|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
July 20th, 2017, 08:54 AM | #16 |
Major Player
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: california North and South
Posts: 642
|
Re: Editing 4:2:2 without conversion?
Question: Does everyone find the new update for 4:2:2 workflow worth it at 4K? I've only just barely had time to test it a little while shooting at some mixed primary color still life so I haven't done enough to make an opinion. Not having C4K but 4K UHD format is not a deal breaker... and FCPX seems to play the 4K 422 footage fine. But being 8 bit not 10 bit 422 instead of 420 didn't leap off the monitor on curved reds or seem to have much more leeway in post. But I've only shot 5 minutes of footage just to make sure the firmware update worked. Does anyone have a 420, 422 8 bit comparison they have done that shows it off? (thinking stills full sized png or something would be great)
Thanks |
July 20th, 2017, 10:02 AM | #17 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Utrecht
Posts: 88
|
Re: Editing 4:2:2 without conversion?
For me, it hasn't changed the workflow at all, so I'd say it's well worth it. I still edit straight out the camera.
I've never really understood why someone wouldn't use the absolute best settings in camera. You can't cut a piece of string longer, so its better to start with too much right? 4:2:2 is a lot more colour than 4:2:0, check this video out for better info: Then the whole 10bit, 8bit thing - 8bit grades fine, just don't push it. No one in the real world will ever tell if you're footage was 10 or 8bit unless you're overdoing the grade. Hell some of the grades on Canon DSLRs 10 years ago looked amazing, but no one was talking about it at all then. Of course, as I said above, if your camera can shoot 10bit 4:2:2, then go for it, but I think the GH5 has made people obsess over things that don't really matter. For example, the movie 'Tangerine was shot on an iPhone 5s and looks amazing despite that. |
July 20th, 2017, 10:18 AM | #18 |
Trustee
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 1,571
|
Re: Editing 4:2:2 without conversion?
Does anyone know if this re-wrapping to MXF has been tried with Panasonic's 10-bit 422 files by anyone?
Chris Young CYV Productions Sydney |
July 20th, 2017, 01:15 PM | #19 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,650
|
Re: Editing 4:2:2 without conversion?
On the Mac side, EditReady may cover this problem. You can download a demo and see if that helps.
__________________
William Hohauser - New York City Producer/Edit/Camera/Animation |
July 20th, 2017, 02:24 PM | #20 | |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 133
|
Re: Editing 4:2:2 without conversion?
Quote:
|
|
July 20th, 2017, 04:37 PM | #21 |
Major Player
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Newark, CA
Posts: 324
|
Re: Editing 4:2:2 without conversion?
|
July 21st, 2017, 12:31 AM | #22 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 133
|
Re: Editing 4:2:2 without conversion?
|
July 21st, 2017, 06:21 AM | #23 |
New Boot
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Atlanta Georgia
Posts: 19
|
Re: Editing 4:2:2 without conversion?
I took a look at EditReady for Mac and it only supports MXF as an input file format. The Rewrap function within EditReady only outputs .MOV and JVC 422 files are still not recognized after rewrap.
There are other programs for Mac that I will investigate as the earlier mentioned ffmeg solution contains .exe files that only make it suitable for Windows users. If anyone is using a Mac program to rewrap MOV to MXF, please let us know. |
| ||||||
|
|