that's exactly what we are testing right now. I will transfer a DnxHD and 1:1x export to the grading just as a test. I will keep you posting.
1:1x; I understand the 'x' makes no sence in this case but a lot of times there is other stuff in the timeline then 8bit xdcam so I thougt in this test would be the best option for future use.
--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, "Job ter Burg (L2B)" <Job_L2@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Bart,
>
> Agreed about compression on top of compression, but since you are starting out with a lower data rate (50 Mbit/s) anyway, there's very little hurt - if any - in using DNx185 (185 Mbit/s), or even DNx120 (120 Mbit/s). I know that MPEG Long-GOP is different from DNxHD, but we're talking more than double or triple the data rate). On top of that, the DNx codec was developed for multi-generation use. It seems to hold up more than well.
>
> Best way to check is if you (or your grading house) can tell any difference when going through 1:1 (829 Mbit/s) or through 185. I'm betting they won't be able to tell. There have been multiple statements from folks that had quit using 1:1 because they just could not tell the difference with 185.
>
> Using the x-variant of the resolutions makes no sense at all, as you will just be adding two empty bits to your 8-bit picture. It has no consequence other that eating more of your storage.
>
>
> > ; to me it seems like compression over compression...
> >
>
If you want to donate to Red Cross quake relief, you can do so through your cell phone. Text redcross to 90999 to make a $10 donation. It will be on your next cell bill.
No comments:
Post a Comment