Question re :delivery in Pro Res HQ 1920 X 1080

I was just wondering what would be the correct sequence of events if you were shooting in HDV but had to deliver on Pro Res HQ 1920 X 1080.
Would you select "HDV Pro Res HQ" in the "capture settings" edit in this and then export using "Quick Time Movie" and Pro Res HQ 1920X1080?

If you can afford the drive space, yes, this is the best method. Though when you export, Current Settings will be fine rather than specifying ProRes.
If you can't afford the space, then capture in native HDV and export to ProRes HQ when finished. If it doesn't have to be "HQ", you also have the option of rendering to ProRes in your Sequence Settings.

Similar Messages

Does Premiere pro cs2 support: 1920 x 1080 - 60fps - 32-bit @ 48khz?

I'm having a hard time importing footage with the specs above with Premiere pro cs2. The video is choppy. Audio seems to be synced. Help...

That several version old program has a different forum http://forums.adobe.com/community/premiere/premierepro_previous?view=all
When a MOD moves your message, you need to provide more information - Information FAQ http://forums.adobe.com/message/4200840

Pro Res in Final cut express How do i get a good quality SD DVD

I recently bought final cut express and have suffered getting a good quality SD DVD out through the workflow from my cannon XHA1.
On screen its fine but when i author through imovie to DVD the quality is poor.
So reading the various threads it would seem that i need to use Pro res and the ingress codec... But cant find this option in express ?
Question is. Is pro res codec available in express and if not can someone suggest the optimum set up for HD capture to SD DVD output
Many thanks

Use either of these techniques to get good quality DVDs from AIC.
1. Edit your HDV/AIC in the timeline. Then create a new DV-PAL (NTSC) Anamorphic sequence. Copy your edited HDV/AIC to the new sequence. Do not alter anything. Render the sequence ..... this will take a long time - up to twice the length of the project. Then File>Export>QuickTime Movie (Not Self-contained).
However, if you use the QT Movie in iDVD you will get a squashed 4:3 movie, so first of all you must make QT stretch it out to its proper 16:9 dimensions like this:-
+a. Open the exported movie file in the QT Pro player.+
+b. Go to Window>Show Movie Properties.+
+c. Select the "Video Track" and in the "Visual Settings" panel uncheck "Preserve Aspect Ratio".+
+d. In the "Scaled Size" box set the width to 1024 pixels for PAL.+
+e. The "Video Track" will have turned grey, so click it to make it blue again.+
+f. The opened movie file will jump to 16:9.+
+g. Close it with the red button and click Save.+
2. This method is fast. Set your camera to "Locked DV" which means that FCE/FCP will capture it as anamorphic DV and edit it as standard definition anamorphic DV. (Use Easy Setup ... DV-PAL (NTSC) Anamorphic).
You can then Export>QuickTime Movie to be used in iDVD and use the stretching technique mentioned above.

After burning a successful DVD in iDVD out of FCPX, how can I see the settings it used? So I finally burned a DVD out of a Apple Pro Res file into iDVD in PAL format. My question now is how can I find out what the exact burn properties were so that I ca

After burning a successful DVD in iDVD out of FCPX, how can I see the settings it used?
So I finally burned a DVD out of a Apple Pro Res file into iDVD in PAL format. My question now is how can I find out what the exact burn properties were so that I can apply the same burn properties to a project in Compressor 4?
Is it possible to see what iDVD did?

I don't know any way you can interrogate iDVD to reveal settings to the extent that you can in a Compressor project. What you could do is open up the show's VOB in MPEG STreamclip, go to File and Reveal Stream Information; that will at least give you some rudimentary info like average bit rate. Perhaps someone, with more iDVD experience, can chime in here.
The broader question is why use Compressor at all if your current workflow is doing the job to your satisfaction?
The value of Compressor is that it gives you control over the many parameters that affect size quality. and playability. The Compressor presets can give you a starting point for DVD delivery, Web, etc. From those presets, people typically experiment by adjusting the parameters until they get the desired results for their specific show. It's a little bit science and a little bit art. After experimenting, you may be able to get slightly better quality for the project you've successfully burned in iDVD by using Compressor and something likeToast…or maybe not.
Good luck.
Russ

Hi there. I shot with a nikon d7000. The clips look great on the viewer but quite bad on canvas (also after its been exported) I converted my clips to apple pro res 422 using mpeg streamclip. The size I used was 1920 x 1080. How can I fix these?

Hi there. I shot with a nikon d7000. The clips look great on the viewer but quite bad on canvas (also after its been exported) I converted my clips to apple pro res 422 using mpeg streamclip. The size I used was 1920 x 1080. How can I fix this?

This is the clip:
This is the sequence:
I know they both should match. Question is, should I re convert the clips in mpeg using different size settings? Or should I change the sequence settings? how?
Thanks A LOT.

AVCHD to Pro res question.

I presently shoot AVCHD 1920 x 1080, the Panasonic SD700 writes the material to the SD card at about 17mgb/ sec. I had my eye on getting a Sony NEX VG10 which does the same thing but writes to the chip at 24mgb/sec.
My question is does Pro res deal with either of these specs differently? Or will it squeeze whatever you give it down the "Same pipe" as it were regardless of bitrate, so there wont be any benefit to having a higher bitrate?

The result ISN'T the same. FOSTERS lager is MUCH BETTER than Bud Light. Shooting on 35mm film is much better than shooting on HDV....but you might convert both to ProRes for editing. Film will look better.
Shooting a higher bit rate will get you a better image. Converting it to ProRes won't change that. And yes, you would see a difference if you shot a lower bit rate.

AVCHD-Pro res LT question/

I have recorded footage in AVCHD 1920 X 1080 25fps and I must edit the material andI MUST submit it in Pro Res 1920x1080 HQ.
It seemed to make sense to edit in 1920x1080, so I've used Toast 10 to encode the AVCHD stuff to Pro Res 1920x1080 LT. I noticed however there were two unchecked boxes, one saying "Interlaced" and the other saying "Gamma correction for 4:2:2 source" (I think) Both I left unchecked.
Does anyone see anything wrong with my workflow so far? (Please don't comment on the submission format, I have no choice in this matter)
Should I have checked either of the boxes and/or should I have encoded for editing, to Pro res LT 1440X1080 and then encoded up to 1920 for the final submission?

It works fine with my Panasonic camera. Works fine with a lot of Panasonic cameras I've worked with in classes. Don't know what camera you're using but if it's AVCHD and your computer hardware and software supports it, it should work fine. You do need the folder structure and not just the ,mts files. ClipWrap will transcode it without problem.
HD is upper. Again, I don't know how Toast works, but I think it does a file conversion.

Pro Res and Intensity Pro Question

Hello All!,
I currently traded in my Sony FX-1 for a Sony V1-U. Very happy with everything on it so far! My question is simple. I am about to undertake a project that is some basic 2 cam sit down green screen interviews. I will be purchasing the intensity pro to capture Pro Res 422 via HDMI from the V1U. My biggest concern is that I will not be able to re-capture if needed! I have read and am pretty sure I can set my camera to HDV downconvert and my device control to DV and capture preset Pro Res 422 and capture through the intensity pro.. My only question is will this allow me to log my footage then do a batch capture. Highly critical that I am able to re-capture the footage as this client seems to come back every couple of months and make changes and I don't like to keep footage on my drives. I also think it would be beneficial to have pro-res to help me with keying the green screen as HDV is 420 and Pro res is 422. Any suggestions? thanks so much in advance!
My Toys:
Mac Pro 8 Core
FCS2
2GB Ram
1.5 TB Internal Raid 0
Intensity Pro Card (Coming soon)
Matt Brodersen

Hello,
I have done just that sort of operation. I am using a Canon HV20 with HDMI out to
Intensity Pro. My camera allows for down convert, which I do not use, but I do connect
a firewire cable which then gives full log and capture. I am not a pro so my daily
experience is for my own needs.
I hope that gives you some help, others here might be able to offer more.
Tom

Log & transfer Pro Res question

I am using log and transfer to import some .mts material. In preferences it says its encoding in Pro res 422 which is fine. My question is I can't see how you can change the parameters of the encoding, are you stuck with Pro res 422 whether you like or not and is the bitrate just fixed?

When you click on the preferences and you see ProRes 422, If you click on ProRes 422 you will see the other options.

