Edius and Cineform Neo

[Bill Ravens]

David...

I've, recently, transfered to Canopus Edius for my main editting NLE, letting Vegas' unreliability relegate it to my beta editing software. I'm well invested in Neo HD, and, have come to rely on Neo HD as a dependable, reliable intermediate format.

Edius is designed to work in YUV color space. Neo HD works in RGB color space. Is there a better version of CFHD that I should be using? Does Cineform plan an implementation of CFHD for Edius?

It may well be that Canopus' HQ codec is competitive with CFHD, but, I've come to like Cineform's reliability.

[David Newman]

Sorry, no plans for Canopus support, the market is too small. They have Canopus HQ, while not really competitive, solves most needs for the Edius user. NEO HD is a YUV based system, however Vegas and maybe Canopus is using VFW to access third party codec in RGBA mode, which unfortunately loses some performance -- one reason CineForm is so much faster in Premiere than Vegas.

[Bill Ravens]

was afraid of that. thanx for answering, anyway

[Roberto Longo]

"while not really competitive"

Why do you think it is not competitive?

In these days I'm testing both CineformIntermediate and CamopusHq on my Vegas 7 system.
My cam is Jvc Gy-Hd100e and I shot only @ 720 24p
I'm trying to see differences bewteen clips and..

File size = almost same (film scan 1 on cineform , standard on HQ)
Playback rate on vegas = identical
Rendering time = not deeply tested yet (seems similar, maybe cineform is faster)
Audio conversion = Hq wins. In some clips captured using HDlink I hear a bacground noise like a linear disturb "zzzzzzzz" (cannot explain by my horrible english). This happens ruffly 20% of clips
Converision time = of course cineform is better, I can capture clips directly on cineform in realtime mode

From my point of view there are plus and minus on each side. The overall quality seems equal to me, that's why I'm asking why you think it is not competitive.

Thanks a lot, Roberto

[Bill Ravens]

Originally Posted by Bill Ravens

It may well be that Canopus' HQ codec is competitive with CFHD, but, I've come to like Cineform's reliability.

Please re-read my post. Did I say it wasn't competitive?
In fact, I'm finding that Neo HD does NOT work very well in Edius' YUV space, nor does it import very well into apps like TMPGenC; and, am relying, exclusively, on Canopus HQ, these days.

[Roberto Longo]

Bill I was referring to David Newman...

"They have Canopus HQ, while not really competitive"

[Bill Ravens]

ahhh....thanx for clarifying

[David Newman]

Using a 8-bit codec via an 8-bit RGB interface in Vegas, it not going to really test, YUV or a 10-bit/12-bit CineForm codec. This is why we don't consider HQ competitive to CineForm, a larger part of market is concerned with what happens beyond 8-bit. Also we just don't market to the same groups, so we don't even test Canopus's products. More competitive is Pro RES 422 HQ, and Avid's DNxHD, with have 10-bit YUV modes, but neither supports 4:4:4 and 4:4:4:4, so the competitors are more broadcast focuses and CineForm more feature/creative focused. This is on the codec alone, but CineForm doesn't sell codecs -- you can't buy a codec from our web site -- we focus on workflow issues to help profession projects with real-time acquisition with pulldown removal as needed, while supporting cross platform at a quality equivalent to uncompressed. Basically different markets makes us non-competitive, even so we a good friends with Thompson, the owners of Canopus (come to our booth at NAB and you will see what I mean.)

PS. Audio buzz, contact support with samples as that should not happen, and we don't have any other reports of this. As we handle audio as uncompressed, buzz should not happen.