Saturday, December 17, 2016

Re: [Avid-L2] Re: Epic 5K 4800x2700 5K Footage and Frame Flex for Transcode?

 

So now I have transcoded the same clip twice once a Project Raster Size and once at Source Dimension.  I added the column "Raster Dimension and that column shows the different settings.  Project Size yields 4096x2160 and Source Dimension yields 4800x2700.  But both clips look identical in an HD downconvert of display on a UHD HDMI fed monitor.  So clearly Avid changes some metadata but the image appears the same so what is this setting really accomplishing?



---In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, <bigfish@...> wrote :


I don't see my previous reply posted yet but I did a bit more research and here is what the Avid Media Composer Help says regarding Transcoding and Raster Dimensions Setting:

Raster Dimensions
This option allows you to select the transcode raster dimensions. Project dimensions (proxy off) - Transcodes the clip at the resolution set for the project.
Source dimension - Transcodes the clip at its original resolution.
Source 1/4 - Transcodes the clip at a quarter of its original resolution.
Source 1/16 - Transcodes the clip at 1/16 of its original resolution.
*When transcoding multiple clips at source dimensions, each clip will be transcoded at its original size or relative 1/4, 1/16 selected setting.
*The minimum dimensions are 256 pixels in width by 120 pixels in height. So for example, in a 960x540 project, only 1/4-proxy (480x270) will be available and not 1/16-proxy (240x135).
Keep Source's Frame Rate
When this option is selected, the list of available codecs changes to the DNxHR family.



So now I've restarted the transcodes with the Raster Dimensions set to Source Dimension which in the case of Red Epic 5K is 4800x2700 but when I take the resulting .mxf file into Media Info it still lists the dimensions as 4096x2160 which is the project dimensions.  In the Avid bin the clip is listed as 4800x2700 so I'm confused as to whether Avid is maintaining all the original pixels or somehow scaling it into 4096x2160 but keeping track of the original dimensions.


---In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, <pale.edit@...> wrote :

Yes, you should, if that is your intent.


On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 2:58 PM bigfish@... [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

I just noticed in the Transcode window there is raster dimensions which can be set to project size or source original size.  I'm wondering if I should be setting this to Source Original Size to maintain all the pixels?  I haven't worked with odd frame sizes very much so I don't have a clear understanding of how these settings effect proper translations of Frame Flex etc... from offline to online.

In my case I'm preprocessing the camera media for later relink so now it's just important to maintain as much quality as possible without distorting the pixels if possible.



---In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, <pale.edit@...> wrote :

Yes.  You are seeing the original size in the bin.  Even if you transcode down to SD it will still say that for raster size.




On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 10:25 PM bigfish@... [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:






























 



















The first file has processed and in the bin it still lists the raster size at 4800x2700 but when I take the .mxf file into Media Info it lists the file as 4096x2160, which matches the project format.  I assume Avid somehow keeps track of the original size dimensions so that any frame flex manipulations will translate properly in the end.  Media Info also lists the aspect ratio as 16:9 which is in fact the original aspect ratio of the 5K Red footage but if it is now 4096x2160 that's 1.9:1 not 106:9 ratio.  Is Avid somehow creating anamorphic pixels in the transcode process that a program like Media Info and other player software would recognize? 

Here is the Media Info specs in the Video category:

Video
ID : 3
Format : VC-3
Format settings, wrapping mode : Clip
Codec ID : 0D01030102110200-0401020271250000
Duration : 1h 26mn
Bit rate : 746 Mbps
Width : 4 096 pixels
Height : 2 160 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 16:9
Frame rate : 23.976 (24000/1001) fps
Color space : YUV
Chroma subsampling : 4:2:2
Bit depth : 12 bits
Scan type : Progressive
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 3.515
Stream size : 448 GiB (100%)
Title : V1
Matrix coefficients : BT.709



---In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, <bigfish@...> wrote :

On my Red 4K 4096x2160 project of course the second shoot was shot at 5K 16:9 not 1.9 Aspect Ratio.  I ama link to the media and I set frame flex to 1.9:1 from the default of 16:9 for the media.  I am transcoding to DNxHRHQX using Camera Metadata and a Full Range to Legal Scaler along with the aforementioned Frame Flex setting.  I am not baking anything in on the transcode.  I just started the process but I'm curious will the resulting DNxHRHQX transcodes be 4096x2160 or will the maintain the original 4800x2700 pixel count.  We have done a similar approach on some other odd frame sizes but I haven't seen the results in online yet.  I do know on the other clips for offline when we didn't bake in the frame flex the resulting offline DNX 36 clips still displayed the full frame pixels for the odd sized clips.  I assume that will allow for a proper online conform as the frame flex parameters they might apply in offline will properly translate to online sequence.  My limited experience in this area suggests that if we bake in the frame flex it will lose track of the original medias odd frame sizes.

