tiedtothe90s Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 Any thoughts on this? Is it worth transcoding to cineform? If so why? Wasn't sure if cineform discarded high bitrate data. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernesto Mantaras Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Hi. I have the same concern as you do. With the Canon DSLRs' footage I've always transcoded to Cineform, and only recently I've started working with my new GH2, so I haven't been able to do much testing. Still, a couple of days ago I transcoded some footage to be able to edit on multicamera (four h264 and AVCHD videos, including hacked GH2 footage, were choking my modest machine). I compared the original AVCHD video (recorded using the EOSHD Unified patch at 88Mbp/s) to the Cineform transcoded file (High quality, "I-frames only" unchecked) and didn't catch any difference with my eyes. Also, the clip size wasn't too different (1.81GB AVCHD vs. 2.11GB CF). So visually there's no difference at first glance (perhaps with some heavy grading one could spot something) and the final file is 4:2:2, better than the 4:2:0 the GH2 offers, so I believe there's no color degradation either. I don't really know, the extra conversion time and sizes are bothersome, but I have to say editing on CF is a hell of a lot faster, so maybe it's worth it some times. And in any case, it's cool for mastering. Anyhow, it'd be great if someone with more technical info out there could shed some light to this! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.