Grass Valley Forums Facebook   Twitter   YouTube  

Go Back   Grass Valley Forums > Editors > Editing with EDIUS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-30-2019, 06:43 PM   #11
Liverpool TV
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Liverpool, England.
Posts: 2,899
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Evans View Post
I think h265 is 4:2:0 anyway for version 1. Testing with ProRes 4:2:2 10 bit source to x265 or NVENC results in the same 4:2:0 file. There is more detail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_E...Coding#Main_10. There is a nice table in that write up. I expect the current codecs we use are Version 1 MAIN 10 for HDR so will all be 4:2:0. At least all the encoders I have available to me with TMPGenc 7 or Resolve are Main 10.
Iíll have a good read of that, thanks. It would explain a few things but does raise more questions about why Edius has it is as an option. Regardless of if itís greyed out, it would definitely suggest to the end user that it is an option to be selected and obviously causes confusion with the exporter if you end up going round in circles trying to activate it for the obvious reasons why you would want it.

Maybe that selection from within E9ís QS H.264 GUI should be removed if it is V1 and can only ever support 4:2:0, as it obviously doesnít do anything.

Aside from Edius, I still donít see what the benefit of any 10 Bit codec is, if itís locked to 4:2:0. Maybe thatís just me?
__________________
"There's only one thing more powerful than knowledge. The free sharing of it"

If you don't know the difference between Azimuth and Asimov, then either your tapes sound bad and your Robot is very dangerous. Kill all humans...... Or your tape deck won't harm a human, and your Robot's tracking and stereo imagining is spot on.

Is your Robot three laws safe?
Liverpool TV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2019, 08:25 PM   #12
Ron Evans
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,055
Default

This is one of a few around that looks at bit depth and colour sampling. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoxMtUatsLg

The way I see it is 10bit gives many more values for luminance and colour. So finer gradation for luminance and colour. Colour sampling is how it is stored for file size and as such a degradation trade off to file size. If theory is correct our eyes will not see much difference between 4:2:0 and 4:2:2 but will see the difference between 8 bit and 10 bit however it is colour sampled.
__________________
Ron Evans

Threadripper 1920 stock clock 3.7, Gigabyte Designare X399 MB, 32G G.Skill 3200CL14, 500G M.2 SATA OS, 500G EVO 850 temp. 1T EVO 850 render, 6T Source, 2 x 1T NVME, MSI 1080Ti 11G , EVGA 850 G2, LG BLuray Burner, BM IP4K, WIN10 Pro

ASUS PB328 monitor, BenQ BL2711U 4K preview monitor, EDIUS 9.5 WG, Vegas 17, Resolve Studio 16


Cameras: GH5S, GH5, FDR-AX100, FDR-AX53, DJI OSMO Pocket, Atomos Ninja V x 2
Ron Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2019, 11:36 PM   #13
Liverpool TV
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Liverpool, England.
Posts: 2,899
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Evans View Post
This is one of a few around that looks at bit depth and colour sampling. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoxMtUatsLg

The way I see it is 10bit gives many more values for luminance and colour. So finer gradation for luminance and colour. Colour sampling is how it is stored for file size and as such a degradation trade off to file size. If theory is correct our eyes will not see much difference between 4:2:0 and 4:2:2 but will see the difference between 8 bit and 10 bit however it is colour sampled.
That's not quite correct Ron, with your understanding of the chroma sub-sampling. Yes, dynamic range will increase with bit depth but this is not quite colour resolution.

For want of a better straight forward comparison, think of it in terms of audio. The sampling frequency of audio is similar to the chroma sub sampling of video, the higher the sampling frequency, or the more samples, the higher the resolution. And in both instances, bit depth helps more with dynamic range, as in the increase or decrease of any individual sample. This is obviously over simplified as you get other benefits of increasing the bit depth of video, it's just that particular analogy is easier for me as I picture audio easier than video.

As for what you're saying about the relation between colour sampling and how we see it, that's not quite correct either. Yes, 4:2:0 does look great and there's nothing wrong with it in instances where it's suited. But I can guarantee you that if you recorded and watched the same thing recorded at 4:2:0 and 4:2:2 on the appropriate monitor, you'd see a difference.

