Prores vs DNxHD

[SameSelf]

Perhaps this is not the right sub-forum to ask this question, so please feel free to redirect if that is the case.

I purchased an Atomos Ninja 2.0 recently. The great thing about this device is you can choose between Apple Prores from LT, standard, HQ and Avid DNxHD and its various incarnations.

So, I am wondering which one I should go with? Here is an interesting link I found in the wild http://www.fallenempiredigital.com/blog/2013/02/28/avid-dnxhd-vs-apple-prores-vs-gopro...neration-loss/
The comparisons with ffmpeg/ffmbc are especially interesting as I am a big user of both.

The comments are also curious with none other than David Newman from GoPro weighing in. Why do people say Prores is not supported on the PC when I have no problems running it as long as quicktime is installed? Am I missing something?

Anyway, I use Adobe Production Studio and frequently do color correction in AE before building my timeline in PP. So I am curious what you gurus think? Prores or DNxHD and why?

[smrpix]

Both are excellent.

ProRes may have a very slight size advantage in certain circumstances. Apple has done it's best to keep ProRes off PCs, so it's not universally supported on Windows systems. DNxHD is fully supported cross-platform. All flavors of DNxHD are free from Avid. It can be wrapped in QuickTime, mxf and OP-1. DNxHD, however, lacks the hipster cache of ProRes and Mac cultists.

[poisondeathray]

1) Prores is supported for DEcoding on a PC for years, with quicktime installed. It used to be unsupported for ENcoding, but there is the "hacked" ffmbc/ffmpeg version

There are potential problems with ffmbc/ffmpeg variant of Prores , it's unsupported in some programs (e.g. resolve), gamma and color shifts in others, metadata problems compared to "official" certifed Apple Prores. Official Prores works stellar on a Mac in FCP/FCPX. No problems. Official QT Prores decoder on a PC is handicapped. Poorly multithreaded, slower compared to the Mac version. No PC love. But it still works OK , just not as well compared to a Mac

DNxHD gamma/color handling can be even worse, even the offical version can have major gamma shifts between different programs. It works stellar in Avid, but can be problematic in other programs

You can encode with official prores on PC now, but only with expensive certified apps. e.g. Telestream Episode (server edition), Assimilate Scratch. Beware there are many paid software that are actually uncertified versions, really using ffmbc or their own hack e.g. Miraizon, Cinemartin

2) Quality/compression wise, they are similar at 10bit. The problem with most tests you see is they haven't done the comparisons correctly, e.g. wrong colorspace, tested at wrong bitdepth, or haven't looked thoroughly enough e.g. 1 comparison. If you do dozens of these tests, PSNR wise they are close, sometimes one is better, sometimes worse. But ffmbc/ffmpeg consistently produces worse results with DNxHD compared to the official Avid implementation. About ~2dB lower, and it's visible to the naked eye. The ffmbc/ffmpeg prores version for some reason isn't as bad.

Prores is actually based on DNxHD. Official Prores and DNxHD are slightly more noisy compared to Cineform . The artifacts in cineform are smoother, more organic. The artifacts in Prores and DNxHD are more typical, like DCT ringing. Either are fine, you're hard pressed to see the differences unless you have challenging content or zoom in , or are used to seeing these things

[SameSelf]

Ahh, QT ENcoding on the PC. I forgot about that since so much of what I do is for Youtube using H.264. I guess my Prores timelines don't play seamlessly in PP, but I assumed it was the 145 MB bit rate, not inherent limitations of the codec on the PC. I am not sure if I will want to encode to Prores. But those are some interesting thoughts to consider. I suppose we shouldn't be surprised that Apple doesn't give the PC any love. If media pros find Prores compelling enough than they will want to invest in Macs and FCP, so a potential selling point, no? OTOH, the Atomos Ninja encodes to certified Prores and DNxHD, but that is from the HDMI output from the camcorder. I suppose if I was enterprising I could figure out a way to send my final timeline to the Ninja. Gotta think about that one.

