Kinefinity Terra 4K

Doug Jensen · July 28th, 2018, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cary Knoop

They are both all-intra and use the same DCT technology.
I think that your claim is simply impossible.

No, it is true. Do you not understand how one codec can be more efficient that another? ProRes was never intended for acquisition.

Cary Knoop · July 28th, 2018, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Jensen

No, it is true. Do you not understand how one codec can be more efficient that another? ProRes was never intended for acquisition.

Sure, I don't understand, that must be it........

I am not even going to argue this: XAVC-I gives the same quality as ProRes with only needing half the file size, believe it!

Have a nice day!

Doug Jensen · July 29th, 2018, 08:29 AM

Cary, I know you disagree with almost everything I say on the forums, so fortunately you don't have to take my word for it on this one. There are plenty of reputable sources that will tell you XAVC is a more efficient codec than ProRes. In other words, you get much smaller file sizes for the same image quality.

Here are a couple:

https://www.redsharknews.com/technol...t,-xavc?page=1

"Better quality than traditional production codecs (eg ProRes or DNxHD) in less space. ProRes and DNxHD are examples of edit-friendly codecs that are easy to work with because they’re relatively simple, and use a low compression ratio. They give great quality at the expense of taking up a bit more room. The more sophisticated algorithms used in XAVC improve the quality for a given bitrate. Although the Sony format needs more computing power, with XAVC IntraFame, you will probably get the same quality as ProRes in around half the space, under optimal conditions. And working with smaller files just about compensates for the slightly greater computing load. (These aren’t Sony’s comparisons - they’re based on what we typically find ourselves.)"

XAVC vs ProRes 422HQ - Z Systems, Inc.

"I put our Odyssey 7Q on the camera and hooked it up for 4k recording using dual-link SDI inputs. This allowed me to record XAVC and ProRes 422HQ simultaneously, just to see if there was a noticeable difference between them. Check out the video to see if you can spot the difference for yourself. If you couldn’t see the difference, you are not alone. I did not see a difference when I was putting the footage together or in the final product. On top of not being able to see a difference, I was able to work with the XAVC footage natively in Final Cut Pro X just as easily as I did with the ProRes so there is no reason, edit wise, to shoot the ProRes. Add to that the stark difference in file sizes (the ProRes file was 2.7x larger), many productions could save quite a bit on camera media and storage by shooting XAVC."

Do a Google search and you'll find even more people saying the same thing.

Cary Knoop · July 29th, 2018, 08:52 AM

XAVC is simply H.264 wrapped in MXF OP-1a.

With comparable bit rates H.264 all-intra is roughly the same quality as ProRes, while H.264 long GOP needs roughly half the bitrate compared to all-intra for the same quality.

There is no magic, only marketing!

David Peterson · July 30th, 2018, 04:10 AM

A History of the Kinefinity company (google translate is your friend!):

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/kfL34lPKCA4ZO0f9VbBfWw

Another article which is in English though, worth a read:

Kinefinity ? Past, Present, Future | KineCommunity

Troy Moss · July 30th, 2018, 05:01 PM

Cary Knoop · July 30th, 2018, 05:33 PM

Unfortunately, the samples above have some crushed blacks.

Gary Huff · July 31st, 2018, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cary Knoop

With comparable bit rates H.264 all-intra is roughly the same quality as ProRes

With comparable bit-rates, H.264 all Intra is better quality than ProRes because ProRes is based on MotionJPEG and H.264 is based on MPEG-4. MotionJPEG has been around since the mid-90s. It's very CPU efficient because the encoding isn't intense.

Cary Knoop · July 31st, 2018, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary Huff

With comparable bit-rates, H.264 all Intra is better quality than ProRes because ProRes is based on MotionJPEG and H.264 is based on MPEG-4. MotionJPEG has been around since the mid-90s. It's very CPU efficient because the encoding isn't intense.

