Best Codec to use for Lossless?

pailes said:
If you read this thread carefully you might find other options than AIC :Drogar-Dum(DBG):
Click to expand...


yes, I'm using voltaic and PPro Cs4, yes i have no option to convert to DVCproHD, and I'm not dishing out the money for cineform just yet, now you can call me a hypocrite after spending money on the cam, but is there any free codec, besides AIC, cause i can't find the correct outputs for Prores or DVCproHD

I'm also on a Mac so no PC based AVCHD to DVCproHD converter
 
Zacatac said:
yes, I'm using voltaic and PPro Cs4, yes i have no option to convert to DVCproHD, and I'm not dishing out the money for cineform just yet, now you can call me a hypocrite after spending money on the cam, but is there any free codec, besides AIC, cause i can't find the correct outputs for Prores or DVCproHD

I'm also on a Mac so no PC based AVCHD to DVCproHD converter
Click to expand...

If you're not using Final Cut Studio you won't have ProRes 422 as an option (and probably no DVCProHD either). These codecs come bundled with Final Cut Pro. If you need a free codec try the one suggested by PerroneFord (DNxHD from Avid).
 
Thanks pailies for your help...

just one more question if you will... What do i use to convert .mts files AVCHD to DNxHD files?

Thanks
Zac
 
Zacatac said:
...but is there any free codec, besides AIC, cause i can't find the correct outputs for Prores or DVCproHD
Click to expand...
Add the AVCHD files to Adobe Media Encoder and make sure to choose P2 Movie under Format in the Export Settings dialog. You can queue up all your clips and transcode them in one go.

Or, File > Export > Movie does the trick in PPro. Make sure to choose P2 Movie under Format in the Export Settings dialog.

The result is DVCPro HD in a P2 folder structure.

/Roger
 
Last edited:
if you and DNxHD go to the avid websites and download and install all the codecs. then when you open up Adobe Media Encoder, the option is there for you.
 
PerroneFord said:
No, but Avid does since they built the codec to compete with ProRes. My guess, is that since they use very similar encoding methodology and very similar bit rates, is that DNxHD is going to be very similar in speed to ProRes.
Click to expand...
DNxHD is going to perform poorly inside FCP though because it's not an 'optimized' codec which means no real time performance. Every dissolve, filter, etc., that you add in FCP's timeline will have to be rendered. Cross platform, and cross program, sharing of files is just a b*tch right now.


-A
 
adkimery said:
DNxHD is going to perform poorly inside FCP though because it's not an 'optimized' codec which means no real time performance. Every dissolve, filter, etc., that you add in FCP's timeline will have to be rendered. Cross platform, and cross program, sharing of files is just a b*tch right now.


-A
Click to expand...

Fair point. So a Mac user could work natively in ProRes, and then Render DNxHD when the time came to hand off the files to non Mac people. Rendering the final in ProRes guarantees no one but Mac (FCP) people could use the "optimized" codec.

I think optimized means "works only with our product". I prefer to work with non-optimized codecs that I can hand off to anyone at any time.

Guess it depends on your needs.
 
Alrighty, All figured out...

I'm a mac guy, but running adobe, so I've gone with DNxHD as my primary codec, and its working very nicely
 
Zacatac said:
Alrighty, All figured out...

I'm a mac guy, but running adobe, so I've gone with DNxHD as my primary codec, and its working very nicely
Click to expand...

What bit rate are you using in the editor? And are you doing offline/online or just using one bit rate to edit and finish in?
 
Ive downloaded and installed the DNxHD codec as well and no problems transcoding with toast 9. I havent set up FCP yet to work with the files but now I'm confused at what i should transcode to as there are options i guess as far as bit rate is concerned. I'm guessing thats what the 90,60 etc is when you select it in the settings.

and whats up with the color after transcode it becomes really desaturated?
 
matt s. said:
Ive downloaded and installed the DNxHD codec as well and no problems transcoding with toast 9. I havent set up FCP yet to work with the files but now I'm confused at what i should transcode to as there are options i guess as far as bit rate is concerned. I'm guessing thats what the 90,60 etc is when you select it in the settings.

and whats up with the color after transcode it becomes really desaturated?
Click to expand...

