Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. Collapse Details
    Canopus HQ codec vs. Cineform codec
    #1
    Member Yuval Shrem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Hollywood, California
    Posts
    87
    Default
    Hi,

    I was wondering if anyone knows which codec is better and what are the main differences (technical and practical) between the Canopus HQ codec and the Cineform codec?

    The descriptions on their websites seem to be similar...

    Also, the Cineform codec should work on all windows applications (including Adobe After Effects for example). What happens if I edit a project in Edius Broadcast 4 and then want to use a chroma-keying plugin that only works in Adobe After Effects? Will After Effects be able to work with the Canopus HQ formated video files?

    Also, is there a quality difference between the two codecs?
    Is there a performance difference between the two codecs?

    Does anybody know?


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #2
    Default
    Hey Yuval,

    i would be interested in the "quality qustion" as well-who would be the winner?

    For the Canopus HQ Codec in After Effects there should be no problem as long as you have installed the HQ Codecs that come with Edius Broadcast, yes it will work(crossing fingers, havent tried it, but i think it does, give a pm to the swiss-guy "JJB" he got a hvx(pal) and a full version of broadcast 4, so he would be the one to test it with AE(there is also a 30 days trial for AE 7), but i think it works flawless...!

    The only problem i see is canopus support for their NX-card: there seems to be lack of driver-support for adobe products, so i am not sure if we can give the video-output to our monitor in after effects...!


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #3
    Default
    For the Aspect HD level products the codec have similar external behavior, both are VBR 8-bit intermediate codecs with a maximum resolution of 1440x1080. HQ is a field based DCT codec, and CineForm Intermediate is a frame based Wavelet codec. As wavelet is more efficient, CineForm will have the lower bit-rate (or high quality at the same bit-rate), otherwise HQ is a nicely designed codec (I think better than Avid DHxHD.) However, HQ doesn't compare with CineForm (or DNxHD) for 10-bit full raster (1920x1080) work -- which comes with CineForm Prospect HD. I don't know it HQ has an upgrade path to 10-bit.
    David Newman
    CTO, CineForm
    http://twitter.com/David_Newman


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #4
    Member Yuval Shrem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Hollywood, California
    Posts
    87
    Default
    Thanks David,

    That was the information I was hoping to get.

    Do you also know how performance compares between Edius (using the native DVC-Pro HD, or HQ) and a Premier Pro 2 with Cineform?
    *(the question is with regards to CPU load for real-time decoding)

    Thanks,

    Yuval.


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #5
    Default
    That information I don't know. It don't use Edius.
    David Newman
    CTO, CineForm
    http://twitter.com/David_Newman


    Reply With Quote
     

Posting Permissions

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