Hello I have a question about Converting 60 23.98 Cannon Mark III footage. In cinema tools, my footage stays grayed out. Both when I try my Compressor pro-res footage,

Hello I have a question about Converting 60>23.98 Cannon Mark III footage.
In cinema tools, my footage stays grayed out. Both when I try my Compressor pro-res footage, & original footage from cam.
When I convert from 60>23.98 in the Gopro app, it works fine.
Does anyone know if there is any quality loss in this app?
Also does anyone know another free software tht works great to convert markIII 60>23.98 footage?
Thank u thank u thank u !!!!

Questions about Cinema Tools should be asked in the Final Cut Studio forum.
Russ

HDV 1080' VS Pro Res question.

Can anybody explain, why when I compare footage from a Sony Z1 encoded in HDV and played on the timeline against footage shot on a Panasonic SD700 in its 50p mode and encoded in any Pro Res but particularly in Pro Res HQ, the Sony is outclassed spectactularly by the SD700. In the backgound the detail is superb and makes the Sony look like "mush".Yet the Panasonic is a mere £700.
The reason I ask is because I have been yelled at on many occasions as to the superiority of HDV over AVCHD. But my own eyes tell me otherwise (in this case)
It would appear that the SD/TM 700 compares favourably with XD Cam EX1 which is £4000 (When it shouldn't!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lMByIVeMA0
Presumably I am imagining all this!??

trabant wrote:
You said,"Pardon my bluntness (and no offence intended), but transcoding footage into anything of higher quality than ProRes 422 (not HQ) is a pure waste of disc space."
Sorry to be blunt as well,butluckily I always try things out for myself and not listen to the mantras of those who lecture from on high,but who have not actually performed the task themselves.
I will assume you misunderstood my original statement and are not acting out of defensiveness or petulance. Did you also notice that I used smileys in my post (which you did not)? You need to chill out. And, no one is preaching from on high, either. Do you really think that most people post here just to see their own words and not to earnestly help out others?
And, if you want to challenge or discuss my stated comments, there is a more appropriate way to do it rather than ad hominem attacks. Enough said. You should have simply mentioned that you disagree based on your testing (and elaborate on exactly how you've done that testing) and ask me to clarify my statements further. Pretty easy...
On top of all of this, your "attack" on my comments is just wrong. Even what you quote from me doesn't say anything about ProRes 422 (LT). Additionally, my comment was a pretty general statement, already mentioned by others in the thread.
Also, part of comparing the "before and after" codec/format must include the tool used to do the transcoding. Different tools produce different results.
And, yes, testing is good and should be done for every project before actual work begins.
Firstly, disc space is not an issue any more as hard discs are so cheap. Secondly THERE IS a noticeable difference in the background detail between Pro res LT and Pro Res hQ when transcoding from 50p AVCHD material. I know, because I've done it and I can see it.
Space still can be an issue. If you are working on a documentary, for example, with hundreds of hours of footage, disk storage usually is an issue for most people. Choosing between the various versions of ProRes can be an important consideration. Deciding whether or not to use an offline-online workflow may include consideration of a chosen codec.
And, when you are discussing a technical issue, you need to be as clear as possible. Simply, saying that transcoding from 50p AVCHD material to some version of ProRe is not enough. What was the bit rate ("quality setting") of the footage? Under what circumstances was the footage acquired? What tool did you use to do the transcoding? What settings were used? How did you evaluate the quality of the results? You didn't mention any of this info, yet you didn't bother to ask me (or others).
Perhaps you didn't really read my post well-enough to get the gist of what I was saying. Or, maybe I could have explained things more clearly. My comment was about not wasting disk space by transcoding a "low quality" acquisition format like HDV or AVCHD into anything more than what is needed to preserve the original contents of the acquisition media (as much as possible, or to an acceptable level).
Later on in my comments, where I give more specific examples of my own workflows, I never mention using the LT version of ProRes 422.
As far as testing goes, one method I personally use is to compare before and after versions of media via a "difference compositing" and viewing the results on video scopes. A more quantitative approach is to import the two versions into a mathematical analysis application and do statistical analysis on the actual pixel values (and compare the two versions).
Sorry if my first statement came across as unclear. You could have asked for clarification. My statements in my previous post were clearly about HDV footage (I didn't mention AVCHD, at all)...
Dave

How to downconvert 2K 2048 to Pro Res 1920 in Compressor?

