Best Codec to use for Lossless?

Zacatac

Zacatac

Well-known member
Hey guys,

So, I have the HMC150, have the shot .mts files, and I have Voltaic to convert to a format easier to use (I'm on the last generation MacbookPro) I've already converted it once to Photo-Jpeg medium quality to see, and its looking good, but it does add a lot of pixelation, and the file size is somewhat large.... is their any other codec that gives the same, if not smaller file size, but less pixelation? or am i asking for something to much?


Thanks,
Zac
 
DVCProHD is HUGELY lossy. Why would you recommend that? It takes his 1920x1080 file and converts it to 1280x1080 right off the bat. Not to mention what it does inside each frame.

If you really want to squeeze the files down, you could use wavelet compression like Jpeg2000. If you want to stick to a full raster, small file size with good looks, try the Avid DNxHD codec, or Cineform. Both can be had in 8 to 10-bit. with the Cineform going all the way through RAW 4:4:4.

If you truly want lossless there are several included with the machines depending on your container. Both AVI and MOV containers have lossless options or uncompressed options but the file sizes are HUGE.

There is always high bitrate mpeg4 as well. At 40-50Mbps, it stands up VERY nicely and that's why we see so much of it on BluRay. I've also been incredibly impressed with the Windows Media Encoder when you give it that much bandwidth, and it's quite popular on some reference grade BluRay's also.

The problem you have is that the better a job the codecs do squeezing down to get smaller file sizes, the harder your computer has to work to unsqueeze them to play them back. So while Mpeg2 is reasonably squeezed, most modern computers can play them back without too much trouble. Compare that to Mpeg4/AVCHD and though it makes very clean and small files, it takes a TON of horsepower to get it to play back cleanly in edit.

I prefer to use DHxHD and Cineform, because they squeeze fairly decently, but the quality is excellent, and so is the playback.
 
The mainconcept DVCProHD converter left my 1920x1080 files as 1920x1080. Yes, the files are bigger.

I know it's not really an option for Mac folk.

Edit: Oops, they are 960x720.
 
Last edited:
DVCProHD isn't hugely lossless and for us there is a trade off with editing ease.

Also, because we intercut with a 170, we stay with DVCProHD.

However, AVCHD starts off heavily compressed. You really improve nothing at all by going to a lossless codec in my view
 
If DVCProHD doesn't truncate the footage to 1280x1080 and leaves it at the standard resolution, then I see the value. It's a good 100Mbps codec. And if you are bringing in other DVCProHD sources, I can see where this would make sense.

But on it's own, I would not use that codec. There are better editing codecs out there. 100Mbps at full res is a pretty heavy burden for online editing. Especially on an older, 1 hard drive latptop.
 
PerroneFord is right, DVCProHD is 1280x1080. If you're on a Mac with FCS I'd recommend ProRes 422, it performs very well.

You also need to realize that true lossless doesn't make sense with HD video. ProRes 422 is what Apple calls "visually losless" but it is in fact a lossy intraframe codec just as DVCProHD. You will just have a hard time in recognizing compression artifacts with ProRes.
 
While ProRes is awesome for the Mac, I am not recommending it anymore simply because it is Mac ONLY. In this world of collaboration, having ANY codec that cannot pass platform to platform is a non-starter. Or at least it should be.

Look a these forums for a week, and look at all the problems people have trying to get their video from one place to another. ProRes, Cineform, AIC, etc. I'm done with all of it. Jpeg2000, DNxHD, AJA/Blackmagic all eliminate these problems and can drop into FCP, Vegas, Avid, and Edius with no fuss. Also works 32 or 64 bit OS's and some are 10bit so they hold up for color and other work.
 
I have been running the demo of Neo Scene by Cineform. The AVIs created from the AVCHD files are identical to my eyes. HOWEVER, the sizes do increase big time, 100mb AVC became 500 GB AVI :(

But much easier for NLE and slower machines to handle. Plus the Cineofrm AVI is 4.2.2 and 10 bit. Mac version arriving soon

http://cineform.com/products/NeoScene.htm

Havent decided if I will get it yet- vegas can handle AVCHD pretty well but with a Cineform AVI I can use PPro cs3
 
PerroneFord said:
While ProRes is awesome for the Mac, I am not recommending it anymore simply because it is Mac ONLY. In this world of collaboration, having ANY codec that cannot pass platform to platform is a non-starter. Or at least it should be.
Click to expand...

ProRes is available on Windows also. Apple released it a few months ago. ProRes is a really good codec and it has got quite some advantages if you're messing with it in FCP. As long as you don't excessively exchange the transcoded footage with the windows world, I don't see any reason to not use ProRes.
 
Last edited:
pailes said:
ProRes is available on Windows also. Apple released it a few months ago. ProRes is a really good codec and it has got quite some advantages if you're messing with it in FCP. As long as you don't excessively exchange the transcoded footage with the windows world, I don't see any reason to not use ProRes.
Click to expand...

No, ProRes is NOT available for Windows. ProRes is able to be decoded in Quicktime player. Which is great if I want to WATCH it. I still can't edit it, or encode to it so that I could give a corresponding file back to an Apple user.

The DNxHD codec is every bit as good as ProRes and you can view and edit with it on both platforms for free.
 