If you look at the effect of banding, this is usually associated with bit depth. But in reality a 10 bit video signal almost always has 4:2:2 colour and no banding. With the same thing shot 8 Bit 4:2:0, you'll see banding.

That's why I find this whole thing very odd with no 4:2:2 at 10 Bit and I've never personally come across it before.

I'm not too sure right now as I can't remember but I used a small amount of 8 Bit 4:2:2 from a Canon camera for one of our feature films and it looked very good when mixed in with the 'proper' footage. Despite the lack of dynamic range the colour info was really good. I couldn't say how the reverse would look, 10 Bit 4:2:0, as I don't know of any camera that would record that combination. Again, another reason why I'm very puzzled about that format.

Here's an idea that may be worth trying out to see what the results are like. Record some complex colour resolution stuff, blue sky gradients etc. on your Panasonic in 10 bit 4:2:2, something that would definitely show stepping/banding on a 8 Bit 4:2:0 recording. Then encode the footage to H.264 8 Bit 4:2:2 and also to H.265 10 Bit 4:2:0. It would be interesting to see how that looks on either a 10 Bit panel or large HDR/10 Bit TV screen.

BTW. This all assumes that there is no dithering going on anywhere in the workflow, something that isn't always apparent. Lastly and again using audio as the analogy, dithering pretty much does the same thing with audio as it does with video.
__________________
"There's only one thing more powerful than knowledge. The free sharing of it"

If you don't know the difference between Azimuth and Asimov, then either your tapes sound bad and your Robot is very dangerous. Kill all humans...... Or your tape deck won't harm a human, and your Robot's tracking and stereo imagining is spot on.

Is your Robot three laws safe?
Liverpool TV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2019, 12:19 AM   #14
Ron Evans
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,055
Default

If you look up this report DIGITAL IMAGE PROCESSING AND COMPUTER GRAPHICS VOLUME: 15 , NUMBER: 4 , 2017 , SPECIAL ISSUE It came to the conclusion that one could see no difference with colour subsampling. It is a pdf that will come up if you do a search but I have failed to find a nice url for it. Can send you a copy if you want.

I am not advocating, defending any of this just reporting what I have found. Technically I can see there must be a difference but we as human beings are not test equipment and have our own flaws in how we see things. What we see and perceive is all that is important to most people.
__________________
Ron Evans

Threadripper 1920 stock clock 3.7, Gigabyte Designare X399 MB, 32G G.Skill 3200CL14, 500G M.2 SATA OS, 500G EVO 850 temp. 1T EVO 850 render, 6T Source, 2 x 1T NVME, MSI 1080Ti 11G , EVGA 850 G2, LG BLuray Burner, BM IP4K, WIN10 Pro

ASUS PB328 monitor, BenQ BL2711U 4K preview monitor, EDIUS 9.5 WG, Vegas 17, Resolve Studio 16


Cameras: GH5S, GH5, FDR-AX100, FDR-AX53, DJI OSMO Pocket, Atomos Ninja V x 2
Ron Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2019, 12:54 AM   #15
Liverpool TV
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Liverpool, England.
Posts: 2,899
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Evans View Post
If you look up this report DIGITAL IMAGE PROCESSING AND COMPUTER GRAPHICS VOLUME: 15 , NUMBER: 4 , 2017 , SPECIAL ISSUE It came to the conclusion that one could see no difference with colour subsampling. It is a pdf that will come up if you do a search but I have failed to find a nice url for it. Can send you a copy if you want.

I am not advocating, defending any of this just reporting what I have found. Technically I can see there must be a difference but we as human beings are not test equipment and have our own flaws in how we see things. What we see and perceive is all that is important to most people.
I've not seen that report but from what you've said it's outcomes are, I'd say it's wrong. You can see this easily for yourself by looking at colour gradients.

Plus, if shooting 4:2:0 was all that was necessary, you'd have to ask why does the entire industry not shoot with that format for professional productions.

