Personally, I don't find much difference, other than DNxHD is cross platform and ProRes isn't. But, some have done more technical testing as follows:
This was a few years ago, before Avid moving to AMA which removes the Quicktime bizarreness from the pipeline:
<<http://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2010/02/07/codec-smackdown/>>
And this:
<<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agaTg9CpESg>>
--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, <avid-l2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Hi all,
I teach editing at a journalism graduate school. Last year I helped the school switch over from FCP to Avid Media Composer. We'll be continuing with Media Composer 7 this year.
We edited and finished in ProRes (regular) MXF last year, to good results. This year, we're considering switching over to DNxHD 115 for students working in 1080p 23.98, and DNxHD 145 for students working in 720p 59.94. Students shoot primarily with the Sony NX70, the Panasonic HPX500, Panasonic HPX3100, and various Canon DSLRs. We prefer not to up-rez, but to edit at broadcast resolution.
Is there any quality difference between ProRes reg and the Avid codecs I've named? My research (including a similar query I posted to the L2 last year) suggest that the Avid codecs will be of equal quality at a reduced file size. We lack a good broadcast monitor at the school, so it's difficult for me to run true tests. I'd appreciate your opinions. I don't see any difference on my computer monitor on the limited tests I've run.
Thanks in advance for your time and opinions!
__._,_.___
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (2) |
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment