness around some of my edges (near pinks, reds, oranges) that do not appear in the original jpegs. I thought "Uncompressed 10 bit 4:2:2 meant i was going to get the best image possible, thats what a professional post facility told me to use.
    In experimenting, When i Choose "None" Compression for my sequence settings, and i exported the quicktime as "None" Compression, the image is much better and does not have the above blockiness.
    Does this make sense?
    Is there an aliasing problem with Uncompressed 10 bit 4:2:2?
    Why does it say "Quality:Medium" when exporting Uncompressed 10 bit 4:2:2 but not give me the option to change that?
    If i have to supply a master quicktime for an HD screening, can it be in "None" compression?
    answers to any of these questions would be much appreciated.
    thanks again,
    aj

    I'm sure someone who has more experience with codecs will be along soon, but I'll take a crack at it for now.
    Using the None option, you're outputting 4:4:4 video, which means there's no color downsampling. When using Uncompressed 4:2:2 the codec is only capable of producing half the color samples of 4:4:4.
    Depending on what your source files were originally sampled it, this could explain why you're seeing the degredation. Only very high end videos cameras capture 4:4:4, however. I'm assuming you used a still camera, and I really couldn't tell you what the color sampling is likely to be.
    But in most regards, Uncompressed 10-bit 4:2:2 should be extremely high quality. There's an excellent site for comparing codecs here:
    http://codecs.onerivermedia.com/ which does report some slight anti-aliasing issues.
    Hopefully someone else can offer a solution.
    Mac Pro 2.66Ghz - 3GBs RAM - X1900XT   Mac OS X (10.4.8)  

  • Trouble exporting with QuickTime 7 to UNCOMPRESSED 10-bit 4:2:2

    I have succeeded with shorter videos, but my 90 minute video returns "error -2125".
    Somehow I managed to do this before, I'm not sure what has changed on my system. Does anyone else have trouble exporting to Uncompressed 10-bit 4:2:2 ? I'm now exporting to ProRes instead, but would prefer uncompressed video for the sake of quality.

    You don't say what's the source of your clips.
    If standard DV (..though I doubt that an agency would accept standard def video any more..) NTSC DV is compressed in the camera as 4:1:1, and PAL DV is compressed as 4:2:0 ..so you won't get true 4:2:2 from normal DV, unless you're using a broadcast camera (..probably feeding into the capture device via SDI inputs).
    If the source was tape-based HDV or any other hi-def source, then iMovie converts that, during import, into Apple Intermediate Codec, and wouldn't be able to output proper Uncompressed 4:2:2 material.
    For Uncompressed 4:2:2, I think you'll need to be using a dedicated capture card - and massive-capacity hard discs! - to be able to import the material in the first place.
    iMovie certainly isn't the program to handle pro video of this nature.
    Ask in the Final Cut Pro Discussions..
    "..I've also tried doing this on my Macbook with Intel processor.." ..but maybe that's just not fast enough (older Mac portables have "shared graphics memory" ..meaning their graphics processor may have to compete with the main processor to temporarily grab free RAM)!

  • I cannot export to "Uncompressed 10-bit 4:2:2" format. Help!

    I need to deliver clips to a stock agency but I cannot export the footage from iMovie with the uncompressed format I need. Not in iMovieHD, nor in iMovie8, nor in FCE. I tried it with a 10 second clip, so it can not be the length or files getting too big!
    So what happens?
    Exporting to Uncompressed 10-bit 4:2:2
    If I try this setting, on all occasions iMovie simply crashes and I get the "iMovie quit unexpectedly" window. The same thing happens in FCE.
    Exporting to Uncompressed 8-bit 4:2:2
    When I export using this seting, iMovie SEEMS to export the file as it should. But when I open the file in Quicktime, the timebar indicates the full 10 seconds, but the video & audio freezes after about 1 or 2 seconds, the clip keeps playing and I hear & see the last second of the clip again. The same thing happens with files exported with this setting in iMovieHD, iMovie8 and FCE.
    I've read on the forum that I should not worry about the quicktime movie not playing right, because the file can be imported into Final Cut without any problems. So I try not to worry about this and hope the stock agency can work with the files... But that still does not explain why I cannot export to 10-bit 4:2:2 without my video programs crashing!
    And yes, I've also tried doing this on my Macbook with Intel processor. With the same result.
    Can somebody please help me with any suggestions? Thanks!!
    Daniëlla

