Converting to Prores-- Compressor? MPEG streamclip? or other?

Tim Joy

Tim Joy

Veteran
Experimenting with converting a clip to Prores HQ.

All adjustments neutral, highest quality... etc.

Original file: 133MB

Using MPEG streamclip:
Converted size- 342 MB
QT player listed data rate of 118 Mb/s

Using compressor:
File size: 542 MB
QT data rate 180 Mb/s


The streamclip conversion is slightly faster. But the big difference is the gamma. In QT player, using the preference, "Enable FCS color compatibility" they look identical. When I bring them into FCP, the streamclip version has darker mids and brighter highs compared to viewing it in QT player. In other words- more contrast.

Anyone else getting this?

The faster conversion and smaller file size of streamclip is obviously preferable, but if it's at the expense of adding more contrast, it might not be so good.


If the "enable FCS color compatibility" is off, then the compressor version looks very washed out, but the streamclip looks the same. ???
 
Just to add- If I drag in the original h264 file from the camera it looks identical to the prores version. SO, my jump to conclusion would be that streamclip throws out info and is not accurate to the original file, hence the lower data rate and file size.

Although, to the untrained eye, the streamclip ver probably looks better because it has more contrast. If you have any over exposed areas it might cause more highlights to go over.

I think I'll be using Compressor. It's only a tiny bit slower anyway.
 
The gamma change happens in mpeg streamclip, compressor, and quicktime export in my experience.

I have found that media manager (within FCP) and Neoscene are the only ways to maintain accurate gamma. My testing has not been as extensive with the 7d as the 5d, but it appears to work the same with both.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top