I didn't realize that Cineform was wavelet vs DCT. But Cineform isn't an option on the Ninja. Also, very interesting that Prores is based on DNxHD. Unfortunately my video is very demanding because I am filming a marching band on a football field so various problems are obvious when you have lots of people with shiny instruments moving on what is essentially a green screen with gridlines and a bleacher in the background that is prone to moire patterns, and a blue sky above all that which shows artifacts quickly when color correcting. Maybe I should just get a GoPro and be done with it, smh.

But great thoughts poisondeathray. You never cease to amaze me with your in depth knowledge, I thank you immensely

[Cornucopia]

Actually, there IS a Windows Quicktime Encoder for ProRes: http://www.miraizon.com/products/codecsoverview.html. Not free, of course, but quite reasonable. I'm buying a copy.

Also, now that Cineform has been OK'd by SMPTE, I expect we'll see more compliant products available (hopefully).

BTW, did you notice: DNxHD will soon be migrating to DNxHR, to enable its use in 4k-native material.

Scott

[smrpix]

DNxHD gamma/color handling can be even worse, even the offical version can have major gamma shifts between different programs. It works stellar in Avid, but can be problematic in other programs

To clarify, this is frustratingly an issue when using DNxHD via quicktime. These issues can be avoided by using op-1a mxf variations with Avid, Adobe apps, Vegas Pro, Edius, Sorenson, etc. Also, FFmpeg encoding to DNxHD Quicktime (which bypasses the QT engine) handles gamma correctly.

BTW, did you notice: DNxHD will soon be migrating to DNxHR, to enable its use in 4k-native material.

Hopefully, they won't shoot themselves in the foot with this one.

[SameSelf]

Actually, there IS a Windows Quicktime Encoder for ProRes: http://www.miraizon.com/products/codecsoverview.html. Not free, of course, but quite reasonable. I'm buying a copy.

Also, now that Cineform has been OK'd by SMPTE, I expect we'll see more compliant products available (hopefully).

BTW, did you notice: DNxHD will soon be migrating to DNxHR, to enable its use in 4k-native material.

Scott

Did you read poisondeathray's post? He states explicitly that Miraizon uses an uncertified version of prores. I am not sure if this is a showstopper. I have encoded plenty of video to Prores using ffmbc that AE and PP handle just fine. So I don't see a need for an expensive third party encoder. The only problem is exporting out from PP to a ProRes format. But again, I mostly export to H.264 anyway.

[poisondeathray]

Miraizon does export out of Adobe AME, but there are times when "Apple certified" is important, and others when non certified works fine. It really depends on what you need it for

eg. If you need to send it off to a colorist using Resolve, Miraizon or other variants like Cinemartin (which uses ffmbc), won't work. Only Apple certified works

To export "Apple certified" out of windows PC from AME directly, the only option is Drastic Mediareactor. The other options mentioned above are separate applications. There is no free or "inexpensive" PC Certified Prores encoding solution, only expensive ones

[SameSelf]

I am thinking another solution is to export from AME to a lossless format like avi then use my Atomos Ninja as a capture device for my video card's HDMI out. Not exactly a low priced option but that is not why I bought it. An unexpected benefit

[SameSelf]

FWIW the official list of Apple ProRes certified products

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT200321

[Cornucopia]

Didn' t catch that line, sorry.

Scott

[SameSelf]

DNxHD, however, lacks the hipster cache of ProRes and Mac cultists.

I didn't follow what you said initially, but I think I now understand if you meant hipster cachet.

[SameSelf]

BTW, did you notice: DNxHD will soon be migrating to DNxHR, to enable its use in 4k-native material.

Missed that thanks for the heads up. After spending years on SD I have only within the last 18 months migrated to an HD workflow. I fear I am already old fashioned like a silent film maker in a talkie world. Maybe I will get a 4K camcorder soon. Heck I can already shoot 4K video on my phone! But storing, editing, and authoring are completely different challenges I imagine.