UpRezzing (DV) MiniDV

[Paul E. Coleman]

Does it make any sense to capture DV from a Canon GL2/MiniDV as Apple Intermediate Codec? It will be color corrected with a filter at some point, but I didn't know if I gained anything by doing so. Or is DV/DVCPro as good as it's gonna get? Does it hold up to multiple filters and effects better as AIC or does it not make a difference?

Thanks

[Mike Barber]

Originally Posted by Paul E. Coleman

Does it make any sense to capture DV from a Canon GL2/MiniDV as Apple Intermediate Codec?

No, you're just going to have larger file sizes for no good reason. The only thing I would consider uprezing to is Pro Res, but even then I'm not 100% certain it is worth it.

[Steve Oakley]

You could use something like a mxo2 to capture to prores sd which is not much larger file sizes then dv but is 10 bit colorspace. If you need to push cc then 10 bit will help. Also of you use Sdi from a dcvam deck the vtr will give you a slightly better image due to internal signal processing to generte the sdi signl

[Christopher Drews]

Our feature was shot on the XL2 (DV) and up-converted to 720P Pro-Res 422 (via AE).
We gained in color correction. Go Pro-Res 422 (no need for HQ) if your end result matters.

-C

[Paul E. Coleman]

Originally Posted by Christopher Drews

Our feature was shot on the XL2 (DV) and up-converted to 720P Pro-Res 422 (via AE).
We gained in color correction. Go Pro-Res 422 (no need for HQ) if your end result matters.

-C

So for basic Color Correction and eventual grading in Color, you're saying digitizing as Pro Res will help a bit.

Thanks.

[Mike Barber]

Originally Posted by Christopher Drews

We gained in color correction. Go Pro-Res 422 (no need for HQ) if your end result matters.

But is it not the HQ where you would gain the added bits that would make it conceivably better for colour correction? Pro Res 422 is 8-bit, Pro Res 422 (HQ) is 10-bit. Going 8-bit to 8-bit (DV to Pro Res) lends no possible advantage that I see other than changing colour sampling from 4:2:0 or 4:1:1 to 4:2:2, but still it is in the 10-bit codec where the extra bits that are helpful reside.

But if you shot DV, you can't expect any miracles, especially after loosing resolution by blowing up your DV to 720p.

@Paul: you could capture to DV now, make your cut, then use media manager to transcode only the footage you are actually using (plus option to add handles. which you should) to Pro Res 422 (HQ) for the colouring session, and then output a Pro Res master.

[Christopher Drews]

Originally Posted by Mike Barber

Pro Res 422 is 8-bit, Pro Res 422 (HQ) is 10-bit.

Mike - Your information is wrong here. Please see the provided screenshot from the Pro-Res white paper. Pro-Res 422 & Pro-Res 422 HQ are 10-bit codecs.
-C

[Aric Mannion]

Originally Posted by Paul E. Coleman

So for basic Color Correction and eventual grading in Color, you're saying digitizing as Pro Res will help a bit.

Thanks.

I'm pretty sure capturing in pro res, vs capturing regular THEN changing the sequence settings to pro res have the exact same effect on the quality. You might not want to capture as pro res, you can change the sequence settings to pro res when you are done editing or ready to color correct.
You'll have to render all the footage, but it will still save space in the end.

[Mike Barber]

Originally Posted by Christopher Drews

Pro-Res 422 & Pro-Res 422 HQ are 10-bit codecs.

True and false.

From what I see in that excerpt, I think we are both off a bit. The white paper states that Pro Res 422 preserves the 8-bit or 10-bit source quality, which I would interpret to mean that the Pro Res 422 transcode (in software) result will only be 10-bit if the source was 10-bit. The only way to get a Pro Res 422 version of DV or HDV footage that was 10-bit would be capture through an HD-SDI card (like the AJA Kona3, for example). Does that seem accurate?

Then is the only difference between Pro Res 422 and Pro Res 422 HQ the bitrates at which they encode?

[Christopher Drews]

Originally Posted by Mike Barber

True and false.

From what I see in that excerpt, I think we are both off a bit. The white paper states that Pro Res 422 preserves the 8-bit or 10-bit source quality, which I would interpret to mean that the Pro Res 422 transcode (in software) result will only be 10-bit if the source was 10-bit. The only way to get a Pro Res 422 version of DV or HDV footage that was 10-bit would be capture through an HD-SDI card (like the AJA Kona3, for example). Does that seem accurate?

Then is the only difference between Pro Res 422 and Pro Res 422 HQ the bitrates at which they encode?

This ticks me off. I didn't copy the white paper so you could add your spin on what it says. Most here donate their time to help others avoid confusion and you are not helping by interpreting Apple's documents. I'm not attacking you - just your erroneous information.

So, no, it's not "true and false"!
In this case it's only TRUE - The Pro-Res Line of codecs are and will ONLY BE 10-BIT! ALL OF THEM. Even Pro-Res Proxy, the crappiest of Pro-Res, is full, honest to God, 10-bit. It is all about bit-rate not (color) bit-depth with Pro-Res.

Apple has advertised this fact everywhere in addition to providing 10-bit claims in all their documentation (such as this white paper). Why would they lie? How would it be beneficial for your Pro-Res codec to determine your bitrate? Mike, with your line of thinking then your 8-bit DV up-converted to Pro-Res 422 720p and your 10-bit DVCPRO HD 720p cross converted to Pro-Res 720p file would be different file sizes.
Run the test, see if the file sizes are different. Better yet, read the documentation on Pro-Res.

-C