Help! I'm hoping someone can give me a step-by-step how-to on converting the 2K 2048 DPX footage I have to ProRes 422, in 1920 x 1080.
I've been told this can be done in Compressor, but have yet to find out how.
Thanks!

Welcome to the Forums!
LCD is the display type. LED is the backlight (versus cold cathode fluorescent lamp, CCFL). So, your profile will show LCD no matter what (i.e. you have an LCD display backlit by an LED light). LED's are "instant-on", CCFL's need to warm up a bit, so that's one way to tell them apart. But, if you have a new 17" high res, it's LED-backlit.
1920 x 1200 is the high-res (the standard res is 1680x1050).
Glossy vs. matte doesn't show up in the profile either - it's just a coating. You can tell glossy by looking for reflections with the display off - if there's reflection, it's glossy, if there are only muted, diffuse reflections or none (depending on lighting conditions), it's matte. (Mine is matte; with the display off, I can only see a fuzzy, diffuse shadow of myself, not a reflection.)
So, overall it certainly sounds like you got what you ordered.
Hope this helps...

HQ vs standard pro res 422 for capture Help!

This is my last question (I think).
Would standard printed out on hdsr essentially look the same in this situation that I shouldn't bother with the HQ?
A gentleman made a comment that I don't need HQ for capture but I am reading a lot of commentary on this.
My feature film has a lot of effects, it is prepared for conversion from a 10bit digibeta sd file that was rendered out from an sd file.
My end delivery is going to be cable broadcast and hdsr master, (though I know just for hdcam standard would be ok).
I read different comments on here and on the web...and some of it comments if your end goal is broadcast you should have an HQ file if it comes from a 10-bit source and as well that more compression will happen down the road and taking that into consideration, as I'll be doing another render, I'd like this verified.
And NOWHERE does it differentiate if that source is the file it's being converted from or the original footage it came from.
And I will be effecting this last capture pro res file before another render to a final QT.
I just want verification that standard will be ok as the individual who commented that it is I hadn't stated for sure what my delivery and end use would be and may have assumed I'd only be concerned with hdcam.
Thanks.

Nobody calls me a gentleman and gets away with it!
There are many resources to heop you decide on a ProRes codec appropriate for your task. However, youmust weigh the processing cost of inadequate hardware against the possibly indiscernible difference in the HUGE difference in file sizes and heavy lifting.
http://16x9cinema.com/blog/2009/7/31/sorting-out-the-apple-prores-family.html
ProRes 422 (HQ)
Visually lossless - highest-quality professional HD video that a (single-link) HD-SDI signal can carry.
Supports full-width, 4:2:2 video sources at 10-bit pixel depths, while retaining its visually lossless characteristic through many generations of decoding and re-encoding.
Apple ProRes 422 (HQ) can be used both as an intermediate codec to accelerate workflows for complex, compressed video sources and as an affordable, high-performance alternative to uncompressed 4:2:2 video.
Has some subsampling of chroma, but retains very high quality.
Supports 4:2:2 sources like DCVPRO HD, AVC-Intra,/100, XDCAM HD422/50.
Data rate about 220 Mbps.
ProRes 422
Visually lossless, full-width 10-bit, 4:2:2 at lower data rate than ProRes (HQ)
Offers better multi-stream RT editing performance. For most video applications, 422 is "good enough."
Data rate about 147 Mbps
The comparison in data density between HQ and vanilla 422 is 220/147.
If you have the chops to KNOW you need to maintain this kind of image integrity then you have the hardware to accommodate the chore. If you have the chops but not the rig, forget it, you can't afford the time. If you have the rig but not the knowledge, forget it, you can't realize the benefits. It's a pretty simple decision matrix and, while you will get some recommendations, you're the only one who can pull this trigger. It's going to cost you time or money or both.
Types of Apple ProRes Codecs
The Apple ProRes format comes in five versions: Apple ProRes 4444, Apple ProRes 422 (HQ), Apple ProRes 422, Apple ProRes 422 (LT), and Apple ProRes 422 (Proxy). The following list describes the features of each version. For a complete comparison of the relative data rates of the Apple ProRes codecs, see Apple ProRes Format Specifications.
Apple ProRes 4444
The Apple ProRes 4444 codec offers the utmost possible quality for 4:4:4 sources and for workflows involving alpha channels. It includes the following features:
Full-resolution, mastering-quality 4:4:4:4 RGBA color (an online-quality codec for editing and finishing 4:4:4 material, such as that originating from Sony HDCAM SR or digital cinema cameras such as RED ONE, Thomson Viper FilmStream, and Panavision Genesis cameras). The R, G, and B channels are lightly compressed, with an emphasis on being perceptually indistinguishable from the original material.
Lossless alpha channel with real-time playback
High-quality solution for storing and exchanging motion graphics and composites
For 4:4:4 sources, a data rate that is roughly 50 percent higher than the data rate of Apple ProRes 422 (HQ)
Direct encoding of, and decoding to, RGB pixel formats
Support for any resolution, including SD, HD, 2K, 4K, and other resolutions
A Gamma Correction setting in the codec’s advanced compression settings pane, which allows you to disable the 1.8 to 2.2 gamma adjustment that can occur if RGB material at 2.2 gamma is misinterpreted as 1.8. This setting is also available with the Apple ProRes 422 codec.
Apple ProRes 422 (HQ)The Apple ProRes 422 (HQ) codec offers the utmost possible quality for 4:2:2 or 4:2:0 sources (without an alpha channel) and provides the following:
Target data rate of approximately 220 Mbps (1920 x 1080 at 60i)
Higher quality than Apple ProRes 422
Apple ProRes 422The Apple ProRes 422 codec provides the following:
Target data rate of approximately 145 Mbps (1920 x 1080 at 60i)
Higher quality than Apple ProRes 422 (LT)
Apple ProRes 422 (LT)The Apple ProRes 422 (LT) codec provides the following:
Roughly 70 percent of the data rate of Apple ProRes 422 (thus, smaller file sizes than Apple ProRes 422)
Higher quality than Apple ProRes 422 (Proxy)
bogiesan