Edweirdo said:
I have been running the demo of Neo Scene by Cineform. The AVIs created from the AVCHD files are identical to my eyes. HOWEVER, the sizes do increase big time, 100mb AVC became 500 GB AVI :(

But much easier for NLE and slower machines to handle. Plus the Cineofrm AVI is 4.2.2 and 10 bit. Mac version arriving soon

http://cineform.com/products/NeoScene.htm

Havent decided if I will get it yet- vegas can handle AVCHD pretty well but with a Cineform AVI I can use PPro cs3
Click to expand...

Cineform out of Vegas is not 10-bit. You can't do 10bit in AVI from Vegas which is why I switched to quicktime based files.

I am guessing your 100MB to 500 *GB* is a typo. I am also going to assume you are not familiar with uncompressed video editing. I'f you are new to this, or only familiar with DV then the file sizes will seem large. But for those of us who had to push around uncompressed SD files because we were doing color or other work, these HD sizes are AMAZING. Uncompressed 8-bit SD is 176Mbps. I am putting archival quality 1080/24p into the less space right now.
 
PerroneFord said:
No, ProRes is NOT available for Windows. ProRes is able to be decoded in Quicktime player. Which is great if I want to WATCH it. I still can't edit it, or encode to it so that I could give a corresponding file back to an Apple user.
Click to expand...

Ok, I didn't know that, but then again, I don't exchange footage with the windows world and if I needed to I can still transcode the original footage into some different codec if necessary.

The DNxHD codec is every bit as good as ProRes and you can view and edit with it on both platforms for free.
Click to expand...
There are a lot of benefits when using ProRes 422 in Final Cut Pro, especially performance-wise. You need to prove that DNxHD can keep up with all those advantages before stating something like that ;)
Do you have detailed information on how fast decoding/encoding of DNxHD is in comparison to ProRes 422?
 
pailes said:
There are a lot of benefits when using ProRes 422 in Final Cut Pro, especially performance-wise. You need to prove that DNxHD can keep up with all those advantages before stating something like that ;)
Do you have detailed information on how fast decoding/encoding of DNxHD is in comparison to ProRes 422?
Click to expand...

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. Since Avid needs to support both Windows and Mac, they needed something that could walk back and forth cleanly between the two platforms. So they essentially built a ProRes clone, and made it open standard (you can download the source code), and got it into SMPTE standard unlike ProRes.

The fact that I can watch 1080p 175 mbps encoded DNxHD on laptop in real time, tells me that it's going to be just fine in a MBP or similar.

[edit]

It's probably not correct to say that Avid built the codec to compete with ProRes. They had a need for a similar codec, that was platform independent. So they built one. It works very well. Looking at the client list for who is cutting with it in HD instead of SD, I'm impressed.
 
Last edited:
avid also has a multitude of variations with the codec too for offline editing. pro res is 1 data rate, and 1 way of compression so you get the same file sizes across the board. DNxHD you with the different variations you can throttle ur bitrate down even more for quicker editing before you online, and it still looks pretty good even at the offline side of things.


i also don't think pro res will work on a mac without a certain version of FCP installed on it. i couldn't find any pro res quicktime codecs online at all, and i took a file i had as pro res to someone's mac for preview where they didn't have FCP installed and it didn't work. newest qt version and everything.
 
@PerroneFord:

Lots of interesting information. I will definitely look into the DNxHD codec and run a few tests on my own. If it can keep up with ProRes 422 on my Macs this might be worth a switch.
 
pailes said:
@PerroneFord:

Lots of interesting information. I will definitely look into the DNxHD codec and run a few tests on my own. If it can keep up with ProRes 422 on my Macs this might be worth a switch.
Click to expand...


I've posted a lot about this codec in recent days (weeks) and I probably sound like an Avid shill. But I don't even own Avid, I cut on Vegas.

I have a need to move files back and forth with PC and Mac users, and also with local broadcasters as they move from DVCam/DVCPro to HD flavors. DNxHD holds up everywhere and everyone can read it. I can even put copies of the Mac and PC codec on the deliverables to ensure the person getting it can read it, edit it, and render it back out if necessary. I WISH Apple had done something similar with ProRes (it's not THAT hard) but they chose to remain closed.

I was kinda on the fence about whether this codec would hold up until I really started looking into who was working with it and deeming it good enough. Check some of this:

Iron Man
http://digitalcontentproducer.com/mil/features/video_dnxhd_marvel/index.html

Focus Features
http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/080603/0403128.html

The Mummy
http://digitalcontentproducer.com/mil/features/mummy_reboot/index2.html

NBC
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6583785.html?q=dnxhd

CBS
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6576275.html?q=dnxhd
 
What would one suggest as the best virtually lossless cross platform FREE EDITING CODEC that would available for NLEs on both platforms?
 
So i tried to export AVCHD mts files to AIC full quaility, but im still seeing alot of banding and digital noise...

is this something Im going to live with?

Thanks,
Zac
 
Zacatac said:
So i tried to export AVCHD mts files to AIC full quaility, but im still seeing alot of banding and digital noise...

is this something Im going to live with?

Thanks,
Zac
Click to expand...

If you read this thread carefully you might find other options than AIC :Drogar-Dum(DBG):
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top