In general, the codec will offer a selection of three bitrates based on your source footage's size (1080, 720) and it's frame rate. Generally, it makes the most sense to select a bit rate that most closely matches the original source bit rate. For my Sony EX1 that records in 35 Mbps, I use DHxHD 36. Someone using the DVCProHD, would select something around the 115 Mbps.

In terms of color, it sounds like you have some RGB material that you've encoded into YUV color space. The DNxHD lets you choose either Rec709 or RGB color space in the options list. The PC interface seems to be screwed up though so it's hard to see certain things. This is not an issue on the Mac version.
 
Im debating still with 200 or 145 (i think thats it)

i haven't done that much testing yet, but with 8-bit 200 the only difference i can see why my naked eye between that and the original .mts, is its a bit lights, but curves brings it right back
 
Drag both a 220 and a 145 rendered file on the timeline with the original on a separate track. Do a difference between them. Generally you can set it up as a compositing child. That will show you the difference. DNxHD 36 compared to my XDCam EX was essentially lossless. That is why I switched.

Edit:

Here are some full-sized screen grabs from a shoot I did a couple weeks ago. This frame grab is from the middle of a zoom-in with highly saturated colors. So nearly a worst case scenario.

Original File:
http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/20610/1231879403.jpg



DNxHD 175x (10-bit):
http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/20610/1231879485.jpg



DNxHD 36 (8-bit Proxy):
http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/20610/1231879445.jpg



Difference between source and Proxy:
http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/20610/1231879541.jpg



Difference between source and online version:
http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/20610/1231879513.jpg
 
Last edited:
Zacatac said:
Im debating still with 200 or 145 (i think thats it)

i haven't done that much testing yet, but with 8-bit 200 the only difference i can see why my naked eye between that and the original .mts, is its a bit lights, but curves brings it right back
Click to expand...

Zacatac, how are you editing DNxHD in premiere? what preset do you pick so that you don't have to pre-render every clip you enter to premiere?

Thanks.
 
lirany said:
Zacatac, how are you editing DNxHD in premiere? what preset do you pick so that you don't have to pre-render every clip you enter to premiere?

Thanks.
Click to expand...


Im currently having to render everything that goes in, so thats a downside


ive recently just converted the original clip to every codec i could find... the best is Avid Packed Codec, as there is no difference in quality... the downside? 15 seconds in 1.8Gb...

next in line is Jpeg 2000 and Photo-Jpeg, which through my eyes is better than DNxhd
 
Well sure, an lossless codec is ALWAYS going to do better in terms of visual quality. Take Huffyuv, or any number of them. The problem (at least for me in Vegas) is that they aren't available in the 64 bit version, and on PCs, they typically can't offer 10-bit space.

Jpeg2000 is wavelet and I've played with it, but it's automatic in terms of bit rate. So if I am trying to lock to a bit rate that just won't do. PhotoJpeg and MotionJpeg are also reasonable, and I've used those to transfer files to Mac users in the past. Both can be lossless, but they are both *slow* and the files are quite large.

I've also used PNG to move stuff back and forth with Macs, and PNG is beautiful, but also slow and creates large files. There's ton's of codecs out there to do this work with, but for ease of rendering, control of bit rates, availability, and price, I still haven't found any combo better than DNxHD.
 
DVCPROHD converter is indeed lossy and that is why i don't use it anymore.

now i just use sony vegas 8 because it has full support for AVCHD. it edits the RAW AVCHD files like butter. no need to transcode first.

when shooting in 1280x720, the DVCPROHD will transcode it into 960x720. you will lose ALOT of your horizontal resolution lines.

i would rather edit in avid but until they release full support for AVCHD, i will edit in vegas so i don't have to convert by using the DVCPROHD transcoder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top