Can anyone clarify the workflow with Red or any other camera that shoots in odd frame sizes?
 

John Moore Barking Trout Productions Studio City, CA bigfish@...













































































 

__._,_.___

Posted by: bigfish@pacbell.net
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (8)

Have you tried the highest rated email app?
With 4.5 stars in iTunes, the Yahoo Mail app is the highest rated email app on the market. What are you waiting for? Now you can access all your inboxes (Gmail, Outlook, AOL and more) in one place. Never delete an email again with 1000GB of free cloud storage.

this is the Avid-L2

.

__,_._,___

Re: [Avid-L2] Re: Epic 5K 4800x2700 5K Footage and Frame Flex for Transcode?

 


Curiously I just started retranscoding setting the raster dimension to Original Source not Project Size but still the resulting .mxf shows up in Media Info as 4096x2160 not the Red 5K Original Size of 4800x2700.  The clip in the Avid bin does show the dimensions to be 4800x2700 just like it did when the Raster Dimension setting was set to Project Size.  I don't seem to understand the intent of this parameter.  The other two choices are 1/4 and 1/16 which sounds more like a quality setting than a Raster Dimension.  I'll see if I can open the help file while I'm in transcode mode.

---In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, <pale.edit@...> wrote :

Yes, you should, if that is your intent.


On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 2:58 PM bigfish@... [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

I just noticed in the Transcode window there is raster dimensions which can be set to project size or source original size.  I'm wondering if I should be setting this to Source Original Size to maintain all the pixels?  I haven't worked with odd frame sizes very much so I don't have a clear understanding of how these settings effect proper translations of Frame Flex etc... from offline to online.

In my case I'm preprocessing the camera media for later relink so now it's just important to maintain as much quality as possible without distorting the pixels if possible.



---In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, <pale.edit@...> wrote :

Yes.  You are seeing the original size in the bin.  Even if you transcode down to SD it will still say that for raster size.




On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 10:25 PM bigfish@... [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:






























 



















The first file has processed and in the bin it still lists the raster size at 4800x2700 but when I take the .mxf file into Media Info it lists the file as 4096x2160, which matches the project format.  I assume Avid somehow keeps track of the original size dimensions so that any frame flex manipulations will translate properly in the end.  Media Info also lists the aspect ratio as 16:9 which is in fact the original aspect ratio of the 5K Red footage but if it is now 4096x2160 that's 1.9:1 not 106:9 ratio.  Is Avid somehow creating anamorphic pixels in the transcode process that a program like Media Info and other player software would recognize? 

Here is the Media Info specs in the Video category:

Video
ID : 3
Format : VC-3
Format settings, wrapping mode : Clip
Codec ID : 0D01030102110200-0401020271250000
Duration : 1h 26mn
Bit rate : 746 Mbps
Width : 4 096 pixels
Height : 2 160 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 16:9
Frame rate : 23.976 (24000/1001) fps
Color space : YUV
Chroma subsampling : 4:2:2
Bit depth : 12 bits
Scan type : Progressive
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 3.515
Stream size : 448 GiB (100%)
Title : V1
Matrix coefficients : BT.709



---In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, <bigfish@...> wrote :

On my Red 4K 4096x2160 project of course the second shoot was shot at 5K 16:9 not 1.9 Aspect Ratio.  I ama link to the media and I set frame flex to 1.9:1 from the default of 16:9 for the media.  I am transcoding to DNxHRHQX using Camera Metadata and a Full Range to Legal Scaler along with the aforementioned Frame Flex setting.  I am not baking anything in on the transcode.  I just started the process but I'm curious will the resulting DNxHRHQX transcodes be 4096x2160 or will the maintain the original 4800x2700 pixel count.  We have done a similar approach on some other odd frame sizes but I haven't seen the results in online yet.  I do know on the other clips for offline when we didn't bake in the frame flex the resulting offline DNX 36 clips still displayed the full frame pixels for the odd sized clips.  I assume that will allow for a proper online conform as the frame flex parameters they might apply in offline will properly translate to online sequence.  My limited experience in this area suggests that if we bake in the frame flex it will lose track of the original medias odd frame sizes.

Can anyone clarify the workflow with Red or any other camera that shoots in odd frame sizes?
 

John Moore Barking Trout Productions Studio City, CA bigfish@...













































































__._,_.___

Posted by: bigfish@pacbell.net
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (7)

Have you tried the highest rated email app?
With 4.5 stars in iTunes, the Yahoo Mail app is the highest rated email app on the market. What are you waiting for? Now you can access all your inboxes (Gmail, Outlook, AOL and more) in one place. Never delete an email again with 1000GB of free cloud storage.

this is the Avid-L2

.

__,_._,___

Re: [Avid-L2] Re: Epic 5K 4800x2700 5K Footage and Frame Flex for Transcode?