Shooting 10 Bit 4:2:2 as a minimum isn't just for grading, although it does help when being destructive in post. It's the amount of colour and dynamic info that it gives, which people do see.

Like I said before, I don't have a problem with 8 Bit 4:2:0 as it's the format that I personally shoot mostly but it does have its drawbacks. Although you can't argue that it's way easier to deal with and store etc. compared with higher formats.

On the point of storage you definitely can't argue that certain formats are easier on the storage front. At the moment I'm using 74GB per minute, which is a real issue for storage.

For the last week or so I've been stress testing E9 as I'm considering changing my main shooting format and workflow. During this time I've been doing a huge amount of test renders in different bit depths, colour spaces, chroma samplings, resolutions, frame rates etc. and can honestly say that there are differences, even on an 8 bit panel.

In fact, right now I'm deciding on two delivery codecs, one is always HQ/X but I'm looking for the best compressed inter one as well. I'm recording 10 Bit 4:2:2 and testing truncated outputs and can say that there are differences.

Like I suggested before, you've got all the equipment to test for these results for yourself. Maybe give it a try and see if your findings are the same as that report.
__________________
"There's only one thing more powerful than knowledge. The free sharing of it"

If you don't know the difference between Azimuth and Asimov, then either your tapes sound bad and your Robot is very dangerous. Kill all humans...... Or your tape deck won't harm a human, and your Robot's tracking and stereo imagining is spot on.

Is your Robot three laws safe?
Liverpool TV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2019, 01:51 AM   #16
Ron Evans
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,055
Default

I do not need to. Read the report then you may have a greater understanding of both the effect of bit depth , subsampling , its uses at various stages of production and delivery . Since almost everyone watches 4:2:0 on an 8bit TV it has some significance. Shooting and editing etc is very different because of the impact on the file for downstream delivery. The more you have to start with the better it is going to be in the end. Totally agree. Very different from seeing with the average eyes a difference on a TV or computer screen.
__________________
Ron Evans

Threadripper 1920 stock clock 3.7, Gigabyte Designare X399 MB, 32G G.Skill 3200CL14, 500G M.2 SATA OS, 500G EVO 850 temp. 1T EVO 850 render, 6T Source, 2 x 1T NVME, MSI 1080Ti 11G , EVGA 850 G2, LG BLuray Burner, BM IP4K, WIN10 Pro

ASUS PB328 monitor, BenQ BL2711U 4K preview monitor, EDIUS 9.5 WG, Vegas 17, Resolve Studio 16


Cameras: GH5S, GH5, FDR-AX100, FDR-AX53, DJI OSMO Pocket, Atomos Ninja V x 2
Ron Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2019, 02:26 AM   #17
Liverpool TV
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Liverpool, England.
Posts: 2,899
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Evans View Post
I do not need to. Read the report then you may have a greater understanding of both the effect of bit depth , subsampling , its uses at various stages of production and delivery . Since almost everyone watches 4:2:0 on an 8bit TV it has some significance. Shooting and editing etc is very different because of the impact on the file for downstream delivery. The more you have to start with the better it is going to be in the end. Totally agree. Very different from seeing with the average eyes a difference on a TV or computer screen.
As much as you "do not need to", presumably try the test I suggested, I don't need to read the report either, I already have a great understanding of such things.

You are now talking about most people watching 420 on 8 bit panels and while I agree with that and the fact that for such viewing scenarios it is fine, as higher delivery options would be quite redundant given the limitation of the play back equipment. It's not what I've been talking about and most certainly doesn't prove that we as humans can't see beyond those technical limitations that are imposed on a standard for convenience as opposed to technical merit.

If you have a preference for such things and it works well for you, that's cool.
__________________
"There's only one thing more powerful than knowledge. The free sharing of it"

If you don't know the difference between Azimuth and Asimov, then either your tapes sound bad and your Robot is very dangerous. Kill all humans...... Or your tape deck won't harm a human, and your Robot's tracking and stereo imagining is spot on.

Is your Robot three laws safe?
Liverpool TV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2019, 03:34 PM   #18
dpalomaki
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 1,890
Default

4:2:2 vs 4:2:0 & 10-bit vs 8-bit.

