AfterCodecs

I just discovered that MagixPro X2 cannot "import" clips rendered with AfterCodecs mov :(
So now i ask myself if it isn't generally better to export in best possible h264 mp4 if not all software can read clips rendered with AfterCodecs because not everybody uses PP ?

AfterCodecs Prores was a flaky solution that really isn't necessary anymore if you have an updated Adobe suite since they now include native Prores support on a PC.

If you don't use updated Adobe software then I'd say your best option is h264 or h265.

That's only if he is using Windows 10.

Does this mean AfterCodecs clips are trash for all people who don't use PP?
I remember that AfterCodecs was very warm recommended here in the forum after Adobe stopped mov.

I say try other AfterCodecs codec options. From what I recall, you could make a wide variety of file types. Perhaps someone else who still has it installed can point you in the right direction.

But I still say to stick to the standards that are available to you in your edit software to ensure full compatibility.

Shoulda used Footage Studio 4K to make ProRes. But don't listen to me, I've only been using it for what, 5 years?

@Mizamook: This one? https://www.acrovid.com/intertake.htm

@ ODesigns: I used W8.1 and standart codec options and won't experiment belonging this. Won't use W10 because some of my software and hardware (drivers) won't work anymore. So i don't upgrade my system only for Adobe and get other problems by this.

Same company, updated product. I know mine mentioned an update (more colour correction stuff .. the versions I have are pretty basic .. you could do all basic stock video processing (trimming, colour, strip sound, frame rate, crop, etc) with this product by itself) but I don't update in general unless I have a good reason to. So I cannot vouch for that exact product, but the versions I have "4K Footage Studio" by Acrovid are very reliable, and the ProResHQ I make with it is spot on identical to the source video (I render out uncompressed 10bit YUV or RGB, depending, then process to ProResHQ for archival and upload) and all specs come clean on any system I've tried the output on.

As recommendation, also, Acrovid has stellar support. I spoke a lot to David Baum regarding improvements to earlier versions (which they did) as well as some concerns I had. They always took me seriously and made sure that any issues I had were resolved (even if they were caused by me).

Now looking at the updated site, I'm a little tempted to try the new version, to use as a quick way to prepare "general" clips for stock. It's a lot faster. Normally these days I use Resolve, and while I resent the extra step, using Acrovid Footage Studio is integrated into my workflow, and I end up with ProResHQ, so that's about as good as I need.