It is somewhat better, but not dramatically.
And certainly not equal to ProRes with only half the bitrate as was suggested above.

Gary Huff · July 31st, 2018, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cary Knoop

It is somewhat better, but not dramatically. And certainly not equal to ProRes with only half the bitrate as was suggested above.

It would be, because MPEG-4 has higher quality encoding than MotionJPEG. What you are arguing is nonsensical.

Cary Knoop · July 31st, 2018, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary Huff

It would be, because MPEG-4 has higher quality encoding than MotionJPEG. What you are arguing is nonsensical.

So what are you claiming Gary that H.264 all-intra is twice as efficient as ProRes or only XAVC-I?

Gary Huff · July 31st, 2018, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cary Knoop

So what are you claiming Gary that H.264 all-intra is twice as efficient as ProRes or only XAVC-I?

At least twice. It's three generations ahead of MotionJPEG, what about that do you not understand?

Doug Jensen · July 31st, 2018, 06:58 PM

Yes, at least twice as efficient. As I said, ProRes is (was) a nice codec but not very efficient and was never intended for acquisition in the first place.

Cliff Totten · July 31st, 2018, 08:13 PM

ProRes is a great quality CODEC today but let's all agree that it's now a dinosaur. Yes, it will STILL give you fantastic quality and HQ is very durable in post against stretching and bending and lifting. However, it was created in a time when computers were MUCH slower than they are today. It uses relatively simple DCT calculatuons that literally go back to the early days of .jpg compression.

H.264 is FAR more advanced, effecient and just plain "smarter". Not just long GOP and the estimation tools and entropy calculations but in all I frame too!

Look at the Lumix GH5's 10bit 400mbp/s h.264 all I frame CODEC. If you have ever shot 10bit V-Log with it, you will see that its pretty damn durable. Just as tough as ProRes but lighter weight.

I like both CODECS but I see it like this:

H.264 All I frame = Tough durability, light weight but need more CPU playback hoursepower.

ProRes HQ = Tough durability, heavy on size but easy playback on low horse power CPU computers. (Good if you have a five 4k camera multi-cam editing job on fat RAID drives)

I like them both but for different reasons.

CT

Troy Moss · July 31st, 2018, 11:44 PM

Thanks for all the Codec discussions. Now, back to the Terra 4K (watch this short action film)

Filmed with Kinefinity Terra 4K

Only one film light used for 3 shots (Aputute f7)

July 29th, 2018, 08:29 AM	#33
Doug Jensen Vortex Media Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 3,450	Re: Kinefinity Terra 4K Cary, I know you disagree with almost everything I say on the forums, so fortunately you don't have to take my word for it on this one. There are plenty of reputable sources that will tell you XAVC is a more efficient codec than ProRes. In other words, you get much smaller file sizes for the same image quality. Here are a couple: https://www.redsharknews.com/technol...t,-xavc?page=1 "Better quality than traditional production codecs (eg ProRes or DNxHD) in less space. ProRes and DNxHD are examples of edit-friendly codecs that are easy to work with because they’re relatively simple, and use a low compression ratio. They give great quality at the expense of taking up a bit more room. The more sophisticated algorithms used in XAVC improve the quality for a given bitrate. Although the Sony format needs more computing power, with XAVC IntraFame, you will probably get the same quality as ProRes in around half the space, under optimal conditions. And working with smaller files just about compensates for the slightly greater computing load. (These aren’t Sony’s comparisons - they’re based on what we typically find ourselves.)" XAVC vs ProRes 422HQ - Z Systems, Inc. "I put our Odyssey 7Q on the camera and hooked it up for 4k recording using dual-link SDI inputs. This allowed me to record XAVC and ProRes 422HQ simultaneously, just to see if there was a noticeable difference between them. Check out the video to see if you can spot the difference for yourself. If you couldn’t see the difference, you are not alone. I did not see a difference when I was putting the footage together or in the final product. On top of not being able to see a difference, I was able to work with the XAVC footage natively in Final Cut Pro X just as easily as I did with the ProRes so there is no reason, edit wise, to shoot the ProRes. Add to that the stark difference in file sizes (the ProRes file was 2.7x larger), many productions could save quite a bit on camera media and storage by shooting XAVC." Do a Google search and you'll find even more people saying the same thing. __________________ Vortex Media http://www.vortexmedia.com/ Sony FS7, F55, and XDCAM training videos, field guides, and other production tools

