No experience, but it's a trade off between compression per frame as heavy
calculations between frames.
Since broadcast output is long gop, i would not worry, especially since you
don't have cuts that need a forced I frame.
Now, are you talking about the DSLR's?
Those aren't good with motion anyways (yello effect anyone?)
And, as always, look at the image yourself. If it looks good, it is good.
Bouke
VideoToolShed
van Oldenbarneveltstraat 33
6512 AS NIJMEGEN
The Netherlands
+31 24 3553311
www.videotoolshed.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "ksirul" kenavid2@glueedit.com>
To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 8:45 PM
Subject: [Avid-L2] Re: OT: Canon i vs iPB formats
Further investigation has many folks saying that IPB is much cleaner and
less blocky. Anyone here have any real experience with these?
KEN
--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, "ksirul" wrote:
>
> Are there major differences that anyone has seen between Canon's i format
> and IPB formats? From what I've gathered on the interweb, IPB can get
> artifacty and is not good with motion. Anyone?
>
> KEN
>
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (3) |
No comments:
Post a Comment