It all goes back to the full chain from acquisition to viewing.
The higher resolutions allow for more precise processing with fewer artifacts introduced by rounding and truncation and the finer structure of the discrete "steps" in the digital information needed as better displays subtend a larger visual angle and have a purer display output.

Everything looked "good" on a 6 inch CRT viewed from 4 feet, even VHS, because the average eye could not see the flaws. The human eye is good for what, a ~100 or so step gray scale. SD TV had what, a 330 lines of horizontal b&W resolution (VHS was 240), and about 40 lines of color. Of course that was a delivery spec, not an acquisition and editing spec (except for home video).

We have come a long way in the past 30 years.
dpalomaki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2019, 04:04 PM   #19
Liverpool TV
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Liverpool, England.
Posts: 2,899
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dpalomaki View Post
We have come a long way in the past 30 years.
Now that's one thing we can all agree on :) Thanks Don.

Cheers,
Dave.
__________________
"There's only one thing more powerful than knowledge. The free sharing of it"

If you don't know the difference between Azimuth and Asimov, then either your tapes sound bad and your Robot is very dangerous. Kill all humans...... Or your tape deck won't harm a human, and your Robot's tracking and stereo imagining is spot on.

Is your Robot three laws safe?
Liverpool TV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2019, 01:41 AM   #20
Ron Evans
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,055
Default

Here is a test for you Dave https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4586b8iR2Y. He had to go to extreme lengths to see a difference and that too may be due to Sony h264 encoding.

To repeat. I fully understand the difference between 4:2:0 and 4:2:2 or even 4:4:4. As a source file then the more one can use the better. The report I referenced is about the final encode for viewing not source file and is there a difference that can be seen there visually by observers not test equipment. Once the edit and grading is done the conclusion is that 4:2:0 is no different than 4:2:2 or even 4:4:4 in this final viewing experience. Which presumably is why the version 1 h265 was just 4:2:0 as it was not intended to be an acquisition format. h265 for UHD HDR requires 10bit for dynamic range but supporting the subsampling reports does not need 4:2:2 for final viewing so is 4:2:0 with a saving in data rate bandwidth for distribution.

If you want to edit , grade or deliver to Youtube which will further encode it would be better to use a 10 bit 4:2:2 encode or better . No arguments.

Yes I can see a difference between grading an internal recording rec709 8 bit GH5 file and a 10bit ProRes 422 HLG file from the Atomos which is why I got it. That is not the discussion. That is comparing apples and oranges. Is there a difference between viewing 8bit 4:2:0 and 8 bit 4:2:2 both rec 709 at the same data rate. Everything I have found says no. One cannot tell the difference. Is there a difference between 8bit 4:2:0 and 10 bit 4:2:2 as a source file, of course there is a difference.
__________________
Ron Evans

Threadripper 1920 stock clock 3.7, Gigabyte Designare X399 MB, 32G G.Skill 3200CL14, 500G M.2 SATA OS, 500G EVO 850 temp. 1T EVO 850 render, 6T Source, 2 x 1T NVME, MSI 1080Ti 11G , EVGA 850 G2, LG BLuray Burner, BM IP4K, WIN10 Pro

ASUS PB328 monitor, BenQ BL2711U 4K preview monitor, EDIUS 9.5 WG, Vegas 17, Resolve Studio 16


Cameras: GH5S, GH5, FDR-AX100, FDR-AX53, DJI OSMO Pocket, Atomos Ninja V x 2
Ron Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
 
Go Back   Grass Valley Forums > Editors > Editing with EDIUS
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Edius 9 and H.265 exporting. Liverpool TV Editing with EDIUS 17 06-29-2019 04:35 PM
Edius workgroup 9 and H.265 exporting Ulisse Editing with EDIUS 25 03-07-2018 03:26 PM
Does Edius Pro 8.2 support H.265? dreaux Editing with EDIUS 4 05-31-2016 01:48 PM
HEVC / h.265 - Support in Edius 7.4? Kris Editing with EDIUS 1 11-17-2014 08:01 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:26 PM.


Copyright © 2014 Belden Inc. All rights reserved.