July 29th, 2018, 08:52 AM	#34
Cary Knoop Major Player Join Date: Jan 2017 Location: Newark, CA Posts: 324	Re: Kinefinity Terra 4K XAVC is simply H.264 wrapped in MXF OP-1a. With comparable bit rates H.264 all-intra is roughly the same quality as ProRes, while H.264 long GOP needs roughly half the bitrate compared to all-intra for the same quality. There is no magic, only marketing!

July 30th, 2018, 04:10 AM	#35
David Peterson Major Player Join Date: Mar 2014 Location: Auckland, New Zealand Posts: 361	Re: Kinefinity Terra 4K A History of the Kinefinity company (google translate is your friend!): https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/kfL34lPKCA4ZO0f9VbBfWw Another article which is in English though, worth a read: Kinefinity ? Past, Present, Future \| KineCommunity __________________ http://IronFilm.co.nz/Sound/ (Location Sound Recordist based in New Zealand) http://www.YouTube.com/c/SoundSpeeding

July 30th, 2018, 05:01 PM	#36
Troy Moss Major Player Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Rancho Cucamonga, CA Posts: 253	Re: Kinefinity MAVO Kinefinity Mavo Samples on Vimeo

July 30th, 2018, 05:33 PM	#37
Cary Knoop Major Player Join Date: Jan 2017 Location: Newark, CA Posts: 324	Re: Kinefinity Terra 4K Unfortunately, the samples above have some crushed blacks.

July 31st, 2018, 06:58 PM	#43
Doug Jensen Vortex Media Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 3,450	Re: Kinefinity Terra 4K Yes, at least twice as efficient. As I said, ProRes is (was) a nice codec but not very efficient and was never intended for acquisition in the first place. __________________ Vortex Media http://www.vortexmedia.com/ Sony FS7, F55, and XDCAM training videos, field guides, and other production tools

July 31st, 2018, 08:13 PM	#44
Cliff Totten Trustee Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Florida Posts: 1,197	Re: Kinefinity Terra 4K ProRes is a great quality CODEC today but let's all agree that it's now a dinosaur. Yes, it will STILL give you fantastic quality and HQ is very durable in post against stretching and bending and lifting. However, it was created in a time when computers were MUCH slower than they are today. It uses relatively simple DCT calculatuons that literally go back to the early days of .jpg compression. H.264 is FAR more advanced, effecient and just plain "smarter". Not just long GOP and the estimation tools and entropy calculations but in all I frame too! Look at the Lumix GH5's 10bit 400mbp/s h.264 all I frame CODEC. If you have ever shot 10bit V-Log with it, you will see that its pretty damn durable. Just as tough as ProRes but lighter weight. I like both CODECS but I see it like this: H.264 All I frame = Tough durability, light weight but need more CPU playback hoursepower. ProRes HQ = Tough durability, heavy on size but easy playback on low horse power CPU computers. (Good if you have a five 4k camera multi-cam editing job on fat RAID drives) I like them both but for different reasons. CT

July 31st, 2018, 11:44 PM	#45
Troy Moss Major Player Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Rancho Cucamonga, CA Posts: 253	BACK TO Kinefinity Terra 4K! 'Magpie' - Short Action Film - Kinefinity Terra 4k - YouTube Thanks for all the Codec discussions. Now, back to the Terra 4K (watch this short action film) Filmed with Kinefinity Terra 4K Only one film light used for 3 shots (Aputute f7)