What is better (image quality)?
- Thread starter someday
- Start date
CaptainMench
Carbonite Member
Depends on where you want to rest your head... on ingest or output.
Plus, isn't it easier to not have to edit longGOP?
CaptM
Plus, isn't it easier to not have to edit longGOP?
CaptM
ChuckS
Veteran
A couple of things to think about.
The BlackMagic IntensityPro card ($295) can capture/convert HDV to DVCProHD or ProRes in real time.
Converting on ingest requires considerably more disk space but provides a frame based project, you work in a 4:2:2 color space for better quality if you do any image processing [effects or color correcting] and there's no conforming.
If your editing native HDV I'm not sure there's any benefit to rendering the final in ProRes.
The BlackMagic IntensityPro card ($295) can capture/convert HDV to DVCProHD or ProRes in real time.
Converting on ingest requires considerably more disk space but provides a frame based project, you work in a 4:2:2 color space for better quality if you do any image processing [effects or color correcting] and there's no conforming.
If your editing native HDV I'm not sure there's any benefit to rendering the final in ProRes.
Thanks!
I read somewhere that throwing HDV footage in a Prores sequence is the best method if you can't ingest uncompressed but have to ingest in HDV.
Do you agree?
adkimery
Veteran
Working in a HDV sequence set to render in ProRes would yield the same results I'd think.
Yes, if you are starting in HDV and ending in HDV there's no quality gain working in anything other than HDV.
-A
I wouldn't be so sure about editing in an HDV native timeline. The question is if the codec is strong enough for various generations of renders. If you ad CC and other effects that need rendering, you're having multiple generations working on the HDV footage. If it was recompressed to Prores, the generational loss would be over the prores codec.
I'm telling this because for SD work in a media 100 environment the captured DV footage would be worked on the media 100 mpeg2 format- the picture looked way better than in the FCP native DV edit.
Shane, maybe you can jump in with some insight in this?
I'm telling this because for SD work in a media 100 environment the captured DV footage would be worked on the media 100 mpeg2 format- the picture looked way better than in the FCP native DV edit.
Shane, maybe you can jump in with some insight in this?
adkimery
Veteran
But if you edit in an HDV sequence, set to render in ProRes, then all of your rendering is done using the ProRes codec. I haven't compared the two work flows, but it seems like the end result would be the same. All of your renders would take place in the "ProRes space" instead of "HDV space." FCP only lets you change your render settings from native codec to "ProRes" if you are working w/HDV or XDCAM HD so I guess they know that working w/a long GOP codec can be a pain at times and are trying to help a brother out, if you will.
-A
Question: I'll be working with FCP 2 and also capturing alot of footage very soon (mixed 24f from XHA1 and HV20). Would the BEST results be from capturing through a Blackmagic card converting to DVCProHD or ProRes?
But if you edit in an HDV sequence, set to render in ProRes, then all of your rendering is done using the ProRes codec. I haven't compared the two work flows, but it seems like the end result would be the same. All of your renders would take place in the "ProRes space" instead of "HDV space." FCP only lets you change your render settings from native codec to "ProRes" if you are working w/HDV or XDCAM HD so I guess they know that working w/a long GOP codec can be a pain at times and are trying to help a brother out, if you will.
-A
Exactly- I believe rendering and editing in Prores should be the best option with hdv footage. Then again, I'm not the most knowledgeable fellow in FCP over here, so take this with a grain of salt...