Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Equivalent to Grass Valley Lossless for 10bit

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by nostalgia View Post

    Thanks anton, I ended up exporting ProRes HQ 4:2:2 10bit

    Wait, are you saying what I set in the project settings for the render format has an effect on my final output file? I thought that was just for previewing purposes?
    Hi:

    Is there any reason why Prores HQ 422 10 bit is better than Edius HQX (422 10bit) ?
    I would be interested on an answer.
    Thanks in advance.
    kurt
    Intel core i7-6700K / ASUS Z170A / 32 GB RAM / Intel HD Graphics 530 / SSD Systemdrive / Gigabyte GeForce GT 1070 / Win-10/64 Pro (V-1809) / EDIUS-9.52 (6153)-WG / Mercalli (V2, V4 and V5 Plugin/64bit) / Resolve-16.2.4 Studio / Zonealarm(Firewall etc) / ImgBurn / PowerDVD etc.
    // Read > Test > Understand

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by kpot View Post

      Hi:

      Is there any reason why Prores HQ 422 10 bit is better than Edius HQX (422 10bit) ?
      I would be interested on an answer.
      Thanks in advance.
      kurt
      The only reason I can see that Prores 422 HQ is better than HQX is simply the ability for more systems to be able to play a prores file without installing the HQX codec pack. According to the HQX whitepapers, HQX actually retains more of the original quality through multiple decompress/process/compress cycles, but it isn't a native codec for a mac, and the codec pack available for a mac is Ouicktime 7 based, Newer macs don't have quicktime 7 on them by default, and I don't think it can even be installed on the newest Catalina OS.

      Personally, I would prefer to use HQX during my work, and convert to Prores for the final export simply for multi platform compatability, or whatever other codec I need for the final delivery.
      Last edited by BernH; 08-01-2020, 11:26 PM.
      Edius WG 9.52.6153, various 3rd party plugins, VisTitle 2.8.0.5, Win 7 Ultimate SP1, i7-4790K @ 4GHz with HD4600 GPU embedded, MSI Z97 Gaming 7 Motherboard, 32GB Kingston HyperX RAM, nVidia GTX680 4GB GPU, Matrox MX02 Mini MAX, Corsair 750W PSU, Corsair H110i GT Water Cooler, Corsair C70 case, 4TB Internal RAID 0/stripe (2x2TB Seagate SATAIII HDD's, Win7 Software RAID 0/stripe), 1TB Crucial MX500 SSD, Pioneer BDR-207D, Dual 1920x1080 monitors (one on GTX680 and one on Intel HD4600).

      Comment


      • #33
        das ist nac
        Originally posted by BernH View Post

        The only reason I can see that Prores 422 HQ is better than HQX is simply the ability for more systems to be able to play a prores file without installing the HQX codec pack. According to the HQX whitepapers, HQX actually retains more of the original quality through multiple decompress/process/compress cycles, but it isn't a native codec for a mac, and the codec pack available for a mac is Ouicktime 7 based, Newwer macs don't have quicktime 7 on them by default, and I don't think it can even be installed on the newest Catalina OS.

        Personally, I would prefer to use HQX during my work, and convert to Prores for the final export simply for multi platform compatability, or whatever other codec I need for the final delivery.
        Thanks, that is understandable - kurt
        Intel core i7-6700K / ASUS Z170A / 32 GB RAM / Intel HD Graphics 530 / SSD Systemdrive / Gigabyte GeForce GT 1070 / Win-10/64 Pro (V-1809) / EDIUS-9.52 (6153)-WG / Mercalli (V2, V4 and V5 Plugin/64bit) / Resolve-16.2.4 Studio / Zonealarm(Firewall etc) / ImgBurn / PowerDVD etc.
        // Read > Test > Understand

        Comment

        Working...
        X