Using Photozoom Pro then export to Cineform? at DVinfo.net

Todd Giglio · April 1st, 2008, 12:24 PM

Hello,

I'm shooting a feature with the Panasonic HVX200 (shooting 720 24pN) and I plan on uprezzing the footage and was wondering about this workflow:

Export the clips as an image sequence.
Import the folder into Photozoom Pro 2.
Uprez to 2k or 4k (I could just go with 1920x1080, but I may get better results if I go higher in case I need to eventually due a film out).
Batch process.
Import new processed image sequence into Quicktime Pro and export as a Cineform QT movie.
Import into FCP and finish color correction, etc.

I'm just curious if anyone has tried this. I have uprezzed to 1920x1080 and export with the ProRes codec and the results were good.

Obviously I'm looking for more resolution (and I don't really expect miracles) but the footage could definitely benefit with a higher pixel count (since I also plan on using NeatVideo to reduce the video noise).

I know Cineform Neo4K can convert the original files and uprez them, I'm just not sure how much sharpening would be happening (and Photozoom Pro 2 gives really nice results... time consuming, but nice).

Any suggestions, advice, etc. would be appreciated. And now that I finally have a MacPro (3.2 Octo-core with 18gb Ram) I can take advantage of the Cineform workflow.

Thanks.

Todd

Kris Bird · April 2nd, 2008, 05:22 AM

I upressed an old music video of ours with photozoom pro, from 576p to 720p, and the results were definitely worthwhile. We just wrapped on a 1080p feature and I'll probably give up-ressing a go as well (if only for curiosity's sake, since 1080p is fine for our deliverables), cheers for the reminder.

Todd Giglio · April 2nd, 2008, 07:37 AM

Hi Kris,

Just curious, what size would you uprez to? I know 2k and 4k are basically 'square' sizes (2400x2400, etc.) but if your image is 1920x1080p what would you set the size to in Photozoom Pro 2?

I'm really curious as to this route while using Cineform. I'm definitely going to go from 720p to 1080p (but I'd love to squeeze a little more resolution if I could :) )

Todd

Kris Bird · April 2nd, 2008, 09:43 AM

My thought was that it would be interesting to see whether an upres to 2K square pixels (2048x1152), followed by a final composite at that res (cg elements, titles, etc.), would be worthwhile. It would give me a 2K deliverable, which sounds better than 1080p, and might be subtly sharper. We'd obviously be talking an upres from 1440x1080 to 2048x1152, so the test/assumption would be that photozoom pro would do a better conversion to square pixels than the viewer (or film out) would manage. Will let you know when I get a chance to try it! 4K upres would be just curiosity, I don't expect to deliver 4K in any shape or form, and I don't have a way to play it back, but it would be interesting to see how it does.

David Newman · April 2nd, 2008, 10:21 AM

Remember you are only adding resolution, not detail. A 1080p master is plenty for filmouts.

Kris Bird · April 2nd, 2008, 11:08 AM

Hi David- sure, I'm under no illusion that it would work miracles, it was mainly just wondering whether performing the final composite and grade in square pixlels (i.e. getting free of the horizontal downsampling, and authoring text, credits, cg elements square pixel) would make any difference. I suppose it would be akin to working in a slightly supersampled environment, providing that the re-sampling doesn't do more harm than good in the first place. I think it would be a worthwhile experiment, but you're probably right than 1080p is plenty.

Kris Bird · April 2nd, 2008, 11:09 AM

Btw David- we're now in post on our first feature length, all footage converted to cineform neo/ filmscan. blog.thedeadoutside.co.uk, will keep you posted.

Todd Giglio · April 2nd, 2008, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Newman

Remember you are only adding resolution, not detail. A 1080p master is plenty for filmouts.

Hi David,

The only difference is the way Photozoom Pro 2 works. The image is cleaned up and sharpened (very naturally too) and the larger you upres, the more 'detail' that seems to be present. Granted, you aren't adding detail, but you are bringing out more detail. But I also guess that too much upressing could give unwanted artifacts as well.

