Redcode vs. ProRes

[Mark Allen]

The Red video on Apples site is a little unclear about the suggestion of use. Does someone understand this?

Ted says something to the effect of "Redcode is for DI, ProRes is for Broadcast" - but that doesn't really mean anything tangible. Can someone shed some light on this?

[Don Woods]

Pro Res is only 4:2:2 Im not sure what red code is. But the idea from what I got from the apple presintaion is that pro res was more for the broad cast real time play back world.

[Jeff Brue]

Due to the adaptive debayering that must go on for editorial to constrain it to HD (1920x1080) resolution would more than likely not allow for realtime playback. So if you want to have realtime HD-SDI out of material. You're more than likely going to be going with ProRes.

[Anders Holck]

When used as a editing codec, Redcode is RGB and ProRes is YUV.
Redcode is vavelet based, there is no info yet on ProRes, but it's possible it's based on H.264.

The revolution in FCP 6 is the Open format timeline, that means any quicktime codec installed on your system can be dragged into any sequence and the system will try in realtime to conform it to the output properties.

It is my understanding that REDCODE is not built in to FCP 6, but because of the open format timeline, you can edit redcode (RGB or RAW) material into any codec, framesize and framerate you wish, and get realtime effects if the destination format supports that.

This now also means that if you bring in redcode RAW FCP can now automatically render that into a redcode RGB sequence, because the codecs dont have to match any more. This was one of the problems with editing RAW before, because you cannot render into RAW.

Note that the RED film only references the source codec as Redcode, not if it's RAW or rgb. The presentation mentioned 4k on a laptop though.

I'm thinking that the reason that Redcode YUV in 1080 dissapered from the format table last year is because of ProRes. It wouldn't make sense to develop a new YUV codec becase you can now edit in realtime from a 4k, 2k or 1080p RGB codec to a 1080 YOU codec. no need to convert or render.

But I think we will get a lot more information tomorrow.

[david farland]

My take on the FCP/RED/ProRes 4:2:2 is this:


FCP has a built-in RED API that will read native RED raw/rgb source files.
Not sure what the severity of transcoding is from RED raw/rgb codec to ProRes codec?
This’ll produce a ProRes 4:2:2 2K file for timeline editing for people who want to do a combined offline/online thing.

Now if you’re doing the separate offline (low rez) EDL’ish compliant timeline stuff, it shouldn’t matter what offline quality (well sorta) you use…because they state that Final Cut Color can ingest conform source files to, and here’s more mystery...to some unknown DPX/Cineon online output (thou I thought Cineon was 10bit).

Now it’s very important that FCP/Color/RED API can natively read the RED raw/rgb source files at this stage! And not just be maxed out at doing the RED raw/rgb codec to ProRes codec thing….or worse…when FCC publishes, transcoding up from Pro-Res to Cineon/DPX 4:4:4 RGB files.

That would mean that you’d have two main options:

Depending on what effects in the FCP ‘offline’ timeline can be conformed in FC Color, it’ll be nice to use FCP reading RED raw/rgb into Pro-Res codec (or low rez) and then export this into Final Cut Color for cc’ing etc.
If FC Color can read higher than Pro-Res, then people may want to do the traditional offline edit in FCP, export edl etc to REDCINE which could produce the conformed highest rez files for FC Color.I ‘m hoping Apple didn’t want to steal RED’s thunder and hopefully this will be more clear tomorrow. Sorry for the convoluted description.

Cheers

[J. Bernard Vallon]

Does anyone know the Datarates for Prores422? Editing on a laptop makes it sound like a small, Redcode-sized datarate. I think this will have a lot to do with accessibility, seeing as how one of the most difficult things regarding workflow is the size/cost of editing stations.

[david farland]

Mike Curtis mentioned it was 22 MB/sec for 1080p24 4:2:2 ProRes in the demo he saw.

[J. Bernard Vallon]

wow, thats about 10 m/s in 720p. Thats pretty amazing.

[Bruce Allen]

David, Cineon is 10bit - though it can be 10bit log, whereas I think ProRes is designed for 10bit "linear" work (eg in a video colorspace). Don't see why you couldn't hack ProRes with LUTs / conversion tables to be log though.


Not sure what the severity of transcoding is from RED raw/rgb codec to ProRes codec?

From RGB - not much, I'd think. From RAW, you'd probably lose latitude.

I think the guideline is that ProRes should be very similar to DNxHD. They are both full-raster 4:2:2 codecs and ProRes's quoted data rate of 22MBps (=176mbps) seems to sit between Avid's two options of 140mbps and 220mbps.

Very good stuff, anyway. Here's hoping they make the codec available in the PC version of Quicktime too... Avid was the other way around for a while (PC only, no Mac codec) and that was the only annoying thing about it - oh yes, and a little blockiness in the reds that came up on one graphics-driven project. But when printing to film with natural source material, it really was nearly impossible to tell that it had been compressed.

I agree that going from RedCode RAW -> FC Color would still be a cool way to go, though, for latitude reasons, etc but that RedCode RAW -> ProRes (provided you did a decent "first light" in RedCine) -> FC Color might work nicely too. If the whites are clipped on a shot, maybe then go back and re-render those shots with different settings from RedCine. It's a little painful, but the small file sizes plus the fact that the footage would then already be in ProRes format when you're going into your color session, might mean that FC Color would be more responsive than if you did a more cumbersome but "technically correct" method such as going from the RedCode RAW. Hmm, will think about it.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[david farland]

Thanks for that Bruce

[Bruce Allen]

On the AJA website, they list ProRes as having 2 bitrates:
"145Mb and 220Mb bitrate"
http://www.aja.com/html/products_Io.html

So, these are identical to Avid - probably similar low and high-quality options. When we tested DNxHD, we found 145 to not be good enough, but 220 was good. So, make sure to use the high quality option, good people!

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[Alex Boothby]

I agree that going from RedCode RAW -> FC Color would still be a cool way to go, though, for latitude reasons, etc but that RedCode RAW -> ProRes (provided you did a decent "first light" in RedCine) -> FC Color might work nicely too.
www.boacinema.com

Good one Bruce. Yes, performing a thoughtful, non-destructive one-light in Redcine seems to be a very practical solution to protect against the 'horrors' of stepping down to 10bit 4:2:2. This entails not crushing your blacks, not blowing out your whites, and generally being boring and conservative. Save the color magic for your select scene transfer. This is not always standard practice as DOPs often view the one-lights as their main opportunity to "set the look" and will often fight against a flat and dull first look at the rushes. Still, working with Redcode is surely a lot safer than favorite pastimes like Ektachrome, bleach bypass or ENR. :biggrin: