What is Comparable to ProRes422(LT) in Win
 

Hello,

I found one thread getting close to my question but not totally addressing. I am working some footage on a windows machine that I received from a guy using a Mac. It is the ProRes 422LT and I'd like to know what is the comparable format/codec to use in Windows. I've already tried the DNxHD but it really wasn't suitable.

The guy is happy when I render out in .mov format, YUV uncompressed 422 but that is out of After Effects. Ideally, I'd like to render out of Sony Vegas Pro 12 but it does not seem to have that same in .mov.

I'm just not sure that after effects will render out 72 minutes of video.

Any ideas? I appreciate your help and thanks ahead.

Eric

Re: What is Comparable to ProRes422(LT) in Win
 

Hi Eric. This doesn't really answer your question, but there's a very good white paper by Apple about ProRes. If you look at the end of the document you'll see the detailed specs, which might help a bit. http://images.apple.com/support/fina...-July-2009.pdf

Re: What is Comparable to ProRes422(LT) in Win
 

DNxHD.
Some flavor of 422 MXF, but I don't know much about how Mac deals with it.

Did I mention DNxHD? What didn't work about it? Can you fix it?

I do seem to remember that Vegas will create an uncompressed MOV. Go into the custom settings for an MOV template and change the codec to "Animation".

Re: What is Comparable to ProRes422(LT) in Win
 

Hi Seth,

I'm back to this CODEC dilemma again now and somehow missed your earlier reply. Guess it didn't notify me and with all of the venues I was checking, I missed your reply. So, first, a belated thanks for the reply (along with Keith).

So, here's where I am. I'm now at my final product and need to really resolve this issue with what is most comparable to the ProRes422(LT) codec.

When I tried the DNxHD codec, looked fine on my end but the customer found it somehow less than stellar. He was however pleased with the YUV 422 uncompressed .mov and anything 422 seemed to be ok. However, the file sizes are immense. It seems to go YUV uncompressed in response to the ProRes422LT which is compressed is wasteful. But that's only because I am concerned for space.

The file I received was only 50GB and that same file rendered in uncompressed avi is 600GB.

Need help.

Thanks,
Eric

Re: What is Comparable to ProRes422(LT) in Win
 

Would Cineform work? It allows you to create .mov files that work on PCs and Macs.

Re: What is Comparable to ProRes422(LT) in Win
 

Cineform is pretty bulletproof cross-platform, *once you and your client are set up!*

Strangely, there aren't a lot of choices. DNxHD; this can be great, but "less than stellar" is not enough info to offer any suggestions about why it isn't working for your client. It may be working fine; maybe they don't really know.

The various uncompressed formats like QT-Animation will be huge, yes. You just need to deal with that, ship cheap hard drives, lots of people do that. It really helps if your client has a utility that allows them to read NTFS drives on mac.

If all the above is just too complicated, you could create a high-bitrate QT-MPEG4. Try something like 10Mbps for 1080i, or 6Mbps for 720p. This is far from lossless, but at high bitrates can be visually lossless for many purposes. But if you can't get any of the more challenging solutions working...

Re: What is Comparable to ProRes422(LT) in Win
 

I have not tried the Cineform CODEC but I do see that option in my render options. The guy seemed to want a 422 standard - not sure if that is. I think the look is the look. I know I've rendered a straight out uncompressed YUV avi that looks spectacular (600GB). When I say less than stellar, well when I used the DNxHD codec and sent an example, he noticed some degradation in quality is all I can really say. If it was noticeable visually, then I suppose I have to go with him on it.

I've tried so many now. I believe the one he liked best was this CinePac was it? I know it was a 422 uncompressed .mov. I need to render about 71 minutes and it konked out before finishing that. I am trying now to split it in half since I did successfully render 40 minutes the other day.

Ideally, it would be nice to just convert the 600GB avi file to ProRes422(LT), however one of the more reputable converters (PC Windows ProRes encoder) that I found through an After Effects News Group has two issues. It works on some small test files but lightens the footage just a notch and second, it couldn't seem to handle the 600GB file and just stayed at 0% forever.

Anyone know of a good converter?

Eric

Re: What is Comparable to ProRes422(LT) in Win
 

While I've not tried this, one CAN export ProRes from the PC. I already have most of the required software installed on my system for other purposes and it is all free/shareware stuff.

Regarding "422", that refers to the color space of the video, typically referred to as 4:2:2. Most camcorders today record 4:2:0, while miniDV was 4:1:1. Uncompressed video with ALL of the original color info intact is 4:4:4. This link from Adobe explains the color business - The Video Road – 2010 – June

While 4:2:0 can look fine to the naked eye, the computer does notice the missing color info especially when trying to do chromakeying or color grading, so 4:2:2 is much preferred for this type of work.

Thanks