Batteries? 8-bit/10-bit?

agcohn said:
Yes, with the Ki Pro Mini you would be recording 170mbps (@23.98fps), while with the transcoding method you would be recording at most 24mbps to AVCHD and then stretching it out to 170mbps ProRes.
Click to expand...

I understand that, but mbps aside, would there be a noticeable difference in the picture? It's not always about mbps. I'm trying to determine if it's going to be worth the extra $2000.
 
Mike@AF said:
I understand that, but mbps aside, would there be a noticeable difference in the picture? It's not always about mbps. I'm trying to determine if it's going to be worth the extra $2000.
Click to expand...
Nobody can say whether the difference is worth $2,000 without testing it, but there will be a difference. You cannot gain 4:2:2 color by transcoding from AVCHD to ProRes.
 
Mike@AF said:
I understand that, but mbps aside, would there be a noticeable difference in the picture? It's not always about mbps. I'm trying to determine if it's going to be worth the extra $2000.
Click to expand...
That's the $2000 question. As agcohn said, we have to wait and see test results with the final camera to determine how much better the 4:2:2 Ki Pro Mini (or Atomos Ninja) footage looks over the 4:2:0 AVCHD footage. I'm sure there will be a difference, but not necessarily $2000 worth of a difference. We'll see.
 
You will gain the most advantage with recording native 4:2:2 when it comes to post if you what to do extensive color grading or effects. I do not believe most people will see the difference between a properly lit and shoot sean recored on AvcCam and any broadcast 4:2:2 format all other things being equal (lens, camera ect )
 
Last edited:
Don't forget that editing with proRes is far more efficient than AVC. AVCHD is very CPU intensive.
 
Yak said:
You will gain the most advantage with recording native 4:2:2 when it comes to post if you what to do extensive color grading or effects. I do not believe most people will see the difference between a properly lit and shoot sean recored on AvcCam and any broadcast 4:2:2 format all other things being equal (lens, camera ect )
Click to expand...

Does transcoding the AVCHD footage to ProRes HQ (or even ProRes 4444) really not give any improvements to the bit-depth or color space? I know it wouldn't be as good as original ProRes HQ, but wouldn't there be some improvement for grading and VFX?
 
Mike@AF said:
Does transcoding the AVCHD footage to ProRes HQ (or even ProRes 4444) really not give any improvements to the bit-depth or color space? I know it wouldn't be as good as original ProRes HQ, but wouldn't there be some improvement for grading and VFX?
Click to expand...
Transcoding to ProRes will not improve the image but more important is that working in a 4:2:2 ProRes time line will not make it worse where a 4:2:0 time line could. You can not add color space that was not originally recorded but editing in a limited color space like 4:2:0 can some times create problems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top