 


I don't see my previous reply posted yet but I did a bit more research and here is what the Avid Media Composer Help says regarding Transcoding and Raster Dimensions Setting:

Raster Dimensions
This option allows you to select the transcode raster dimensions. Project dimensions (proxy off) - Transcodes the clip at the resolution set for the project.
Source dimension - Transcodes the clip at its original resolution.
Source 1/4 - Transcodes the clip at a quarter of its original resolution.
Source 1/16 - Transcodes the clip at 1/16 of its original resolution.
*When transcoding multiple clips at source dimensions, each clip will be transcoded at its original size or relative 1/4, 1/16 selected setting.
*The minimum dimensions are 256 pixels in width by 120 pixels in height. So for example, in a 960x540 project, only 1/4-proxy (480x270) will be available and not 1/16-proxy (240x135).
Keep Source's Frame Rate
When this option is selected, the list of available codecs changes to the DNxHR family.



So now I've restarted the transcodes with the Raster Dimensions set to Source Dimension which in the case of Red Epic 5K is 4800x2700 but when I take the resulting .mxf file into Media Info it still lists the dimensions as 4096x2160 which is the project dimensions.  In the Avid bin the clip is listed as 4800x2700 so I'm confused as to whether Avid is maintaining all the original pixels or somehow scaling it into 4096x2160 but keeping track of the original dimensions.


---In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, <pale.edit@...> wrote :

Yes, you should, if that is your intent.


On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 2:58 PM bigfish@... [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

I just noticed in the Transcode window there is raster dimensions which can be set to project size or source original size.  I'm wondering if I should be setting this to Source Original Size to maintain all the pixels?  I haven't worked with odd frame sizes very much so I don't have a clear understanding of how these settings effect proper translations of Frame Flex etc... from offline to online.

In my case I'm preprocessing the camera media for later relink so now it's just important to maintain as much quality as possible without distorting the pixels if possible.



---In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, <pale.edit@...> wrote :

Yes.  You are seeing the original size in the bin.  Even if you transcode down to SD it will still say that for raster size.




On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 10:25 PM bigfish@... [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:






























 



















The first file has processed and in the bin it still lists the raster size at 4800x2700 but when I take the .mxf file into Media Info it lists the file as 4096x2160, which matches the project format.  I assume Avid somehow keeps track of the original size dimensions so that any frame flex manipulations will translate properly in the end.  Media Info also lists the aspect ratio as 16:9 which is in fact the original aspect ratio of the 5K Red footage but if it is now 4096x2160 that's 1.9:1 not 106:9 ratio.  Is Avid somehow creating anamorphic pixels in the transcode process that a program like Media Info and other player software would recognize? 

Here is the Media Info specs in the Video category:

Video
ID : 3
Format : VC-3
Format settings, wrapping mode : Clip
Codec ID : 0D01030102110200-0401020271250000
Duration : 1h 26mn
Bit rate : 746 Mbps
Width : 4 096 pixels
Height : 2 160 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 16:9
Frame rate : 23.976 (24000/1001) fps
Color space : YUV
Chroma subsampling : 4:2:2
Bit depth : 12 bits
Scan type : Progressive
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 3.515
Stream size : 448 GiB (100%)
Title : V1
Matrix coefficients : BT.709



---In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, <bigfish@...> wrote :

On my Red 4K 4096x2160 project of course the second shoot was shot at 5K 16:9 not 1.9 Aspect Ratio.  I ama link to the media and I set frame flex to 1.9:1 from the default of 16:9 for the media.  I am transcoding to DNxHRHQX using Camera Metadata and a Full Range to Legal Scaler along with the aforementioned Frame Flex setting.  I am not baking anything in on the transcode.  I just started the process but I'm curious will the resulting DNxHRHQX transcodes be 4096x2160 or will the maintain the original 4800x2700 pixel count.  We have done a similar approach on some other odd frame sizes but I haven't seen the results in online yet.  I do know on the other clips for offline when we didn't bake in the frame flex the resulting offline DNX 36 clips still displayed the full frame pixels for the odd sized clips.  I assume that will allow for a proper online conform as the frame flex parameters they might apply in offline will properly translate to online sequence.  My limited experience in this area suggests that if we bake in the frame flex it will lose track of the original medias odd frame sizes.

Can anyone clarify the workflow with Red or any other camera that shoots in odd frame sizes?
 

John Moore Barking Trout Productions Studio City, CA bigfish@...













































































 

__._,_.___

Posted by: bigfish@pacbell.net
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (6)

Have you tried the highest rated email app?
With 4.5 stars in iTunes, the Yahoo Mail app is the highest rated email app on the market. What are you waiting for? Now you can access all your inboxes (Gmail, Outlook, AOL and more) in one place. Never delete an email again with 1000GB of free cloud storage.

this is the Avid-L2

.

__,_._,___
There was an error in this gadget