PDA

View Full Version : The Edius HQX Codec


Jim N
09-13-2010, 10:08 AM
Edius 6 has obviously been a significant project for GV with many improvements including the HQX codec. This 10 bit variable resolution/data rate codec is the beating heart of Edius's next generation architecture. I would like to know more about this important feature and the advantages it confers.

Jim

Alter Ego
09-13-2010, 05:41 PM
It looks like GV has removed Lossless codec from Edius 6, because of new (even better quality) HQX codec. Lossless is missing in the version which they show at IBC.



Will Edius 6 still be able to read and work with files previously created with Canopus Lossless? Is it just a matter of still having the codec installed on the machine? I have tons of files rendered to the Lossless codec.

Jerry
09-13-2010, 05:45 PM
Same as other intermediate codecs (Cineform, DNxHD), but this version allows you to go down with quantization to 0, so it means at this setting it will be close or maybe even lossless. It looks like GV has removed Lossless codec from Edius 6, because of new (even better quality) HQX codec. Lossless is missing in the version which they show at IBC.

With modern machine you can have 4k 10bit HQX file with few filters playing with no rendering- quite impressive.

Andrew

Keep in mind that you had better have some serious power to add filters and edit in RT.
Also, you notice the buffer drops from SD to HDV to Full HD, and then 4k....it will take a big hit.

caminostereo
09-13-2010, 11:11 PM
Here are more technical information on HQX:

http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=es&sl=ja&tl=en&u=http://www.thomson-canopus.jp/catalog/edius_pro/edius_6_hqx.htm&rurl=translate.google.com.pe&usg=ALkJrhhN9BDd5mCQ5lPJfYwwrQ-lxzd0WA

rando
09-13-2010, 11:53 PM
What about the compression VS HDV? ie gigs per hour or drive space?

rando
09-14-2010, 03:54 AM
yes I know about quality VS space and speed I was wondering how it compares to Canopus HQ in file size. Right now Canopus HQ is about 4-5X the size of HDV or AVCHD is the new CODEC about the same or will it require more space than the current Canopus HQ.

gdame
09-14-2010, 04:38 AM
I would say larger through simple math.

1440x1080 HDV ------>8 bit HQ = approx. 5X larger file

1440x1080 HDV ------>10 bit HQX = even larger file (more data = larger file)

These are both I frame intermediary codecs that offload CPU burden in exchange for editing performance with an increase in storage burden. As Andrew mentioned, hard drives for 150Mb/sec video are inexpensive. Making it a very clear advantage.

Jerry and I had a project setup at 3840 x 2160 with a red file that was converted to HQX. It played back perfectly. Real time effects will be a different story as I thing the buffer was maybe in single digits. Actually I think it was 12 or 16. Jerry will chime in at some point and clarify our findings.

Jerry
09-14-2010, 12:15 PM
I was able to get this file to play on a Core 2 duo extreme
running at 3.3. The buffer was indeed at 16 and I did not
add any filters. A dissolve required rendering in order
to play. A 980 should be able to play it with the dissolve
easily.
I still prefer to use either HQ, HQX, or AVC-Intra.
These are all I frame based codecs and will have
larger file sizes, but will have the best editing response.
Drive space is cheap. I recently added 6tb for around $300.

Andreas_Gumm
09-14-2010, 04:37 PM
I was able to get this file to play on a Core 2 duo extreme
running at 3.3. The buffer was indeed at 16 and I did not
add any filters. A dissolve required rendering in order
to play. A 980 should be able to play it with the dissolve
easily.
I still prefer to use either HQ, HQX, or AVC-Intra.
These are all I frame based codecs and will have
larger file sizes, but will have the best editing response.
Drive space is cheap. I recently added 6tb for around $300.

Another option could be using the proxy option for limited workstation performance!

baddgsx
11-18-2010, 09:46 PM
hi ,

im new to the HQX codec. I will be capturing hdv. From what I read here HQX at 150mbit or better is what i should capture to. So the higher the quality the easier Edius will run but the larger the files right?

I used to use capture with cineform to avi and import to vegas.

Thanks,
Chris

baddgsx
11-19-2010, 03:15 PM
i just captured HQX on the highest quality. I have alot of hard drive space so thats not an issue for me. I figure HQX is a newer codec so it must be better for edius 6.

baddgsx
11-19-2010, 06:44 PM
do you have to manually set that? Ill have to look again , but from what i can remember last night i was only able to move the left side , fine.. etc

i havent done any real editing yet with edius 6. i will play tonight hopefully. the only performance comparison that i will be able to make is comparing edius 6 to vegas pro 8.0. which im hoping will be a huge leap.

so far i love the edius layout. once i know where everything is ill be faster about it. i was fast in vegas putting projects together. edius will take some time getting used to for me.

thanks,
Chris