.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

High Definition Video for Independent Filmmakers
A How To Guide for Digital Filmmakers
Welcome all! This is my blog to share my latest research,
thoughts, etc. on utilizing HD for independent filmmaking.

YES, I am available for consulting
Contact me at mike@hdforindies.com

All content copyright 2004-2007 Mike Curtis.

Wednesday, May 30, 2007

First stab at comparing DNxHD and ProRes 

Studio Daily Blog � The great codec bake-off

I wouldn't call it that (the great codec bake-off), since it is just a first step, and I have a lot of technical quibbles (see my comment, and Graeme's next in the article) - so don't let the headline throw you - I think it is of interest to compare the two, but the results as shown are not what I would consider final nor unequivocal.

I'd like to see the One River Codec test image used to compare them, use some real footage (DCI StEM, anybody?), test/experiment with the 4:4:4 chroma filtering option, etc.

-mike

UPDATE - he redid some tests, and the results make ProRes look better, but it isn't clear if his currently posted images are the new-and-improved, or the old-n-busted. I'm still going to fool with it on my own when I get a chance.

Just got off the phone with a client asking about whether ProRes obviates the need for a RAID for HD work...good question, I don't have a definitive answer yet. Let's presume it falls between the quality of DVCPRO HD and uncompressed (a pretty reasonable presumption) - therefore for SOME amount of the market it will be good enough for their needs - the real question is how much of that market - and I don't know the answer to that yet, I need to do my own testing now that I'm back in town.

At this point, while he's said he retested, I'm not sure whether the posted files are the original testing methodology or the second improved-but-still-potentially-have-issues testing methodogy - so while his intent may have been to have a conversation starter on codec quality, I don't consider his downloadable files & samples worth seriously evaluating in depth until his testing methodology is clearly documented, updated results posted, etc.

Otherwise, his post is merely a conversation starter as he states but his headline implies otherwise, and his presented data lacks relevance to the core question at hand. To me, the core issue is how good are these codecs in their "native" environments first (Final Cut for ProRes, Avid for DNxHD), and a secondary but still interesting question is how good are these codecs for intermediate files rendered out of After Effects. Methodology is crucial in these regards.

-mike

Labels: , , ,

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Listed on BlogShares