ProRes422(HQ) vs H.264...

Question

Level 1

24 points

ProRes422(HQ) vs H.264...

My original project was edited using the ProRes 422(HQ) format in the timeline.

I tried exporting a small clip (54 sec) using both ProRes and H.264 formats. I noticed that the ProRes clip was 3X larger than the H.264 and had slighter better color and contrast.

I tried exporting the whole movie (1 hr 17min) in both formats, the H.264 ended up being 13.08 GB and the ProRes version is 11.63 GB. I am wondering why the total sizes are nearly identical now and curious which one to use for my final SD DVD and Blue Ray copies? I would have thought the ProRes would have ended up being less compressed (bigger file and more GB) but it did not turn out that way. The color is slightly richer with the ProRes so I might might to go with that one even though it is more compressed!!

Regards,

Rory

iMac Dual Core 2.4GHZ, Mac OS X (10.5.5), 4GB RAM (2) 2000GB GRAID2 Ext. Drives (1) 500GB Ext. Drive, Final Cut Studio 2

Posted on Dec 26, 2009 6:10 PM

Reply

Answer 1

Tom Wolsky

Level 10

152,809 points

Dec 26, 2009 6:15 PM in response to Rory Mells

That's not possible unless there is some other factor you're not seeing, length, frame size, frame rate.

Why are you exporting? Where are you trying to get to? H.264 should not be used as an intermediate export format, but as a final export.

Reply

Answer 2

Rory Mells Author

Level 1

24 points

Dec 26, 2009 6:21 PM in response to Tom Wolsky

I will look into this further and see what I've done.

I am exporting my final copy as an uncompressed Quicktime file then putting it into Compressor and then sending it to DVD Studio Pro and Toast (for Blue Ray) final copies.

Reply

Answer 3

Tom Wolsky

Level 10

152,809 points

Dec 26, 2009 6:33 PM in response to Rory Mells

NO you're not. Both H.264 and ProRes are compression codecs. You should export to QuickTime Movie using the current settings, which is, assuming you're using the application correctly, as close to the original material as possible. Exported it as "uncompressed" will not improve it.

Reply

Answer 4

Rory Mells Author

Level 1

24 points

Dec 26, 2009 6:42 PM in response to Tom Wolsky

Oh yes, that is what I am doing. I am exporting as a Quicktime Movie using current settings. When I did this same method with the small clip it said it was Apple ProRes 422(HQ) in the movie inspector??

Reply

Answer 5

Tom Wolsky

Level 10

152,809 points

Dec 26, 2009 7:01 PM in response to Rory Mells

If your sequence settings are ProRes HQ then that's what will get exported. Not sure why you're using HQ unless you're media is film resolution. It's a waste of drive space. What's the original format of your media?

Reply

Answer 6

Rory Mells Author

Level 1

24 points

Dec 26, 2009 7:49 PM in response to Tom Wolsky

Drive space is not an issue. I like to watch and playback my clips in high def so I have 4TB of hard drive space. I shot in HDV 1080i. In order to get the 23.98 fps I had to use a custom setting that Apple posted. In the setting it ends up being in the ProRes format, I had no control over that.

Reply

Answer 7

Tom Wolsky

Level 10

152,809 points

Dec 27, 2009 1:32 AM in response to Rory Mells

I understand, but ProRes HQ is doing nothing for you that ProRes doesn't do. ProRes will take less drive space, it's easier to process, and will render faster than ProRes HQ. It's a waste of time and resources unless your media is in film resolution, which yours isn't.

Reply

Answer 8

Rory Mells Author

Level 1

24 points

Dec 27, 2009 3:17 AM in response to Tom Wolsky

Oh I see, the process I followed told me to use ProRes(HQ), so I did.

I ended up exporting the movie and in the movie inspector it says Format: Apple HDV 1080i60, 1440 x 1080 etc...

This looks great, slightly smaller than the ProRes(HQ) file 11.62GB vs 13.08GB for some reason.

Let you know how the Blue Ray turns out someday.

Reply

Answer 9

Dec 27, 2009 7:24 AM in response to Tom Wolsky

I am going to have to disagree with you here. ProRes is a compressed format, so using a higher bit rate is going result in better looking video.

The only reason it does not help in this particular case is because the original format is HDV which is already an extremely compressed format; much more than ProRes or ProRes HQ.

Unless you are doing a ton of post effects; you would probably be better off just editing in HDV, although working with ProRes is faster.

I have no idea how you are getting a ProRes export to be smaller than H.264 unless you have some settings really bonkers.

-mark

Reply

Answer 10

Rory Mells Author

Level 1

24 points

Dec 27, 2009 8:28 AM in response to Mark Beazley

Hey Mark,

I had to use ProRes as per this article for my camera and FCP6 to get the desired 24P I wanted:

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2410

So you think I am good to go ahead with this Apple HDV 1080i60 1440 x 1080 format for the final DVD vs the H.264? They are both basically identical in apearance, the HDV has slightly better color it seems.

Rory

Reply

Answer 11

Dec 27, 2009 8:53 AM in response to Tom Wolsky

Tom, although I agree that h.264 is not an ideal intermediate export format, at full quality when you need to upload and download elements it does maintain an amazing amount of quality. This is the voice of experience speaking. Last year I had to deliver a 720 stereoscopic program. I was onsite in New Orleans and my animator was in NYC. He was able to upload clips as h264 and I was able to download them, convert them to dvcproHD, edit and output as mpeg2 program streams that looked great. This was the only workflow that allowed us to deliver. If there's another format that will get your file sizes down this much with so little loss, please let me know.

Reply

Answer 12

Rory Mells Author

Level 1

24 points

Dec 27, 2009 9:11 AM in response to Michael Grenadier

Micheal/Mark,

So you think I am good to go ahead with this Apple HDV 1080i60 1440 x 1080 format for the final DVD vs the H.264? They are both basically identical in apearance, the HDV format seems to have slightly better color, specifically reds and greens.

Rory

Reply

Answer 13

Dec 27, 2009 9:14 AM in response to Rory Mells

I was only suggesting h264 for an intermediate codec if file size is crucial (in my case, for ftp). My understanding is that prores is a better choice.

Reply