I'll try to give some test results once I get everything in order. I think you are right though, 1080p is probably enough anyway... :)

Todd

April 1st, 2008, 12:24 PM	#1
Todd Giglio Major Player Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 265	Using Photozoom Pro then export to Cineform? Hello, I'm shooting a feature with the Panasonic HVX200 (shooting 720 24pN) and I plan on uprezzing the footage and was wondering about this workflow: Export the clips as an image sequence. Import the folder into Photozoom Pro 2. Uprez to 2k or 4k (I could just go with 1920x1080, but I may get better results if I go higher in case I need to eventually due a film out). Batch process. Import new processed image sequence into Quicktime Pro and export as a Cineform QT movie. Import into FCP and finish color correction, etc. I'm just curious if anyone has tried this. I have uprezzed to 1920x1080 and export with the ProRes codec and the results were good. Obviously I'm looking for more resolution (and I don't really expect miracles) but the footage could definitely benefit with a higher pixel count (since I also plan on using NeatVideo to reduce the video noise). I know Cineform Neo4K can convert the original files and uprez them, I'm just not sure how much sharpening would be happening (and Photozoom Pro 2 gives really nice results... time consuming, but nice). Any suggestions, advice, etc. would be appreciated. And now that I finally have a MacPro (3.2 Octo-core with 18gb Ram) I can take advantage of the Cineform workflow. Thanks. Todd

April 2nd, 2008, 10:21 AM	#5
David Newman CTO, CineForm Inc. Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Cardiff-by-the-Sea, California Posts: 8,095	Remember you are only adding resolution, not detail. A 1080p master is plenty for filmouts. __________________ David Newman -- web: www.gopro.com blog: cineform.blogspot.com -- twitter: twitter.com/David_Newman

April 2nd, 2008, 05:22 AM	#2
Kris Bird Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: UK Posts: 173	I upressed an old music video of ours with photozoom pro, from 576p to 720p, and the results were definitely worthwhile. We just wrapped on a 1080p feature and I'll probably give up-ressing a go as well (if only for curiosity's sake, since 1080p is fine for our deliverables), cheers for the reminder.

April 2nd, 2008, 07:37 AM	#3
Todd Giglio Major Player Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 265	Hi Kris, Just curious, what size would you uprez to? I know 2k and 4k are basically 'square' sizes (2400x2400, etc.) but if your image is 1920x1080p what would you set the size to in Photozoom Pro 2? I'm really curious as to this route while using Cineform. I'm definitely going to go from 720p to 1080p (but I'd love to squeeze a little more resolution if I could :) ) Todd

April 2nd, 2008, 09:43 AM	#4
Kris Bird Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: UK Posts: 173	My thought was that it would be interesting to see whether an upres to 2K square pixels (2048x1152), followed by a final composite at that res (cg elements, titles, etc.), would be worthwhile. It would give me a 2K deliverable, which sounds better than 1080p, and might be subtly sharper. We'd obviously be talking an upres from 1440x1080 to 2048x1152, so the test/assumption would be that photozoom pro would do a better conversion to square pixels than the viewer (or film out) would manage. Will let you know when I get a chance to try it! 4K upres would be just curiosity, I don't expect to deliver 4K in any shape or form, and I don't have a way to play it back, but it would be interesting to see how it does.

April 2nd, 2008, 11:08 AM	#6
Kris Bird Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: UK Posts: 173	Hi David- sure, I'm under no illusion that it would work miracles, it was mainly just wondering whether performing the final composite and grade in square pixlels (i.e. getting free of the horizontal downsampling, and authoring text, credits, cg elements square pixel) would make any difference. I suppose it would be akin to working in a slightly supersampled environment, providing that the re-sampling doesn't do more harm than good in the first place. I think it would be a worthwhile experiment, but you're probably right than 1080p is plenty.

April 2nd, 2008, 11:09 AM	#7
Kris Bird Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: UK Posts: 173	Btw David- we're now in post on our first feature length, all footage converted to cineform neo/ filmscan. blog.thedeadoutside.co.uk, will keep you posted.