ProRes looks the best in Final Cut? at DVinfo.net

Aric Mannion · April 12th, 2010, 01:10 PM

I've done a test exporting an animation from After Effects with 3 different codecs. The gigantic "animation codec" the more gigantic "uncompressed 422" and the manageable "ProRes HQ". They looked exactly the same to me in quicktime, but in Final Cut the animation and uncompressed versions were jaggy, even after compressing or exporting from Final Cut. The Pro Res version looked way better.
I have no question that using ProRes is the best option for me because it takes up less space than the other codecs. But I am surprised that the higher quality codecs couldn't hold up in Final Cut. I've seen this before many years ago in animation class when we were all told to use animation codec when exporting for Final Cut because it's the best quality. It just looked crunchy to me when it was in the timeline. Has anyone else noticed this?

David Knaggs · April 12th, 2010, 02:09 PM

I won't use ProRes when I send a clip to Motion. Sometimes I've noticed a slight color shift when I finish the round trip back into the FCP sequence. So I always use the Animation codec these days because it keeps the colors pristine. Mind you, I'm running FCP 6.0.6 and Motion 3.0.2.

Arnie Schlissel · April 12th, 2010, 04:53 PM

Aric, do you have an external broadcast monitor hooked up? It's best to evaluate your footage there, especially for this kind of side-by-side testing.

FWIW, I prefer to render out of AE, Shake or Motion in a codec that matches my FCP timeline. If I need an alpha channel for transparency, then I would use animation or the new ProRes 4444.

Craig Parkes · April 12th, 2010, 05:41 PM

Are you putting the files on sequence with a non matching timeline? Do they come up with an orange bar above them (meaning you are unlimited realtime and they need rendering) - Could be your viewing conditions/lack of render rather than anything directly relating to Final Cut.

Aric Mannion · April 13th, 2010, 10:01 AM

I'm looking at a new apple screen, not a broadcast monitor. But I'm not looking at color, I'm looking at jaggies which are only introduced by my non-pro res clips after rendering or exporting from final cut. I can't imagine editing with my sequence settings set as uncompressed or animation, so admittedly the clips do not match my sequence settings. I know I can't trust FCP canvas, but even after export the pro res clips look better.
If you guys have time maybe you could put a ProRes HQ, animation, and uncompress 422 clips in a timeline, and export them to see which looks best. Everything but pro res causes my image to have jagged edges.

I'll try to upload screenshots when I have time.

Arnie Schlissel · April 13th, 2010, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aric Mannion

I'm looking at a new apple screen, not a broadcast monitor.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aric Mannion

I know I can't trust FCP canvas

Well, this is why it's important to use a broadcast monitor. The FCP canvas is designed for performance and convenience, and it only works at half resolution most of the time. IOW, don't trust the canvas.

Aric Mannion · April 13th, 2010, 01:02 PM

I'm not looking at the canvas Arnie, I'm talking about the final export. Apple monitors are nice enough for me to see that a jaggy video looks bad and a crisp video looks good.
Anyway I'm not making this for broadcast and I'd be surprised if the results were opposite when viewed on a broadcast monitor.

Craig Parkes · April 13th, 2010, 11:41 PM

Arnie - because the sequence settings aren't matching your footage is going through two lots of compression, once out of after effects, and again on the timeline out of Final Cut when you export again. Not knowing more details about your project (Resolution, Pixel Aspect Ratio etc.) or how you have exported from either Final Cut or After Effects its near impossible to tell what's going on - there are a number of quirks with how quicktime plays back different footage that could be impacting you, but it's probably most likely to do with the sequence settings on your timeline.

Could also be an interlacing issue - again this depends on your sequence settings and your project settings.

Aric Mannion · April 15th, 2010, 09:54 AM

Craig, that was directed to me not Arnie.
I have proof right here that in all instances ProRes looks better in Final Cut than animation or uncompressed 422.
I have exported the exact same clip from After Effects three times: once with animation codec, once as Pro Res HQ, and once as Uncompressed 422. I have brought these three clips into a Final Cut Pro timeline with a 1920x1080 sequence and fields set to none. I have made three final cut timelines, the only difference being that one sequence setting is set to "uncompressed 422" one sequence setting is set to "animation" and one sequence setting is set to "ProRes HQ". I have labeled with final cut's text which is which (so the text quality is not part of the test). In all sequences the ProRes HQ looks the best. Please take a look at this attachment for yourself, it is the animation sequence version but all three versions had identical results. You can clearly see that Uncompressed and animation codec videos in Final Cut are Jagged when compared to ProResHQ, and therefore not usable to me. This is just a circle made in After Effects with the shape tool, but I have the same issue with HD video shot from various cameras as well as any of my animation work that I do.
This is as detailed a response as I can give, and if any of you still have doubts please do a test and help me understand.

