8 or 10 bit

astroanalyst

astroanalyst

Well-known member
Is adobe premiere pro - 8 or 10 bit resolution?... and what is the dvx? 8 or 10?
Is the total workflow right thru Adobe Encore all 10 bit?..

thanks
-astro
 
Is any part of this process 10 bit?
After Effects... to Premiere... to Encore... or is everything 8 bit?..
 
depends on your codec - if I export 32 bit TGA's, they are 32 bit. DV on Premiere runs in a YUV color space - which is faster for video than RGB. In terms of bits for DV, 8bit. Premiere supports up to 32 bit. But 10 bit is only used for uncompressed HD and yes Premiere supports that though hardware helps a lot to play it back in realtime. Compressed HD like DVCproHD should play fine in Premiere but I dont know if it will allow 10 bit. Look at Matrox's Axio coming out soon.
 
In terms of color space, bit rate etc... what is the quality difference between what I see on a commercially released DVD compared to what I can generate on my desktop with after effects, edit in premiere and then output to encore?

I tend to notice that my stuff looks a little cheezy (and i'm not referring to my artwork). The graphics don't have the same quality as the commercial stuff. It doesn't look as rich and robust.

Does any of this have to do with inferior equipment? Are the big boys working at a higher bit rate, better color space...etc?
 
DVD is only a transmission grade medium. In terms of quality, that's difficult to say.
MiniDV files are a whole lot bigger, though.

Re: Graphics/Artwork. Probably this has more to do with your monitoring scenario, calibration, and
ultimately (respectfully) art design and just finding colors and saturation that works well in M2V.

There's probably a case to be made that movies are cut at high bit rates with higher sample rates
and more color space, etc. etc. but I think you could get similar results with your graphics...
 
I come out of the audio recording world. Though you can pass an audio signal through a Mackie or Tascam and get 'similar results' to passing the signal through a Neve or SSL console it's really a world of difference. One sounds pro one doesn't.

Do you think this is the same comparison between low and high bit rate video equipment?
 
Film/Video--as in Audio--ultimately there is never a single element that creates the look/sound
of a final product. It is always combinations of components. So, while Brent Avirell preamps
with a PM-5D (personal favourite) may be an excellent system, it will lack sorely if you're using
AT's instead of DPA's and or Behringer monitors instead of Meyer. Know what I'm saying?

I guess what I'm saying is of course there is a difference between low-end gear and high-end gear,
but I think the line is more complex than a bitrate issue. And, quite frankly, I am woefully
unprepared to answer the question of what a big studio would or wouldn't use to get their
elusive look--but, I can't imagine that for the purposes of administering some tweaks in
Photoshop, they've got anything that isn't available on the desktop. Encoding could be an
entirely different issue and my exposure to high-end DVD authoring has been zero. Again,
it's hard to imagine the "extra 10%" making that big of a difference in this case from, "I
can't use any of this" to "okay, this is pretty good" Does this make sense?

Maybe I'm too naive when I think of graphics and that what is done in "big studios" could
ought be done just as well on a desktop without compromise. Related to high-end aquisition,
I would totally agree that there are tools unavailable to the average guy and I can say that
because I have more familiarity with high-end aqusition as opposed to post or graphics. But,
again it isn't one piece of gear that works the magic, ya know?

The short answer I guess is that there is a huge level of flexibility in terms of what you can do
in post to a high bit rate medium than the very limited choices you have with a low bit rate medium.

Hope this helps.
 
Related to DVD's.. are you trying to figure out what they started with or trying to match the
quality of the final encoding? I'm unclear on this.
 
It should go without saying movies are aquired on negative film (think analog tape) that has an
entirely different aesthetic than videotape and electronic capture.. More than likely, if those images
are edited digitally, they would be scanned most likely at a 2K resolution as uncompressed images
with infinitesimally more color and resolution than nearly any video camera could offer. The scanner
used most often is the Phillips Spirit alongside a DaVinci color corrector.

Eventually, this uncompressed information is printed back to a print stock and sent to theatres..
So, there is a lot more raw information to work with: 10Bit log, 4:4:4, uncompressed 2K scans.

This is not to say every film is processed this way (in fact, it's really a pretty new approach) but
even with the "old" methods of negative aquisition and prints without a Digital Intermediate, the
results have always been more "analog" and dare I say "better" quality than a video capture.

I don't know if this is helping or if this is repetitive. But, yes, there's a difference from the Mackie
video equivalent to Rupert Neve's designs in the video world, too.

I'm just not the best person to be offering information on the subject, really.
 
I think a parallel could be drawn between editing DV on a high-end system to
sending an MP3 through a Neve console. The damage has already been done.
 
I've owned Neve's and SSL consoles and just by passing a 'damaged' signal through these consoles it changed the overall sound because the mix buss was that much better and the signal was being processed at a higher voltage rate (+4)...

I assume there truly is a correlation to the video world and I would like to know where the weak link is in the chain. If it is true that Premiere can handle multiple bit rates than why the need for cards made by Bluefish http://www.bluefish444.com

I know the difference that pro equipment can make (talent aside)...
I just want to be sure that if I am making a professional looking product it didn't get reduced in some way by the equipment.

thanks for the help
-Astro
 
The quality is better because they do a much better master than DV - you are probably going from DV to DVD. If you were to load up a uncompressed timeline and run that off to DVD, it looks just as good as Pro DVD's.

For Pro HLYWD movies, they go HD or Betacam masters and convert that to DVD - more color space, less compression. Try saving a jpg image multiple times with compression - pretty soon it looks bad. Same thing with video- DV is 5:1, DVD is 10:1 = possible 50:1 compression issues but you actually get around 8:1 compression but, if you start with 1~2:1 compression and go to 10:1, you will get a cleaner image.

With the new HVX200, you should be able to get a dvd just as clean as a pro setup. Often, I notice that Titles I create in PPro 1.5.1 are very clean compared to video (that has already undergone the 5:1 DV compression). Now, on a 20" TV, I dont notice a difference between Pro DVD's and My DVD's. But on my 92" Projector, yep, I can see the quality loss.
 
Wow... 92" projector! Nice

and Yes I am going from DV to DVD...
another question arises... if I am working in After Effects and make a composite then bring that composite .mov file into PPro... then make a .avi from the timeline
..... then bring it into Encore...
Have I crushed the thing 3 times?..
Should I save my AE files to something other than .mov or .avi to preserve them better?...
Should I save my PPro files to somethng other as well...
 
if shifting stuff around maybe use a 422 uncompressed avi, they're roughly nine times the size of dv files but shouldn't suffer from generational loss due to compression artifacts. some people also use a wavelet-based intermediate codec like the cineform codec...
 
Digital Anarchy MicroCosm

Digital Anarchy MicroCosm

Has anyone tried the MicroCosm Codec from Digital Anarchy?

Direct Quote from their site:

"
Microcosm is the world's first lossless 64-bit RGBA QuickTime file format. Utilizing Theory LLC's revolutionary technology, Microcosm crushes 64-bit or 32-bit files into a fraction of their uncompressed size without losing any image quality.

Stu Maschwitz, co-founder and CTO of The Orphanage, says, "The Orphanage is committed to delivering the highest quality work for our clients. To this end we keep our work uncompressed 32- or 64-bit RGBA throughout the entire production process. Microcosm has proven to be the most effective and efficient 64-bit file format available."

"

Cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top