Tell the difference between Prores and DNG

Can you tell which is which, and how or why?
After youve done that, i have another technical question...
No, its not a friday evening quiz

First clip RAW, 2nd ProRes.

There is a little more macro blocking in the 2nd clips. A sign of re-compressing footage.

Yes, you are correct.
Can you see some moire in the raw too?

Any tips to avoid macroblocking? formats or compr that cope better with that?

Yes, you are correct.
Can you see some moire in the raw too?

Any tips to avoid macroblocking? formats or compr that cope better with that?

To avoid macroblocking you should not compress at all... the better is the quality the less you see them

(I know, I'm stating the really obvious here)

lol, yea, but the question is, how?
What format is the best for saving to Vimeo or YT uploading, or if not uploading, just playback trough QT?

This was saved in Prores 422 LT.
Ive tried different variations of 422 earlier, but i can barely tell any difference....

The ProRes leaves the camera after being compressed. RAW does not.

When you export the RAW to ProRes 422 HQ it is very similar to the in camera ProRes. A touch sharper as the computer has way more power to dedicate to the de-Bayer and compression that what the camera has (the camera is doing it real time in with a small processor).

Once you grade, edit, export and finally upload to YouTube the ProRes version has been compressed at least twice and at least once more than the RAW. Then YouTube pass it through their own compressor which is a horrible thing...

You can avoid that. It's just part of the process.

And actually a good compression could be your friend: if you try to compress a very noisy image, most of your bandwidth is lost to "preserve details" that is indeed something you do not want (noise) and the image will suffer. If you have a "smoother" image, paradoxically the final result is better.

I never tried myself (for lack of time...), but try to work with whatever you have and "reduce the hi frequency noise" very very aggressively then sharpen the edge back very aggressively and compare that (once compressed for VIMEO) against the original compressed as is... Just to test...

Interesting Walter, project of the weekend.
I could always also try different options of 422, and even H.264, and i can post a new quiz

But in general, for local viewing, what is the best lossless format to save graded raw to?

That sounded weird, what is the absolute best format to save graded raw, to maintain the best quality for minimal compression or loss of quality?

That sounded weird, what is the absolute best format to save graded raw, to maintain the best quality for minimal compression or loss of quality?

Uncompressed QuickTime. But the file size is huge. Next down would be ProRes 4444.

Another option is the QuickTIme Animation codec. Also very big but the image remains crisp.

Thanks! Been out for 3 hours shooting everywhere today until sunset, ill see what i can get out of it...

That sounded weird, what is the absolute best format to save graded raw, to maintain the best quality for minimal compression or loss of quality?

Yes, you're right: RAW then some 16bit uncompressed (Or EXR if you fancy that) but is Terabites of data

Also the OP was talking to post the final to Vimeo: you need to compress at one point.

Yea, thats always the headache, eventually you have to destroy it for others to see it, unless its going straight to the cinemas...
But ive seen very nice and crisp stuff on both Vimeo and YT, how come, do someone know those dirty little secrets the rest of us dont? Or is it just material with even higher res that compensate for that?
I dont see why DNG from a BMCC should be that less better than RED, despite 4k

Here are some few clips from yesterday...

Yea, thats always the headache, eventually you have to destroy it for others to see it, unless its going straight to the cinemas...

Digital Cinema (DCP) is compressing to a J2K format.

Michael

Is there more sharpness to RAW footage compared to ProRes?
I know the ProRes gets processed but is the captured footage visibly less sharp than RAW?

Uncompressed QuickTime. But the file size is huge. Next down would be ProRes 4444.

If you don't need 444 Prores HQ is actually less compressed due to the 12bits in PR444.
About 7:1 vs 5:1.

Is there more sharpness to RAW footage compared to ProRes?
I know the ProRes gets processed but is the captured footage visibly less sharp than RAW?

ProRes done in camera can be slightly softer than ProRes converted from RAW in post depending on your workflow.

Simple comes down to processing power. The in camera de-Bayer process is happening on the fly and being done by a small processor. Doing it in post you have all the power of your GPU and CPU to do a better job.

That's not to say there is anything wrong with the in camera ProRes. It stands up well against Arri Alexa ProRes.

Is there more sharpness to RAW footage compared to ProRes?
I know the ProRes gets processed but is the captured footage visibly less sharp than RAW?

There is NO sharpen in the RAW: it is the "RAW data" from the sensor, sharpen is a post process that happen after the debayer...

Is Prores being sharpen in the Pocket camera?

Is Prores being sharpen in the Pocket camera?

not sure but I think that there is a "base" sharpen and I think that resolve set that to nil as starting process...

Here are some few clips from yesterday...

Nice … Did you shoot this with in-camera ProRes or raw and export to ProRes? Wondering … did you create a h.264 or x.264 file to upload to Vimeo or let Vimeo compress a ProRes file?

S

Here are some few clips from yesterday...

Nice … Did you shoot this with in-camera ProRes or raw and export to ProRes? Wondering … did you create a h.264 or x.264 file to upload to Vimeo or let Vimeo compress a ProRes file?

S

It was shot in raw, exported to prores HQ, and uploaded as is and let Vimeo squeeze it down.
Ive been experimenting with the different prores vers, but you can hardly tell the difference after its uploaded to Vimeo