Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 50
  1. Collapse Details
    #21
    Senior Member ahalpert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    2,758
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by morgan_moore View Post
    But that's for ProRes raw hq?

    The previously mentioned rate refers to ProRes RAW HQ, which is the best you can get. Standard ProRes RAW manages to deliver nearly the same quality, using compression, to reach a rate of 40-100 MB/s. This is for 4K footage at 24 fps,


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bristol, UK
    Posts
    10,131
    Default
    All those amounts are way less than non raw? Making raw far preferable on the size metric- the opposite of production house myth


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #23
    Senior Member Liam Hall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Worldwide
    Posts
    3,324
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by NorBro View Post
    You making up these numbers? lol

    As mentioned above, it's 471 for 422.

    And 328 for LT and 707 for HQ.

    Attachment 141046
    No, I'm not. Those numbers came from a data calculator. Interestingly (or not) I checked the numbers on another data calculator (AJA) and it gives the figure 530.79 Mb/s for QHD at 24p but only 238.5 GBs an hour. I checked them again on Arri's data calculator and they said 553Mb/s and 240GBs an hour. I don't know where you got your figures from but I do know I didn't make mine up.

    You can apologise anytime you like.
    www.liamhall.net
    TWITTER: @FilmLiam
    INSTAGRAM: @picsbyliam


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    663
    Default
    Back when the Ursa Mini came out, and CFast cards were really expensive (not that they're cheap now), I remember watching a video where a guy resorted to shooting in Prores Proxy for long interviews. Hopefully it turned out okay for him, but I agree with everyone that LT is recommended minimum.


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #25
    Member R_Marvin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    71
    Default
    I use ProRes LT for most sit down interviews intended for distribution on the web. For other purposes I'll use standard 422. I've yet to have a client ask for any specific codec and outside of editors that I've worked with most people don't see the difference.

    Here's a link to Apple's ProRes white paper for all sorts of details about it:

    https://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/...hite_Paper.pdf


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    8,734
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Liam Hall View Post
    No, I'm not. Those numbers came from a data calculator. Interestingly (or not) I checked the numbers on another data calculator (AJA) and it gives the figure 530.79 Mb/s for QHD at 24p but only 238.5 GBs an hour. I checked them again on Arri's data calculator and they said 553Mb/s and 240GBs an hour. I don't know where you got your figures from but I do know I didn't make mine up.

    You can apologise anytime you like.
    No offense, but that's why there is always confusion because of doing silly things like that.

    Stop using data calculators, man - and just post the numbers from the people who created it.

    Page #24 - https://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/...hite_Paper.pdf

    Apple's ProRes Chart.jpg


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #27
    Senior Member Liam Hall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Worldwide
    Posts
    3,324
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by NorBro View Post
    No offense, but that's why there is always confusion because of doing silly things like that.

    Stop using data calculators, man - and just post the numbers from the people who created it.

    Page #24 - https://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/...hite_Paper.pdf

    Apple's ProRes Chart.jpg
    To be fair, those are "target" bit rates, not absolute. They even use the word "approximate". Encode the same video file to ProRes using two different systems you'll get two different bit rates. Also, I don't think it's silly to use a data calculator made by a manufacturer of the type of recorder the OP is talking about using or one by a trusted manufacturer like ARRI. These things are guides.
    www.liamhall.net
    TWITTER: @FilmLiam
    INSTAGRAM: @picsbyliam


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    8,734
    Default
    Silly wasn't the best adjective.

    But you know what, I think you're actually right.

    When critically thinking about it (which I always preach on here), I've changed my mind.

    In a video production world where technical attention to detail doesn't matter as much anymore, and specific standards change on a daily basis, there shouldn't be one figure from one white paper as a universal reference for information.

    Everyone should share their own numbers and their own results based on their own hardware and software configuration and what the machines calculate based on their analyzation of what is in front of the lens/sensor.

    (That may sound like I might be being sarcastic, but I'm not, lol.)


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #29
    Senior Member Liam Hall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Worldwide
    Posts
    3,324
    Default
    No, it's not sarcastic. I agree, though I would add, people need to use their EYES too and add that into the equation.

    Actually, I searched for that White Paper and only came up with the one from 2013 which is why I used the calculator!
    www.liamhall.net
    TWITTER: @FilmLiam
    INSTAGRAM: @picsbyliam


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #30
    Senior Member ahalpert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    2,758
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Liam Hall View Post
    To be fair, those are "target" bit rates, not absolute. They even use the word "approximate". Encode the same video file to ProRes using two different systems you'll get two different bit rates. Also, I don't think it's silly to use a data calculator made by a manufacturer of the type of recorder the OP is talking about using or one by a trusted manufacturer like ARRI. These things are guides.
    Really? I thought ProRes was constant bitrate whereas ProRes raw is variable


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •