canopus hq VS cineform
 

dose anyon knows which codec is better?
I tested both codec....and canopus codec was less shaper than cineform..
i'm not sure ...... but i think canopus have better color.

Thats pretty much how the canopus codec works even with SD...
Im yet to find an encoder which is as CLEAN and retains colour as does the the caopus codec. This is for SD DVD DElivery though.
My only issue with it though, is sharpness (but to me the softer look movs away from teh home video look, and that helps... but another issue is that it cannot convert native progressive scan material.
Im using ProCoder2, and i also use Edius' native encoders directly from the timeline.
For some reason, i get LOADS of interlacing artefacts, especially when working with letterboxed material, or text.

For waht it is, the cineform codc does what it says it does, is FAR FAR FAR more efficient to work with and in the end, i find that thse far outweigh the slight loss in colour, as if people really want to boost their coilour, they can adjust their tvs to run the video in its "movie" mode which drops gamma, increases contrast and lowers sharpness in most cases...

canopus hq VS cineform
 

I've used Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5 and 2.0 , Vegas , Avid Express Pro HD and Avid Liquid along with Edius 3.6 using the Canopus HQ Codec. Edius by far is the best performing solution for HDV. in speed , render time, and final output quality. The Cineform codec (using wavelet)on paper should outperform the Canopus(using dct) compression. But Canopus has a much better MPEG compiler. Also the canopus HQ codec seems to handle changes and increase in chroma much better.
Edius has drawbacks, no matte keyer, limited plug-in support, for example but it's the only system that works quick and flawless on my Pentium 4 2.8G,computer.

well ... one point for each side. It does not help a lot the poor guy.