Jump to content


Photo

Apple Pro Res 422


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1 Marie Davignon

Marie Davignon

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Posted 17 December 2008 - 10:26 AM

Hi,

I shot a film in super16mm and we're finishing it in HD.
We opted for the Apple Pro Res 422 codec.
Does anyone have any info that I should know about this codec? Is it looking far more different than QuickTime Uncompress HD 10 bit (which is to heavy to edit on a normal computer)?

Thanks for your advices and concerns!

Edited by Marie Davignon, 17 December 2008 - 10:27 AM.

  • 0

#2 Dan Goulder

Dan Goulder
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1259 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 17 December 2008 - 11:02 AM

Hi,

I shot a film in super16mm and we're finishing it in HD.
We opted for the Apple Pro Res 422 codec.
Does anyone have any info that I should know about this codec? Is it looking far more different than QuickTime Uncompress HD 10 bit (which is to heavy to edit on a normal computer)?

Thanks for your advices and concerns!

Your choices may be determined by the final target format. If you are planning a film out, you'll want to transfer to uncompressed HD. Otherwise, the ProRes format may be well suited as an online format. If your budget allows for it, your best option would be to transfer your masters to uncompressed HD, then rendering to ProRes proxy files for editing.
  • 0

#3 David Ghast

David Ghast
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 33 posts
  • Director

Posted 23 March 2009 - 02:30 AM

Dont do it. Thats all i have to say. You've been warned.
  • 0

#4 Tom Hepburn

Tom Hepburn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 341 posts
  • Other
  • Chicago-land

Posted 23 March 2009 - 09:04 AM

Dont do it. Thats all i have to say. You've been warned.


Not a lot of detail as to why David. Any chance you could expound a bit?

Thanks,
Tom

Edited by Tom Hepburn, 23 March 2009 - 09:04 AM.

  • 0

#5 timHealy

timHealy
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1252 posts
  • Other
  • New York

Posted 23 March 2009 - 10:06 PM

Aren't there two versions of ProRes?

ProRes 422 and ProRes 422 HQ?

Best

Tim
  • 0

#6 Rick Martinez

Rick Martinez
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 14 posts
  • Producer

Posted 24 March 2009 - 09:14 AM

I would go uncompressed.

ProRess 422 go up to 145Mbps and HQ reach 220Mbps according to Apple.
the format can work 4:2:2 / 10-bit.
But remember that introduces some compression algorithm that must sacrifice some info to reduce file size.

Regards,
  • 0

#7 Ross Neugeboren

Ross Neugeboren
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 110 posts
  • Electrician
  • Greater NYC

Posted 24 March 2009 - 02:57 PM

Hi,

I shot a film in super16mm and we're finishing it in HD.
We opted for the Apple Pro Res 422 codec.
Does anyone have any info that I should know about this codec? Is it looking far more different than QuickTime Uncompress HD 10 bit (which is to heavy to edit on a normal computer)?

Thanks for your advices and concerns!


Since you mentioned computer strain in Uncompressed HD 10 bit, if you don't have a super-powerful computer to work with, you're probably going to want to go with an offline workflow. Probably the best way to go about this is to do your assembly edit off ProRes 422 proxies of your uncompressed footage, creating an EDL. Then go back online (final cut will automatically take you through bringing in your online, uncompressed media) and perform your final edit. This will save you a lot of processing power during the assembly.

There's a chapter about the whole offline/online process in the final cut pro user manual. (Chapter 5, page 57)

Edited by Ross Neugeboren, 24 March 2009 - 03:00 PM.

  • 0

#8 David Rakoczy

David Rakoczy
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1579 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • USA

Posted 25 March 2009 - 08:48 AM

Dont do it. Thats all i have to say. You've been warned.


Please explain. Were you using ProRes HQ?... on what system?.... what happened?
  • 0

#9 Erik Turestedt

Erik Turestedt
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 25 posts
  • Director
  • Sweden

Posted 28 March 2009 - 11:23 AM

Since I wen't with prores 422 there is nothing else for me!

It kicks ass...

Thats all I can say. Never had any problems with it. Picture is awesome.

I'll post from film to prores 422 on some tests soon. The lab (stockholm post production), said that they do this quite often. Of course 2k or uncompressed HD is a bit better... But on the other hand, I can't imagine that something shoot on s16 cut prores 422 then recorded on for example cinevator or more expensive arriprint still wouldn't look great! This process but with HDcamSR looks very good on the big screen, even if many would say the only way is 2k scan.

I'm impressed by prores. But keep in mind that still I haven't recorded or printed back to film for the big screen, so I can't answer how it looks in cinema from prores..

And when it comes to efficency prores is so good codec! Never got any bad renders! I even cut things on my intel macbook white with 1,2gb ram without any lag or slow workflow! Imagine doing that on a pc!

