Canopus HQ vs. Cineform 10th Gen Test
 

I decided to conduct a codec test between the Canopus HQ and Cineform codecs. As far as the testing methodology, I borrowed from Cineform's website as per the following link (Look towards the bottom of the page):

http://www.cineform.com/technology/H...ysis051011.htm

The only deviation are the following:

1. Used jpg acquired from internet (Here is the link: http://www.deniscarl.com/previous/20..._1920x1080.jpg )

2. Vegas 7 was used

And here are the resultant files from the 10th generation test:

Original: http://webpages.charter.net/joropeza...l_Adjusted.png

Cineform: http://webpages.charter.net/joropeza/10th_Cineform.png

Canopus HQ: http://webpages.charter.net/joropeza...Canopus_HQ.png

IMO, the clear winner is Canopus. In addition to quality, I experienced better performance and smaller files sizes with the Canopus HQ codec within Vegas 7.

Let me know what you think!

Juan

frankly , i do not see a lot of difference between the 3 pictures.

Very interesting.

I do see a difference but it is very subtle. In fact some may say the Cineform is better because it looks cleaner although a little softer at the same time. The softness seems to get rid a lot of the noise and imperfections making an overall very pleasing image. If watching on a TV I bet nobody would ever be able to tell the difference.

I agree!
 

Thomas,

With out a doubt there is a difference. The CineForm file definitely produced a softer image at the expense of noise, which in the end is good I guess. But, I can see some jaggies (stair stepping) on some of the edges of the petals, which in the end is not good.

The Canopus HQ file rendered a closer replica of the original. It's almost like it produced a file that's in the middle of the road when compared to the original and the CineForm file. But, in the end as you point out, it would be hard to tell the difference when viewed on a TV.

One final observation I do want to make is the fact that most of the resolution loss and degradation was obtained after the first generation alone. This did not surprise me due to the fact that I have heard others on these forums mention this as well.

Juan

Just for the record, there is not just a single Cineform codec. They have released a number of versions, you can select the quality level vs. bit rate setting in their new versions, and they have 8 and 10 bit versions of their codec. I believe that ConnectHD and AspectHD are only 8 bits whereas ProspectHD is 10 bits. Most of the stuff shown on their website is with the 10 bit version. To be complete, you might want to document the settings you used for the comparison (e.g., ConnectHD? which is 8 bit, which version?, which quality setting?, etc). I have no experience with the Canopus codec, but if there are similar settings you might also want to document those as well...

Just my 2 cents,
Bill

For the cineform renders I used the following:

Prospect HD within Vegas 7
8 bit (Vegas Limitation)
Quality setting was set to the best setting of 'Film Scan 2'

For Canopus HQ:

Canopus HQ within Vegas 7
8 bit (Canopus HQ & Vegas Limitation)
Quality setting was set to the best setting of 'Fine'

Hope this helps with the comparison.
Juan