    You don't say what's the source of your clips.
    If standard DV (..though I doubt that an agency would accept standard def video any more..) NTSC DV is compressed in the camera as 4:1:1, and PAL DV is compressed as 4:2:0 ..so you won't get true 4:2:2 from normal DV, unless you're using a broadcast camera (..probably feeding into the capture device via SDI inputs).
    If the source was tape-based HDV or any other hi-def source, then iMovie converts that, during import, into Apple Intermediate Codec, and wouldn't be able to output proper Uncompressed 4:2:2 material.
    For Uncompressed 4:2:2, I think you'll need to be using a dedicated capture card - and massive-capacity hard discs! - to be able to import the material in the first place.
    iMovie certainly isn't the program to handle pro video of this nature.
    Ask in the Final Cut Pro Discussions..
    "..I've also tried doing this on my Macbook with Intel processor.." ..but maybe that's just not fast enough (older Mac portables have "shared graphics memory" ..meaning their graphics processor may have to compete with the main processor to temporarily grab free RAM)!

  • "Uncompressed 10-bit" vs. "None" Compression settings

    Hello,
    I work at a FX/finishing/color grading facility that provides the final masters for commercials seen on television.
    I am trying to gain some insight on the difference between some compression settings, so that I can educate a client on the proper file to provide us.
    We have been provided Quicktime files with an "Uncompressed 10-bit NTSC" tag attached to it, though they always come with an FCP wrapper that requires a special codec for us to access the files. They are usually relatively smaller files, which also has us suspecting that they are actually compressed.
    We would prefer files with a universal Quicktime codec, such as exporting it with "None" as done in the Quicktime conversion in FCP. Problem being, these files get so huge and unmanageable even when derived from low-end acquisition formats.
    A 5 second clip exported with "Uncompressed 10 bit" comes to are 115megs, while "None" is at 457 megs.
    Can someone explain to me the differences between these codecs and what causes the vast difference in file sizes?

    La diferencia en clara, tú tienes un file uncompressed y otro sin none compresion, paresen igula pero no es así, ambos te dicen sin compresion, pero el none comprsesion es puro, es el file en crudo por esa razon pesa mucho mas, tú tiens que ver que deseas porque ambos se ven bien el resultado en ambos en optimo, ecepto cuando los tienes en FCP y los exportas como DV, ahí se ven la diferencia pues la compresion a DV siempre baja un poco la calidad del producto final.
    El file "none" pesa más del doble que el "uncompressed-8bits"
    mi recomendacion es depende de lo qué quieres y que capacidad de tu HD estas dispusto a ocupar y par qué trabajo usarlo? será el formato que escojas pero ambos son muy buenos..
    pd:puedes contestar en ingles si deseas.. thanks

  • Exported Raw Conversion Image Resolution and Assigning a Color Profile, etc

    In Aperture 1.1, although I set the exported Raw conversion image resolution to 300 dpi in the preferences, it continues to come out at 72 dpi which is something of an inconvenience. Also, is it possible to assign a color profile to the "exported version" so that it is congruent to my PS CS2 color workspace (if that is what its called). Is this program capable of carrying out a conversion as a background operation? Finally, can the layout windows be configured so that they remember how they have been used in the past? Thanks.

    Iatrogenic huh! Cool!
    Anyway, I'm not real clear on what it is you are trying to accomplish. Despite your obvious vocabulary skills, there seems to be some disconnect relative to what you are trying to accomplish. You are right that "exporting a version" in Aperture is roughly equivalent to what happens in ACR when you "Open" a RAW image into Photoshop. In both cases you have, hopefully, already done the adjusting of parameters you want prior to "exporting", or "opening". When you "open" or "export" you wind up with an "image" composed of pixels, whereas in the RAW adjustment phase you are just working with a temporary thumbnail and a set of mathematical instructions. Big difference, I suppose is that when you "open" and image from ACR into CS2, the resulting image is truly just pixels and has not had a "file type" applied to the file yet, until you "save" it, while in Aperture, if you "export" a file to CS2, or to the desktop, you end up with the file type already applied. Presuming you "export" a 16 bit TIFF or PSD, there is no operational difference.
    I could be wrong, but with the new Bayer Demosaicing algorithms in Aperture 1.1, and the Camera RAW adjustments, you should be able to come up with an adjusted image that is VERY close if not identical to one done in ACR, with the possible exception of lens abberation adjustment. I was very critical of the RAW adjustments in 1.0.1, but I am very happy with the capabilites in 1.1. That said, I think there is still some room for improvement in user friendliness of some of the adjustments such as Levels.

