Very interesting codec shootout - MustRead

Steffen took the time to compare different codecs ProRes Mac vs. ProRes Win vs. CineForm....
If you're rendering ProRes on a Windows machine you should read this article.

http://www.hackermovies.com/intermedia-codec-test-prores-vs-cineform

Ok but the biggest question most have is compared to h.264 and PJPEG. So wonder how he feels about them compared to these most used codex?

One thing I'm noticing is that I get different results depending on whether I render from Vegas or After Effects. Interesting that Vegas outputting PJPEG is (in this one isolated clip I randomly chose) is way better in detail and contrast than Miraizon ProRez 422, and obviously due to the AE problem with PJPEG I can't test that.

I notice a loss of sharpness still when rendering ProRes from both.

Using difference masks I do not see anywhere close to what the guy in the article was expressing...I do wonder about whether issues (there are always issues) are not only between Mac/PC, but between individual machines, and to toss another wrench in, between individual encoders on individual machines.

I didn't want to get into this again, but I do know I will be re-rendering (or at least checking) some of the work I've been doing of late, as what I saw again today when I was pixel-peeping unnerved me greatly.

This stuff is not for people who would consider using h.264 as an intermediate codec. Not if we are talking about using serious stuff like ProRes 444 and uncompressed! It's the other end of the shovel! For general stock though, as many have pointed out, no-one cares, and the reason for this, I opine, is that stock is what it is...we create an image, moving or not, and the buyer either needs it because of the content, and not having seen the original scene, or the original footage of the scene, are simply not aware of the information/detail loss, and even in the case of artifacts, banding, etc., there is so much "flawed" video out there that people are able to see past the flaws. That doesn't make it OK, though!

I really only scanned the article but I don't remember him stating the actual settings he used. Level of quality 94%, 90%. 85% etc etc. By just comparing different codex it really needs to be rendered at the setting that is best suited for each codex. A straight 90% on all tests might not be the best comparison.

co·dex
ˈkōˌdeks
noun
an ancient manuscript text in book form.
an official list of medicines, chemicals, etc.

Now we know where the problem is - our tech is not ancient. ;) Just messin' with you Don. It is CODEC not CODEX.

yup, c versus x not watching as I typed. Who put the C next to the X on the keyboard???? ;)

I'm really considering the possibility that the reason Miraison ProRes is exhibiting less banding is that it actually has less resolution.

I've just looked at some more stuff, including another comparison between M ProRes 422 and HQ compared to each other, and to PJPEG, and I'm sorry, but Miraizon sucks. Unless you like BLUR.

Blur will reduce aliasing, and it will reduce banding. Like what happens if you are drunk at a bar. Things look better. But when you look at them later, not so much. Right now I just woke up with an ugly codec.

I've got so much re-rendering of clips to do it's not even funny, and I'm sorry but because of this I won't have time to bore you with details. Why I didn't see it earlier I don't know. In fact I did...I mentioned the lesser detail in a thread here. Why didn't I listen to me?

If you are using Miraizon, STOP.

@RekindlePhoto Just to make sure that everybody understands there is no quality setting when rendering to Apple ProRes on a MAC. It is always at 100% no matter what you set that quality slider inside your software it will always render at 100%. Try it for yourself. If you want a smaller file size you need to use a different flavour of ProRes like 422, LT or Proxy thats what they are for.

Getty have said that they are not in favour of Miraizon - in fact I think they just said they won't accept it.

Looks like the quality slider on a PC is also of no use. 90% or 100% results in same size file on Miraizon ProRes HQ