April 12th, 2010, 01:10 PM	#1
Aric Mannion Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Boston, Massachusetts Posts: 616	ProRes looks the best in Final Cut? I've done a test exporting an animation from After Effects with 3 different codecs. The gigantic "animation codec" the more gigantic "uncompressed 422" and the manageable "ProRes HQ". They looked exactly the same to me in quicktime, but in Final Cut the animation and uncompressed versions were jaggy, even after compressing or exporting from Final Cut. The Pro Res version looked way better. I have no question that using ProRes is the best option for me because it takes up less space than the other codecs. But I am surprised that the higher quality codecs couldn't hold up in Final Cut. I've seen this before many years ago in animation class when we were all told to use animation codec when exporting for Final Cut because it's the best quality. It just looked crunchy to me when it was in the timeline. Has anyone else noticed this?

April 12th, 2010, 05:41 PM	#4
Craig Parkes Major Player Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Auckland, New Zealand Posts: 444	Are you putting the files on sequence with a non matching timeline? Do they come up with an orange bar above them (meaning you are unlimited realtime and they need rendering) - Could be your viewing conditions/lack of render rather than anything directly relating to Final Cut. __________________ www.afterglow.co.nz

April 13th, 2010, 11:41 PM	#8
Craig Parkes Major Player Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Auckland, New Zealand Posts: 444	Arnie - because the sequence settings aren't matching your footage is going through two lots of compression, once out of after effects, and again on the timeline out of Final Cut when you export again. Not knowing more details about your project (Resolution, Pixel Aspect Ratio etc.) or how you have exported from either Final Cut or After Effects its near impossible to tell what's going on - there are a number of quirks with how quicktime plays back different footage that could be impacting you, but it's probably most likely to do with the sequence settings on your timeline. Could also be an interlacing issue - again this depends on your sequence settings and your project settings. __________________ www.afterglow.co.nz

April 12th, 2010, 02:09 PM	#2
David Knaggs Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 826	I won't use ProRes when I send a clip to Motion. Sometimes I've noticed a slight color shift when I finish the round trip back into the FCP sequence. So I always use the Animation codec these days because it keeps the colors pristine. Mind you, I'm running FCP 6.0.6 and Motion 3.0.2.

April 12th, 2010, 04:53 PM	#3
Arnie Schlissel Major Player Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: New York NY Posts: 322	Aric, do you have an external broadcast monitor hooked up? It's best to evaluate your footage there, especially for this kind of side-by-side testing. FWIW, I prefer to render out of AE, Shake or Motion in a codec that matches my FCP timeline. If I need an alpha channel for transparency, then I would use animation or the new ProRes 4444.

April 13th, 2010, 10:01 AM	#5
Aric Mannion Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Boston, Massachusetts Posts: 616	I'm looking at a new apple screen, not a broadcast monitor. But I'm not looking at color, I'm looking at jaggies which are only introduced by my non-pro res clips after rendering or exporting from final cut. I can't imagine editing with my sequence settings set as uncompressed or animation, so admittedly the clips do not match my sequence settings. I know I can't trust FCP canvas, but even after export the pro res clips look better. If you guys have time maybe you could put a ProRes HQ, animation, and uncompress 422 clips in a timeline, and export them to see which looks best. Everything but pro res causes my image to have jagged edges. I'll try to upload screenshots when I have time.

April 13th, 2010, 01:02 PM	#7
Aric Mannion Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Boston, Massachusetts Posts: 616	I'm not looking at the canvas Arnie, I'm talking about the final export. Apple monitors are nice enough for me to see that a jaggy video looks bad and a crisp video looks good. Anyway I'm not making this for broadcast and I'd be surprised if the results were opposite when viewed on a broadcast monitor.