FCP 7 L & T, pro res or XDcam?

Hi
When I use log and transfer in FCP 7 latest, do I need to bring the video in as Pro Res into the bins since I'll be making my sequences Pro Res? Or do I just bring the material in via L & T as is, which is XDcam 1920 30p, and edit easily on Pro Res timeline?
In fact is there even a way to bring it in as another codec than what it was recorded in? Not used L & T before.
Thanks
K

Hi K
The current crop of file based ingest options for XDCAM HD are all native ie without transcode. You have Sony's free XDCAM Transfer tool or (via a free Sony authored plugin) you can use FCP's own built-in Log and Transfer interface, but in both cases it is the native source footage being brought in to FCP albeit with a new "wrapper" added to the which makes them accessible to Quicktime, not a transcode to an altogether different intermediate codec. Alternatively you can adopt a commercial solution such as MXF4Mac's or Calibrated Software's MXF Import, either of which will allow you to work directly with the raw MXF files in Quicktime without the otherwise necessary rewrap, again no transcode.
As to your questions, my personal answer would be "No" you don't need to transcode to ProRes. You can easily work directly with the XDCAM HD files in a ProRes timeline, or you can edit with them directly in a native XDCAM HD timeline (but if you do that I would recommend you set the render codec to ProRes).
If you do want to capture to another codec then you can use an I/O device like those provided by Matrox, AJA, Blackmagic Design, Motu etc Or you can bring the footage in as per the above and then recompress to your target codec using FCP's Media Manager tool.
Hope it helps
Andy

Pro Res/ HQ

Hi there,
Quick question folks, I'm importing footage from some AVCHD mini-cameras via log & transfer. I'm trying to import the footage as Pro Res HQ, and have set my capture preset accordingly. However, the first clip imports and it seems like it is a normal Pro Res file. Am I doing something wrong or missing a stage here?
Many thanks

Ah right, of course. I don't see any options within the Log & Transfer window to convert, it appeared to do it automatically to Pro Res. So is it impossible to do this then I take it?
Reason for question is I'm working with footage from multiple cameras and wanted to ensure they all match so as to edit with multi-cam and to generally make life easier. I have footage already that is in Pro Res HQ and I was advised to edit everything on a 1920 x1080 Pro Res HQ timeline.
Previously, I've really only worked with normal Pro Res 422, not had any experience really with HQ. I assume if the footage is mixed btw the two then I will not be able to make up a multi-cam as the codecs are different???

Question re :delivery in Pro Res HQ 1920 X 1080

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for