Best intermediate codec for Premiere

[BATman]

Hi guys,

After Final Cut X, I am switching over to Premiere and I was wondering what's the ProRes equivalent intermediate codec to start using with Premiere. I do not want to use ProRes anymore, what's the intermediate code most people use with Premiere?

I found this, but is only one opinion:

http://forums.adobe.com/message/3652557?tstart=0


Very much appreciate the answer.

Thanks very much!!

 

[Mike Harvey]

I don't think there is one codec that people use the most. One of Premiere's selling points is that unless you plan on doing heavy color correction or grading, you can pretty much edit anything natively.

However, if you must use an intermediate, Premiere will accept ProRes (free), Avid's DNxHD (free),and Cineform ($$$). Premiere also allows you to export and edit in AVC-Intra, which is nice since it comes with Premiere and you don't have to rely on a 3rd Party.

 

[Phil1076]

I used to transcode to AVC-Intra but stopped because of the completely random file names it generates. If you transcode your AVCHD to Intra, then that Intra now becomes your original source footage. If you lose that Intra and transcode from your AVCHD sources again, you'll have completely different file names and your project will be useless. I hope that makes sense.

What I do now is I transcode my AVCHD to DNxHD and then backup the AVCHD source. If something happens and I lose the DNxHD footage, I can always re-transcode from the original AVCHD source. Backing up the original AVCHD source keeps my backups as small as possible.

 

[Elton]

I'm a big CineForm fan. I jumped from FCP and even the Mac and am quite happy with CS 5.5 and CF. It's much less expensive than it used to be and the performance is noticeably better with MPE on my Toshiba i7 nvidia laptop (3D too! Thanks for keepin up Apple) , and that's comparing FCP/ProRes on a 8 core Mac Pro.Its just smokin' fast for a laptop that can burn Blu-ray's too. When I transcode in Neo it uses all 4 cores and 4 virtual hyper threading cores from the i7 and nearly pegs the CPU at 100% to yield highest quality conversions at a rate much faster than realtime. (usually 2x speed with just an internal laptop drive)I don't know how speedy DNXHD is as far as transcoding goes, but CineForm has been absolutely superb in both the quality and speed dept's. Well worth the investment IMHO.I know that I can edit native files but it still sucks. I value performance and render quality, so I am fine with the sacrifice of a little time transcoding.

 

[Kevin Monahan]

Most long-time Premiere Pro users go with Cineform.

 

[Gabrobot]

One of Premiere's selling points is that unless you plan on doing heavy color correction or grading, you can pretty much edit anything natively.

Typically the only reason to transcode in these cases would be to something uncompressed like DPX to go to a high-end grading system. If the color work is being done in Adobe (either Premiere or After Effects) then you'll want to work directly off the original H264 files.

 

[BATman]

I don't think there is one codec that people use the most. One of Premiere's selling points is that unless you plan on doing heavy color correction or grading, you can pretty much edit anything natively.

However, if you must use an intermediate, Premiere will accept ProRes (free), Avid's DNxHD (free),and Cineform ($$$). Premiere also allows you to export and edit in AVC-Intra, which is nice since it comes with Premiere and you don't have to rely on a 3rd Party.

Hey Mike, Thanks for the advice. Is AVC-Intra Adobe's ProRes version?

Thanks again!!

I used to transcode to AVC-Intra but stopped because of the completely random file names it generates. If you transcode your AVCHD to Intra, then that Intra now becomes your original source footage. If you lose that Intra and transcode from your AVCHD sources again, you'll have completely different file names and your project will be useless. I hope that makes sense.

What I do now is I transcode my AVCHD to DNxHD and then backup the AVCHD source. If something happens and I lose the DNxHD footage, I can always re-transcode from the original AVCHD source. Backing up the original AVCHD source keeps my backups as small as possible.

Hi Phil1076... Thanks much for sharing what you do. What do you use to color correct your DNxHD files? Is that your only purpose to transcode?

I'm a big CineForm fan. I jumped from FCP and even the Mac and am quite happy with CS 5.5 and CF. It's much less expensive than it used to be and the performance is noticeably better with MPE on my Toshiba i7 nvidia laptop (3D too! Thanks for keepin up Apple) , and that's comparing FCP/ProRes on a 8 core Mac Pro.Its just smokin' fast for a laptop that can burn Blu-ray's too. When I transcode in Neo it uses all 4 cores and 4 virtual hyper threading cores from the i7 and nearly pegs the CPU at 100% to yield highest quality conversions at a rate much faster than realtime. (usually 2x speed with just an internal laptop drive)I don't know how speedy DNXHD is as far as transcoding goes, but CineForm has been absolutely superb in both the quality and speed dept's. Well worth the investment IMHO.I know that I can edit native files but it still sucks. I value performance and render quality, so I am fine with the sacrifice of a little time transcoding.

Hey Elton, Read my longer reply bellow. Thanks much for your input!!

Most long-time Premiere Pro users go with Cineform.

Thanks Kevin. I did not know that, so thanks for explaining me.

Typically the only reason to transcode in these cases would be to something uncompressed like DPX to go to a high-end grading system. If the color work is being done in Adobe (either Premiere or After Effects) then you'll want to work directly off the original H264 files.

