Return-Path: Received: from p3plsmtpa01-09.prod.phx3.secureserver.net ([72.167.82.89] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with SMTP id 4865848 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Sun, 07 Oct 2012 07:34:23 +0200 Received: (qmail 13307 invoked from network); 7 Oct 2012 05:36:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (173.247.4.230) by p3plsmtpa01-09.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (72.167.82.89) with ESMTP; 07 Oct 2012 05:36:23 -0000 Message-ID: <507114D6.7070302@delrazor.com> Date: Sun, 07 Oct 2012 01:36:22 -0400 From: Greg Balint Organization: delRAZOR User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120907 Thunderbird/15.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: After Effects Mail List Subject: Re: [AE] incorrect colors on output to client References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------060601040706010201050604" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------060601040706010201050604 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Yep, that's usually my choice as well.. accept for it's slowness in initial renders from AE, it's usually a great space saver and includes alpha channel.. but for some reason, with this workflow (coming from ProRes 422 (HQ)) and going to PNG, it also showed those lower gammas than source.. FWIW, I tried Animation, PNG, and various setups of the DNxHD codec, which I was told would also probably fix my issues, but none of those got me around the issue.. Not sure why PhotoJPEG did the trick, but it did.. and saved me a ton of room on my DropBox folder as well. ///Greg Balint //Art Director / Motion Graphics Designer /321.514.4839 delRAZOR.com/ On 10/7/2012 12:52 AM, Adam Mercado wrote: > Well you mentioned PNG and that is my codec of choice when I get those > colour shift issues and need uncompressed or alpha. Try rendering a > PNG sequence or a QT with PNG as format > > Sent from the ubiquitous Apple communication device I like to call > Boris. Hence the brevity and poor spelling. > > On Oct 5, 2012, at 10:34 AM, Greg Balint > wrote: > >> Thanks everyone for the help. >> >> I ended up rendering everything out at PhotoJPEG 98%.. file-sizes >> went WAY down and the client loves the quality.. plus!!!!!! it >> fixed/didn't show the QT Gamma issue! So I'm now a big fan. My >> entire render folder was 5.59Gb. vs nearly 25Gb+ previously. My >> client actually called to ask if it had a hiccup in the uploads >> because of how small the folder was. >> >> Does anyone know a similar QT codec to PhotoJPEG that can do Alpha >> Channel and doesn't disable MultiProcessing in AE like PNG codec does? >> >> Basically I need an embedded alpha channel codec which looks pretty >> much uncompressed, 8-bit is probably fine, is useable with FCP on Mac >> and Premiere on PC, and doesn't take up a TON of space like Animation >> codec does, which also takes advantage of AE's MP capabilities. >> >> ///Greg Balint >> //Art Director / Motion Graphics Designer >> /321.514.4839 >> delRAZOR.com/ >> On 10/5/2012 7:11 AM, Darren H wrote: >>> Hi Greg, >>> >>> The only difference is bit rate. HQ gives better quality at bigger >>> file sizes, though in some cases where I've compared frames, I've >>> struggled to see the difference. They're both 10bit. >>> >>> D. >>> >>> On Friday, 5 October 2012, Greg Balint wrote: >>> >>> >>> Can anyone, off hand, tell me what the diffs are between HQ and >>> non-HQ? >>> >>> >>> ///Greg Balint >>> //Art Director / Motion Graphics Designer >>> /321.514.4839 >>> delRAZOR.com/ >>> >>> On 10/4/2012 7:54 PM, Gary Berendsen wrote: >>>> I've been haing that as well, since cs6, well 5.5 as well. >>>> prores non hq solved it for me. >>>> >>>> >>>> *Gary Berendsen - VFX Generalist* >>>> *Czaar Peter Straat 157-159* >>>> *1018 PJ Amsterdam* >>>> *garyberendsen.com * >>>> *gary@garyberendsen.com* >>>> *+31614385398* >>>> *skype: garyberendsen* >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Oct 5, 2012, at 1:52 AM, Brian Maffitt >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I missed the detail about it showing up in the final edit. If >>>>> that's true, this is something else. >>>>> >>>>> Brian >>>>> >>>>>> Also this. I was gonna mention that. But if they see the >>>>>> shift in fcp for final edit I guess it does matter. They >>>>>> can't just gamma shift it back? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Oct 4, 2012 7:46 PM, "Brian Maffitt" >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Before you completely panic, I think you may be seeing a >>>>>> fairly well-know Quicktime-on-Windows display bug. It >>>>>> only affects how the movie looks when played in >>>>>> Quicktime, not when used in another application. Take a >>>>>> look at the same clip in VLC and see if it looks OK. >>>>>> >>>>>> > Hey all, >>>>>> > >>>>>> > I'm running into some gamma issues or something, which >>>>>> I've never seen before. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > I've previously had issue with the H.264 bug, where >>>>>> renders would come out lighter, almost looking like their >>>>>> gamma was bumped up. I know what that looks like and how >>>>>> to alleviate it. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > This however, is a completely different ball of yarn. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Basically.. I can take a ProRes 422 HQ file from my >>>>>> client (who wo >>>>>> >> --------------060601040706010201050604 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Yep, that's usually my choice as well.. accept for it's slowness in initial renders from AE, it's usually a great space saver and includes alpha channel.. but for some reason, with this workflow (coming from ProRes 422 (HQ)) and going to PNG, it also showed those lower gammas than source..

FWIW, I tried  Animation, PNG, and various setups of the DNxHD codec, which I was told would also probably fix my issues, but none of those got me around the issue.. Not sure why PhotoJPEG did the trick, but it did.. and saved me a ton of room on my DropBox folder as well.
///Greg Balint
//Art Director / Motion Graphics Designer
/321.514.4839
delRAZOR.com/
On 10/7/2012 12:52 AM, Adam Mercado wrote:
Well you mentioned PNG and that is my codec of choice when I get those colour shift issues and need uncompressed or alpha. Try rendering a PNG sequence or a QT with PNG as format

Sent from the ubiquitous Apple communication device I like to call Boris. Hence the brevity and poor spelling. 

On Oct 5, 2012, at 10:34 AM, Greg Balint <greg@delrazor.com> wrote:

Thanks everyone for the help.

I ended up rendering everything out at PhotoJPEG 98%.. file-sizes went WAY down and the client loves the quality.. plus!!!!!! it fixed/didn't show the QT Gamma issue!  So I'm now a big fan.  My entire render folder was 5.59Gb. vs nearly 25Gb+ previously. My client actually called to ask if it had a hiccup in the uploads because of how small the folder was.

Does anyone know a similar QT codec to PhotoJPEG that can do Alpha Channel and doesn't disable MultiProcessing in AE like PNG codec does?

Basically I need an embedded alpha channel codec which looks pretty much uncompressed, 8-bit is probably fine, is useable with FCP on Mac and Premiere on PC, and doesn't take up a TON of space like Animation codec does, which also takes advantage of AE's MP capabilities.

///Greg Balint
//Art Director / Motion Graphics Designer
/321.514.4839
delRAZOR.com/
On 10/5/2012 7:11 AM, Darren H wrote:
Hi Greg,

The only difference is bit rate. HQ gives better quality at bigger file sizes, though in some cases where I've compared frames, I've struggled to see the difference. They're both 10bit. 

D. 

On Friday, 5 October 2012, Greg Balint wrote:

Can anyone, off hand, tell me what the diffs are between HQ and non-HQ?


///Greg Balint
//Art Director / Motion Graphics Designer
/321.514.4839
delRAZOR.com/
On 10/4/2012 7:54 PM, Gary Berendsen wrote:
I've been haing that as well, since cs6, well 5.5 as well.
prores non hq solved it for me.


Gary Berendsen - VFX Generalist
Czaar Peter Straat 157-159
1018 PJ Amsterdam
+31614385398
skype: garyberendsen






On Oct 5, 2012, at 1:52 AM, Brian Maffitt <brian@totaltraining.com> wrote:

I missed the detail about it showing up in the final edit. If that's true, this is something else.

Brian

Also this. I was gonna mention that. But if they see the shift in fcp for final edit I guess it does matter. They can't just gamma shift it back?

On Oct 4, 2012 7:46 PM, "Brian Maffitt" <brian@totaltraining.com> wrote:
Before you completely panic, I think you may be seeing a fairly well-know Quicktime-on-Windows display bug. It only affects how the movie looks when played in Quicktime, not when used in another application. Take a look at the same clip in VLC and see if it looks OK.

> Hey all,
>
> I'm running into some gamma issues or something, which I've never seen before.
>
> I've previously had issue with the H.264 bug, where renders would come out lighter, almost looking like their gamma was bumped up. I know what that looks like and how to alleviate it.
>
> This however, is a completely different ball of yarn.
>
> Basically.. I can take a ProRes 422 HQ file from my client (who wo


--------------060601040706010201050604--