![]() |
Quote:
My top 5 reasons for using PPro over Avisynth: 1. PPro lets me see changes in real-time. Real time is important, so I can get a feel for pace, flow, timing. That is why people spend money on hardware, use proxy files (like I described above), and/or purchase a real-time codec like Cineform. If I only had Avisynth, I would need to compile an output everytime I made an edit in order to check if it was correct or not. And, as I'd be guessing my edits blind, it would take an awful long time to complete even a short sequence. Lets say I had two clips, one wide-angle and one close-up. I want to cut from wide-angle to the close-up at exactly the right point. In PPro I can find that point very quickly, make the edit and then watch the result instantly. With Avisynth I'd have to guess, compile, watch, change, recompile, watch, etc. So, if I knew beforehand that I needed to cut at frame 150, increase saturation by 3% and reduce gamma by 2%, Avisynth is no problem. But, I don't know without seeing it first, and that is where PPro comes in. 2. I work in a team, and not everyone in the team would appreciate using a text-based editor. 3. Adobe software, like Microsoft Office, is widespread enough to be considered a standard, and standards are good for team working. 4. PPro works with 10-bit (or greater) precision, Avisynth is 8-bit only. 5. Adobe Media Encoder has a nice GUI. Sometimes it is more convenient to drag-and-drop than it is to type commands. Avisynth is an excellent tool. As you say it is more stable than Premiere (at least on my system), and there is excellent community support and development. But it is not a replacement for Premiere, and it was never designed to be. |
Quote:
I do know (as I said before) the files from QT 7.6 going straight into Premieres shows parades that have banding (missing values) like crazy. The Cineform is as smooth at silk. |
Quote:
1) Method above has an 8-bit conversion from 709 to 601, which will most likely be slightly lossy. Cineform won't be lossy in this respect. 2) Method above is otherwise completely lossless, Cineform is slightly lossy (but should not be visible). If you're on CS3, my understanding is Cineform have an importer that correctly interprets the files. So you should be able to use the Procamp to reduce contrast and increase brightness. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Can you bring up the RGB parade, drag a ProcAmp filter onto your clip, enable max bit depth rendering on the sequence, then increase/decrease brightness. Do you see more detail magically appear? |
Quote:
But the data was still there above 100 and below 0. I did what you said and used the procamp to adjust brightness and contrast to get all the data within 0 to 100. I had to reduce the contrast from 100 to 75 and push the brightness back up by 12.5 to get it to fit (named "fit" pics below). Parade with default procamp: http://elleh.com/public/parade-flat.jpg Parade with adjusted procamp: http://elleh.com/public/parade-fit.jpg Notice that there is a blob in the upper right part of the red parade that went from totally missing to visible. Photo with default procamp: http://elleh.com/public/pic-flat.jpg Photo with adjusted procamp: http://elleh.com/public/pic-fit.jpg Notice the highlight in the white fan and the dark books to the immediate right. I obviously wouldn't use a curve like this to make such a lousy image, but the crushed highlights and crushed blacks are definitely back in the photo. Having 25% of the photo out of the 0-100 range seems high to me. 16-235 is only missing 7% of 0-255. It doesn't matter though if I can get to all of it. I owe you one (or two or three). |
Quote:
If you want to see things as they came out of the camera, I think the Fast Color Corrector filter could be more 'faithful' as you can enter specific RGB numbers rather than trying to guesstimate the the correct level percentage by eye. Drag the Fast Color Corrector onto your clip (instead of the Procamp), go down to the Input Levels/Output Levels section and enter the following: Input Levels: 0.0, 1.0, 255.0 Output Levels: 16.0, 235.0 |
Quote:
Parade with fast color corr: http://elleh.com/public/FCC-16-235.jpg Photo with fast color corr: http://elleh.com/public/FCC-16-235-PHOTO.jpg |
Quote:
Turn on chroma, or look at the RGB Parade, and you should see levels extending below 0 and above 100 for certain intense colors. Whether this is a problem or not will depend on what equipment further down the line can handle; for NTSC -16 to +121 is acceptable, possibly higher for certain colors. You can fix over-saturated colors by continuing to reduce brightness/contrast as you did with procAmp, but most likely this would result in an over-dark picture, as it is the intensity (saturation) of certain colors that is problematic and needs to be fixed, not the overall brightness level. If you're not broadcasting, I wouldn't worry about Chroma just now, you can always fix that later as required. The important thing is to get the luma correctly between 0-100 to avoid clipping. If your final output is to 8-bit RGB (YouTube/Vimeo??? haven't checked yet what they require), I would say it is best as a final step to expand back from 16-235 to 0-255 while you're still in 10-bit Premiere Pro. Otherwise, you'll be outputting reduced contrast, and the final video renderer will be expanding to 0-255 (hopefully), but with 8-bit precision. |
Quote:
Also, assuming the workflow of 5D .MOV > Cineform > Premiere CS3 max bit depth project with range recovered using ProcAmp or Fast Color Corrector,........when I'm exporting to some compressed file format (to be used for an upcoming screening of my work on a digital projector via computer) do I have to worry about this 8 bit RGB issue that you mention. Ignorance was bliss for me for many years working with DV. It's only since I got into photography that the significane of of colour space issues have been brougth home to me. |
Quote:
*Does anybody know about what we need to consider regarding chroma levels for Blu-Ray? Quote:
|
Quote:
My final output will be film. We're making an indie with a bunch of people who want to branch out on their resumes. The producer/director/writer is a writer who sold the script for the next Halloween saga. We know two actors on cable dramas and one from a major soap. We know about ten people who want to be grips, pullers, anything they can. They are all working for free (well, tiny bit of sales) including the DP (me). The director and I have never done this before, so it should be interesting. :-) We are going to practice on a music video for a friend to try to avoid making complete idiots of ourselves. The writer is hooked up with a guy who sells indies, mainly overseas. Unlike Jon, we are not going to try a short first and it definitely won't be film festival material, but we are going to give it our best because you never know what can happen. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:23 AM. |
DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2025 The Digital Video Information Network