  • Is uncompressed 8-bit PAL 48 KHz the most compatible format for a HDV dvd

    I have shot a project in HDV, edited in HDV sequence. I now want to produce a dvd, that is compatible on both widescreen and 4:3 tv's.
    A friend suggested exporting a quicktime movie in uncompressed 8-bit PAL 48 KHz to ensure maximum compatibility.
    Would people agree with using this setting?

    Mark
    There are a boatload of posts on exactly this topic, they come in waves ... nobody will ask this question for a week or two, then it'll be the same question 2 or 3 times a day
    Nobody has asked for a week or two so I guess yours signals the start of the next wave! If you use the search function and you'll find the hundreds of answers that have gone before ...
    ... or just use one of the many tutorials freely available on the subject: for example, http://www.kenstone.net/fcphomepage/hdv_to_sddvd.html
    Have fun
    Andy

  • UNCOMPRESSED 10 BIT QT WON'T PLAY

    Hi,
    I'm playing out some shots at Uncompressed 10 Bit 4:2:2 (with QT Conversion in Final Cut Pro) for someone to do some effects on, but the finished shots won't pay back as a Quicktime - it keeps sticking. If I scroll through frame by frame the individual frames seem to all be there, but it won't play through.
    Weird thing is, I did this with some other shots a few weeks ago and they played back fine at the time. But I've since just reopened them and they're not playing through properly either.
    What could be happening to stop them playing?
    Many thanks,
    Mark

    Hi, not sure how fast the drive is but the point is it played some Uncompressed 10 Bit just fine a coupla weeks ago.
    Maybe I just had more drive space then? Do you think that might be the reason?
    Pretty sure I didn't update Quicktime, in case that's an issue.
    Many thanks,
    Mark

  • Converting avi. files to 720 x 486 uncompressed 8 bit 4:2:2

    I am importing some avi. files into a project that is using uncompressed 8 bit 4:2:2 (720 x 486) material. FCP7 keeps asking me to convert the files using Media Manager. I have many times using my custom compressor settings but the copied files still end up being DV/DVCPRO  720 x 480. What am I doing wrong?

    "What am I doing wrong?"
    Listening to FCP7?   Come on, that's the same lot that told you to export via Compressor...
    You should be able to transcode from your source AVIs using Compressor (and your custom settings) without involving FCP at all.  Then you should be able to bring the footage in using the Import command. (If your project requires logging there'll be some manual work.)
    Media Manager has done many good things for me and several evil things as well. I avoid it.

  • Uncompressed 8-bit Field Order?

    Hello!
    In FCP, I'm working with an Uncompressed 8-bit sequence with the field dominance set to "None." After having done a bit of research, I realize that choosing "none" was fruitless since Uncompressed 8-bit is an interlaced format (right?). Anyway, when I export my sequence to a QT file for compression, Compressor sets field dominance to "Upper First." Does that sound right? First of all I've got my sequence set to "none" for field dominance. But if I'm right that Uncompressed 8-bit can't really be set to "none," shouldn't Compressor at least recognize it as "Lower" aka "Bottom First?"
    I've read several posts about this but nothing to do with Uncompressed 8-bit specifically, so sorry if this seems like a repeat post.
    Thanks for any help!
    Cameron

    I was looking for some posts concerning interlaced source material and came across this thread. I have to say I don't think it's accurate to say that almost everything other than DV is upper (odd) field dominant. For example, the uncompressed codec AJA uses is lower field first, as well as the Avid codec.
    The most important thing is to tell your encoding software what field dominance the SOURCE material is. It can then interpolate and output correctly.
    Also, don't judge anything interlacing-related on a computer monitor - look at it on a tv monitor. You won't notice some interlacing problems until you see them output NTSC.
    I have had MAJOR problems when importing interlaced source material into Compressor. Number one, it almost always guesses the wrong filed order on import. Number two, at least when bringing in D1 resolution material from Final Cut and cropping in Compressor, the resulting files flicker when played on tv. I actually haven't used compressor - but a great alternative called BitVice by Innobits. It handles interlacing with ease - like it should.
    I bring this up because I have never heard anything official from Apple that addresses problems with interlaced source material, and after thinking for a long time that I was missing something, I now realize it's not me - it's them. Try BitVice. It lacks the user interface of Compressor but it's a great (and dependable) encoder.
    If anyone can point out posts that address these issues that I've missed, please let me know!
    Dual 2 GHz G5   Mac OS X (10.3.7)  

Maybe you are looking for