Canon C100 - Internal Codec vs Prores External

Matt Davis · December 8th, 2013, 10:47 AM

The Ninja thing is not just about 4:2:0 vs 4:2:2 - there are times when the AVCHD codec falls apart (the 'AVCHD killed by tree' example above. It's not the way to go for every shoot, but you can SEE the quantisation errors of 4:2:0 on the vectorscope. The trouble is that the near invisible effects of these errors tend to remain invisible for several transcode iterations, then at the 5th or 6th stage, they get exponentially more pronounced until you end up at the viewers' screens.

HD transmission in the UK has been pulled down from 16 mbits to 12 mbits and now 8 mbits in the quest to fit more channels into a given space, and this has affected the end quality at viewers' screens. The better the original quality, the better it will look after the torture of transmission.

And again, the same BBC chap (and his fellow panel members) had a real dig at the 'DSLR for TV' thing - the whole point of the infamous episode of 'House' was to keep the look grungy.

It has to be said, cameras like the Canon 5D Mk2 don't have the resolution - the resolving power - like the C100. Most broadcast cameras should be resolving 1000 lines plus, and the Canon DSLRs barely makes 800. Only the 1D-C has been 'approved' for broadcast use by the BBC.

Apologies for this bit of FS100ness in a C100 forum, but check out the bit that compares the FS100 to EX1 and 5D Mk2 - the C100 achieves EX1-like detail in images over the FS100.

I still think a Ninja is a valuable tool to have at hand - I get more use from my Pix than I do from my mattebox or shoulder rig (and my matte box cost the same as a Ninja), and on a couple of shoots it's been essential. Talking heads aren't going to see much value, but even on the conference last week, it took a fair few hours to get 12 hours of footage per day off SxS cards and into an edit ready format. Had I shot on a Ninja on both cameras at ProRes, it would have been a lot quicker (I'll do that next time! LOL).

Dave Mercer · October 21st, 2014, 03:59 PM

Just to revisit this topic, if one recorded internally, then edited and exported Prores, I presume there would be no further degradation down the broadcast chain (even if the source is not as "clean" as recording Prores)?

December 8th, 2013, 10:47 AM	#16
Matt Davis Trustee Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Berkshire, UK Posts: 1,562	Re: Canon C100 - Internal Codec vs Prores External The Ninja thing is not just about 4:2:0 vs 4:2:2 - there are times when the AVCHD codec falls apart (the 'AVCHD killed by tree' example above. It's not the way to go for every shoot, but you can SEE the quantisation errors of 4:2:0 on the vectorscope. The trouble is that the near invisible effects of these errors tend to remain invisible for several transcode iterations, then at the 5th or 6th stage, they get exponentially more pronounced until you end up at the viewers' screens. HD transmission in the UK has been pulled down from 16 mbits to 12 mbits and now 8 mbits in the quest to fit more channels into a given space, and this has affected the end quality at viewers' screens. The better the original quality, the better it will look after the torture of transmission. And again, the same BBC chap (and his fellow panel members) had a real dig at the 'DSLR for TV' thing - the whole point of the infamous episode of 'House' was to keep the look grungy. It has to be said, cameras like the Canon 5D Mk2 don't have the resolution - the resolving power - like the C100. Most broadcast cameras should be resolving 1000 lines plus, and the Canon DSLRs barely makes 800. Only the 1D-C has been 'approved' for broadcast use by the BBC. Apologies for this bit of FS100ness in a C100 forum, but check out the bit that compares the FS100 to EX1 and 5D Mk2 - the C100 achieves EX1-like detail in images over the FS100. Vimeo I still think a Ninja is a valuable tool to have at hand - I get more use from my Pix than I do from my mattebox or shoulder rig (and my matte box cost the same as a Ninja), and on a couple of shoots it's been essential. Talking heads aren't going to see much value, but even on the conference last week, it took a fair few hours to get 12 hours of footage per day off SxS cards and into an edit ready format. Had I shot on a Ninja on both cameras at ProRes, it would have been a lot quicker (I'll do that next time! LOL). __________________ Director/Editor - MDMA Ltd: Write, Shoot, Edit, Publish - mattdavis.pro EX1 x2, C100 --> FCPX & PPro6

October 21st, 2014, 03:59 PM	#17
Dave Mercer Major Player Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Lake Atitlan, Guatemala Posts: 346	Re: Canon C100 - Internal Codec vs Prores External Just to revisit this topic, if one recorded internally, then edited and exported Prores, I presume there would be no further degradation down the broadcast chain (even if the source is not as "clean" as recording Prores)?