Hi Gabrobot,

So, there is no significant improvement from color correcting on H264 files then?

Thanks very much!!

-----

Good evening guys,


I shot my short movie on a Canon 7D using the Technicolor Cinestyle picture profile. I need to apply the S-curve that comes with it to see how it comes out to determine if I need to add more CC to the footage. I 'might' use Magic Bullet Looks (which I do not have) as well. I went to Cineform's website and found neoscene ($129) and neo ($299). I read the product grid that compares all of their products. I understand pretty much all of the diffrences, however; haven't had worked with it before; I am unsure which one I would need. My intent is to send my short film to the best festival/s I can.
Reading also about DNxHD, 2 specific questions to you guys came in:


1) On my specific situation, which version of cineform would you guys recommend (neoscene or neo)? and Why?


2) What are the advantages of Cineform over DNxHX?

Look forward to learn more form your expertise.

THANKS VERY MUCH!!

BATman

 

[Mike Harvey]

Hey Mike, Thanks for the advice. Is AVC-Intra Adobe's ProRes version?

Thanks again!!

No, AVC-Intra is Panasonic's effective replacement for DVCProHD. Basically all the new P2 cameras coming out, and many that have already come out, are now including this codec. Basically, all their pro cameras are either going to be AVCHD for the lower end and AVC-Intra for the higher end.

Also, regarding Cineform vs DNxHD... the Cineform codec is going to be the same for Neoscene and Neo. THe difference is with Neoscene you just get the codec. Neo ships with a few other gooies like their color correction software. The neat thing about Neo is that if you use their color correction/grading software in Premiere, you never have to actually render out a new file. It tags any coloring you did to the footage, and imports that into Premiere. There is a more technical explanation of it on their website. Also, if you want to use the files on multiple computers, you'll need to have buy a couple different copies. DNxHD doesn't come with those goodies... but it's a free download from Avid's website.

Personally, if I know I'm going to do any sort of color grading, I'll use Cineform.

 

[Elton]

The Active Metadata thing in Neo is pretty cool, but not an absolute necessity. Codec quality and performance is, so if money's extra tight, I think you're fine with neoscene.

Edit: One caveat is that if you're sticking with the Mac OS, I'm not sure if CineForm performs completely on par with the Windows version. I know my experiences with CF and FCP weren't satisfactory, and I haven't tried it on the Mac version of CS 5.5 as I completely switched OS's.

YMMV.

 

[Erik Naso]

I don't think there is one codec that people use the most. One of Premiere's selling points is that unless you plan on doing heavy color correction or grading, you can pretty much edit anything natively.

However, if you must use an intermediate, Premiere will accept ProRes (free), Avid's DNxHD (free),and Cineform ($$$). Premiere also allows you to export and edit in AVC-Intra, which is nice since it comes with Premiere and you don't have to rely on a 3rd Party.

ProRes isn't free but if you have FCP installed then you have it to transcode to. I was reading a blog post that explained the new Compressor 4 has ProRes codecs with it so for $50 you can get Compressor and ProRes.

 

[BATman]

No, AVC-Intra is Panasonic's effective replacement for DVCProHD. Basically all the new P2 cameras coming out, and many that have already come out, are now including this codec. Basically, all their pro cameras are either going to be AVCHD for the lower end and AVC-Intra for the higher end.

Also, regarding Cineform vs DNxHD... the Cineform codec is going to be the same for Neoscene and Neo. THe difference is with Neoscene you just get the codec. Neo ships with a few other gooies like their color correction software. The neat thing about Neo is that if you use their color correction/grading software in Premiere, you never have to actually render out a new file. It tags any coloring you did to the footage, and imports that into Premiere. There is a more technical explanation of it on their website. Also, if you want to use the files on multiple computers, you'll need to have buy a couple different copies. DNxHD doesn't come with those goodies... but it's a free download from Avid's website.

Personally, if I know I'm going to do any sort of color grading, I'll use Cineform.

Hey Mike,

Yes, I am leaning towards Neo. I saw a tutorial on First Light and that'll do what I am looking on doing. I have one scene that is going black and white and I can even use one of the presets. The metadata makes sense, it is kinda Lightroom on photography. And it seems like I can lead the S-curve from Technicolor's cinestyle profile right? My other question is, do you know if I upgrade from CS4 to CS5; if I can keep Neo or will I need to re buy it again?

Thanks very much for your input Mike!!

The Active Metadata thing in Neo is pretty cool, but not an absolute necessity. Codec quality and performance is, so if money's extra tight, I think you're fine with neoscene.

Edit: One caveat is that if you're sticking with the Mac OS, I'm not sure if CineForm performs completely on par with the Windows version. I know my experiences with CF and FCP weren't satisfactory, and I haven't tried it on the Mac version of CS 5.5 as I completely switched OS's.

YMMV.

Thanks Elton,

Yes, it seems super cool. I like that you do not need to re render. That saves plenty of time. I believe I am going to end up getting Neo. First light is pretty cool I think. That sold it to me too.

Thanks SO much guys!!