Ex1 Output Uncompressed HD???

[thefilmaddict]

A client has asked me to output my 1080 24p 35Mb/s EX1 footage to one of two formats:

QuickTime Uncompressed 10-bit

or

QuickTime Photo-Jpeg

I have Final Cut Pro (latest version). Can I output either one of these formats? Any particular settings I should check/use? Any disadvantages? These files currently live in a XDCAM 1080 24p 35Mb/s project.

[VictorS]

A client has asked me to output my 1080 24p 35Mb/s EX1 footage to one of two formats:

QuickTime Uncompressed 10-bit

or

QuickTime Photo-Jpeg

I have Final Cut Pro (latest version). Can I output either one of these formats? Any particular settings I should check/use? Any disadvantages? These files currently live in a XDCAM 1080 24p 35Mb/s project.

Photo-JPEG will save you alot of space, so if you have long project, go with that.

[DaKrisht]

A client has asked me to output my 1080 24p 35Mb/s EX1 footage to one of two formats:

QuickTime Uncompressed 10-bit

or

QuickTime Photo-Jpeg

I have Final Cut Pro (latest version). Can I output either one of these formats? Any particular settings I should check/use? Any disadvantages? These files currently live in a XDCAM 1080 24p 35Mb/s project.


FilmAddict,

Why? Your video is ALREADY compressed, going to an "uncompressed out" won't do anything for your video?

Anyway, not my place to judge. The best would probably be ProRess 422 (Apple codec).

Of course, you can do quicktime or quicktime JPEG but it will do nothing for your video since the Codec has already done it's damage.

[thefilmaddict]

It's a stock footage company. They say they prefer those 2 formats.

It's not for me to edit, so size is not an issue.

I just wonder if the conversion is possible and if it will hurt the original compressed video?

I thought it was a weird request. I edit HD video at work all the time. Our broadcast clients want DVCPRO HD 720 59.97 or 1080i HDCAM.

Will most people working with HD be able to use my footage once converted to:

QuickTime Uncompressed 10-bit

or

QuickTime Photo-Jpeg?

[basilisk]

QT PhotoJPEG goes back over several QT versions, and is pretty reliable and compatible. If you use >90% quality, you wont see any additional compression, and you will save quite a lot of space.
No real point at going to 10 bit uncompressed, as the file will be huge.

[booth]

Weird as the main codec I've been asked to export to recently is ProRes. Seems everyone is happy with that.

[basilisk]

proRes is excellent, but is only available with FCP 6 so some folks (esp. Win folks) can't use it.

[thefilmaddict]

So QT PhotoJPEG at 90% quality is the way to go?

Any other settings to adjust when making a photoJPEG file?

[Jim Kinsey]

FA,

Photo jpeg is what most stock footage companies want from my experience. I do just a little more than medium quality and go with that. Anything higher than medium will just increase your file size without much more quality. I got this right out of the Post magazine article around a year ago. The problem with sending out QT vs. Photo jpeg is that everyone can use the photo Jpeg files ( windows) while the Qt files are basically for FCP users.

I just sold my entire fire footage library to artbeats and those files were Photo Jpeg. Hope that helps.

http://www.dv.com/news/news_item.php?articleId=196603800

Jim Kinsey

[George Kroonder]

My experience with iStockPhoto is that they require QT PhotoJPEG at "Best"or >95% for compatibility and quality.

Selecting al lower quality setting can create problems with grading or compositing the stock for the final product.

George.

[thefilmaddict]

Do these settings look good:

Compression Type: Photo-JPEG
Frame Rate: Current
Depth: Color
Quality: Best

-------------------

This stuff was shot at 1920x1080 24p. Will people mac and PC folks be able to use it?