![]() I brought up editing as Prores is generally associated with either camera capture sources or intermediaries. I don't even have Intel QS nor anything other than software decode.Īnyway OP said it was for archival, and not immediate editing. I personally don't come across any timeline slowdown with SD x264 in Adobe PP, it's seemingly instant. I did use the vague term "fast" without anything to compare it to when talking about x264 editing, but I was trying to say that the difference in editing speed these days with SD x264 content isn't that big with something like Prores. I'm pretty sure I made it clear that Prores was built for editing. 9 times out of 10, if you intend to do any subsequent editing, a lossless or near-lossless intra codec (this includes ProRes) will always be much faster to edit with than x264, whether low or high bitrate, intra- or inter. These are the settings I was planning on using for the two conversions if going from source on both: What CRF / bitrate would be appropriate for the archival version? If 2 files, then I assume DEFINITELY go from source -> x264 each time, right? This is not something I had even considered because I thought the ProRes version was the "right" thing to do for archival and have never seen anyone recommend editing with x264 copy.ĭo you mean finding a happy medium CRF / bitrate that I could use for my viewing mp4 AND the archival version, or do you mean generate 2 copies, one at a higher bitrate / low CRF for archive/editing and another more average bitrate / CRF for viewing? I had settled on CRF 16 but haven't tried lower than that yet to see if it makes any difference. Any future editing with a x264 source, especially a SD source should be fast on even modest hardware. Prores is Intra only and so is built more for editing than being efficient for a given bitrate. You would probably get better results just going for a high bitrate / low CRF x264 copy only if you are going the lossy route. Which brings me to: Do I even need the ProRes file at all? Realistically speaking I (or anyone else) will probably never go back and redo this process, so I was thinking the ProRes files might be used in something like a compilation if someone had a big birthday party or a wedding, and I wanted to put together videos and photos, OR if h264/mp4 became not the format of choice and I needed some other format in the future, it would be better than converting the mp4 again. ![]() I guess you're right on this, but the ProRes archival file feels like a "just in case" copy that likely will not be needed, while the h264/mp4 is the "important" one that will get seen and used the most, so I wanted to make sure I was getting the best possible result in the mp4. ![]() Otherwise it isn't really good enough for "archival purposes/future use". 2nd thought: If ProRes422 is good enough for "archival purposes/future use" then it should be good enough as a basis for conversions to "tv/computer/smartphone viewing and sharing". ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |