#Rarevision 5dtorgb movie
I say try it and see if you notice a difference.5DtoRGB Batch iyq / 1.5.22 / Rarevision LLC /Video / 2.8 MB / 00:16:26 / #Footage converter #Convert movie #HDSLR converter #Converter #HDSLR #Transcoder #Conversionĭesc: A fully-featured and easy-to-use video converter that provides the necessary tools to convert HDSLR videos to an editable formatĥDtoRGB script allowing batch processing of.
#Rarevision 5dtorgb pro
It has been argued that NLEs such as Premiere Pro already use similar algorithms to 5DtoRGB, and therefore will not benefit from it as much. Technically, people use it as a fix for a problem they may or may not have. 5DtoRGB uses lanczos to convert color space, which is slower but ulrimarely won't exhibit the same issues. That saves CPU time, but pixel peepers will notice a difference versus a more complicated algorithm. To get technical, quicktime has a gamma shift bug, and I believe uses a fast nearest-neighbor algorithm to convert to RGB. I'm thinking it probably does something to it, otherwise why would people rave about the files looking better after? If it does something to the files, I wonder if I would have to run my AF100 files through 5DtoRGB too to match?Its not as much that it "does something" as it is that it works around some known bugs NLEs have converting color space. But I want to know if it will just convert the file to DNxHD or if it does anything to it. I only asked because I need a way to convert all my video to DNxHD for editing anyway, and since 5DtoRGB does that and I have always heard so much buzz about how good it is I thought I might as well use it. Someone using Premiere on a PC-based system, for example, may not find any noticeable difference.
There is a well documented gamma shifting bug that will crush your blacks and clip highlights earlier than it should when directly importing footage (see the saxophone player in the field example here) and it has been shown that in some cases, the color translation from 圜bCr to RGB that Quicktime uses creates jagged artifacts (in particular, the red channel from Canon cameras).ĥDtoRGB does not rely on quicktime to do its conversion, rather it uses its own algorithm that avoids all these problems and produces almost universally-accepted footage that your NLE can import without problems.īut here's the kicker- not every system relies on quicktime, and therefore would not necessarily benefit from 5DtoRGB's "fix". This has less to do with any kind of "magic" from 5DtoRGB, and much more to do with some buggy decoding on behalf of Quicktime.
#Rarevision 5dtorgb software
On Mac-based systems in particular, running editing software that rely heavily on Quicktime (such as FCP), it will give a cleaner and more accurate picture. Whether or not it is necessary or makes any difference at all ultimately depends on your NLE setup. I don't think I should run the AF100 footage through 5DtoRGB since it's already 10 bit 4:2:2 DNxHD.Īnother thing I couldn't find in rarevision's site is if 5DtoRGB does pulldown removal? Thank you.5DtoRGB has options to apply some limited filters (like a gamma correction, if I recall), or you can just leave it as a direct conversion. Does 5DtoRGB apply any LUTs or does anything to change your image or it only converts to another format? Because I'm going through a lot of work to match the AF100 and GH2 and would hate if 5DtoRGB would mess this match up.
Since I also usually shoot with the AF100 recording DNxHD, 5DtoRGB's ability to convert GH2 files to DNxHD looks interesting for me. But should I use 5DtoRGB on GH2 footage no matter what? I use Flowmotion V2.02. I have never used 5DtoRGB but have always heard great things about it.
0 kommentar(er)
