8bit or 10bit ProRes ???

I got several capture, i need to know if the file is in 8bit or 10bit.

All those file as been capture with AJA VTR in ProRes HQ

I know ProRes HQ is 10 bit but in AJA VTR you can capture in ProRes HQ 8 bit as well...

In Dumpster it doesnt display the Bit info, or i havent found it

In FCP or QT no bit depth info

How can i know if those ProResHQ are in 10 bit for sure ?

thanks

ProRes is 10bit. Doesn't matter if it's HQ or not.

HQ is really only necessary for 2k or larger. We use ProRes for all our HD work here, 720 and 1080.

Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Biscardi Creative Media
biscardicreative.com

ProRes is always 10 bits (or rather it is a compression scheme that is able to preserve granularity up to 10 or 12 bits). The AJA VTR probably is set to use an 8 bit digitizer.



www.strypesinpost.com

>HQ is really only necessary for 2k or larger.

I disagree that ProRes HQ is necessary for 2K or larger. Although it is perceptibly hard to tell the difference between SQ and HQ after one generation of recompression, the difference mattes are never totally black in most cases. So HQ does retain more quality than SQ, because HQ uses a more gentle compression than SQ, so it is more about how much drive space you have, and how much you need to push the footage in post production and how much quality you think you need.

Also, you would hardly use HQ for 2K, because most 2K formats are 4:4:4 RGB. So ProRes Proxy or LT is good for the offline (then you relink to your high resolution DPX scans or RED footage for the online in Smoke), and if you want to work at "online" resolution, you would prefer ProRes 4444.



www.strypesinpost.com

It is hard to tell actual bit depth from an arbitrary image, that is, until the image starts banding and colors start clumping together. Graeme did a little test in Shake years ago:

[www.nattress.com]



www.strypesinpost.com

Quote
walterbiscardi
HQ is really only necessary for 2k or larger.

Quote
strypes
I disagree that ProRes HQ is necessary for 2K or larger.

I more than agree with strypes. HQ may sometimes be less necessary for 2k or larger than it is for smaller video resolutions.

The difference between HQ compression and SQ compression is that pixels are less affected by their neighbors with HQ compression. When you have fewer pixels it is more visually damaging for a pixel to be affected by its neighbors than when you have more pixels. For an extreme example, suppose someone shot 10k. What reason would there be to use HQ when no one can see a difference between 10k in HQ and 10k in SQ when the image is on a screen in front of them?

Should we presume that whenever 2k or larger video is shot the lenses are better, the sensors are better, the videographers are better, the standards are higher, therefore HQ? There are some shots where 2k or larger resolution is essential for post effects. In these cases a 10-bit uncompressed 4:4:4 (v410) codec would be best.

Dennis Couzin
Berlin, Germany