When it comes to the technical details I cant say I know much... Other than that prores is full raster! Meaning that there is no HD 1440x1080 upres. It's full 1920x1080 pixel to pixel as I understood it.

Only bad thing I saw was when I ran 1280x720 with red text from AE. The text looked a little bit like it had deinterlaced artefacts. But then again, red color is always a warningbell, and should used with precation.


I use prores today mainly for shooting commercials, shot HD. And next up is film! I'm looking forward for the tests, shoot either s16 or 35 2perf...
  • 0

#10 David Rakoczy

David Rakoczy
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1579 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • USA

Posted 28 March 2009 - 01:08 PM

Yep.. I just finished rebuilding and upgrading my Edit Suite with the new MacPro and am going tapeless!

35mm & S16mm to HDCam (for master transfer archive) then to a G-Raid in ProResHQ. I'll receive all Film footage on the G-Raid.

Really looking forward to the next Project we do! I am banking this will improve the quality of the Images we deliver...

Unfortunately, some simply leave a negative message and don't back it up with a more detailed (useful) description of any issue(s)... oh well :rolleyes:
  • 0

#11 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3057 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 29 March 2009 - 08:58 AM

35mm & S16mm to HDCam (for master transfer archive) then to a G-Raid in ProResHQ. I'll receive all Film footage on the G-Raid.


You'd be better off TKing to HDCam SR, otherwise your Pro Res 4:2:2 files are coming from a 3:1:1 source.
  • 0

#12 David Rakoczy

David Rakoczy
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1579 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • USA

Posted 29 March 2009 - 09:29 AM

Yes indeed.. I left the SR off...
  • 0

#13 Patrick Neary

Patrick Neary
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 873 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Portland, OR

Posted 29 March 2009 - 09:53 AM

Hi-

I just had a short 35mm project transferred to SR, and the lab gave me both an uncompressed QT along with a proresHQ file. Comparing both side by side, the prores looked to me to be just the slightest bit grainier, and a tiny bit more saturated, but the differences were negligible.

I didn't have to do any greenscreen or major CC with the footage so I don't know how well the two would stack up under those conditions, but I assume the uncompressed would handle it better.

The dire "You've been warned" bit above is complete BS.
  • 0

#14 David Rakoczy

David Rakoczy
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1579 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • USA

Posted 01 April 2009 - 05:56 PM

Stuart,

Just spoke with my (LA) Transfer House and they said that both HDCam and D-5 are 4:2:2... They said HDCam SR is (slightly) better.. ever so slightly.. but you can stay in 4:2:2 with either HDCam or D-5 as well... maybe you were thinking 4:4:4???
  • 0

#15 Patrick Neary

Patrick Neary
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 873 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Portland, OR

Posted 04 April 2009 - 11:23 PM

Hi-

Did Sony change their specs or something? HDcam has always been 3:1:1.
  • 0

#16 David Rakoczy

David Rakoczy
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1579 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • USA

Posted 05 April 2009 - 08:40 AM

Hi-

Did Sony change their specs or something? HDcam has always been 3:1:1.



hmmmm, yes I see that Patrick on wikpedia.. I will call them again.. it is a BIG Transfer House and I was speaking with a guy in Data Management... gets Tape to Hard Drive. Either way I will use the SR Tape but I wonder what they were thinking.....???
  • 0

#17 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7116 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 05 April 2009 - 10:17 AM

HDCam SR can be 4:2:2 or 4:4:4... perhaps they just used HDCam to refer to HDCam SR.
  • 0

#18 David Rakoczy

David Rakoczy
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1579 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • USA

Posted 05 April 2009 - 12:25 PM

Hi Adrian,

We were real specific.. they said HDCam, D-5 and HDCamSR are all 4:2:2.

Gonna call them Monday morning..
  • 0

#19 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7116 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 05 April 2009 - 12:37 PM

Hmm.. Odd.. maybe they were just a bit bleary eyed!
Let us know what they say.
How are things in FLA?
  • 0

#20 David Rakoczy

David Rakoczy
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1579 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • USA

Posted 05 April 2009 - 04:02 PM

B)
  • 0


CineLab

Wooden Camera

Rig Wheels Passport

Paralinx LLC

Metropolis Post

Opal

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Abel Cine

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Aerial Filmworks

Visual Products

Willys Widgets

CineTape

Tai Audio

Glidecam

Technodolly

rebotnix Technologies

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

FJS International, LLC

Ritter Battery

The Slider

Willys Widgets

Rig Wheels Passport

FJS International, LLC

Opal

Ritter Battery

Wooden Camera

CineLab

CineTape

Tai Audio

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Glidecam

The Slider

Abel Cine

Visual Products

Metropolis Post

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Technodolly

Paralinx LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

rebotnix Technologies