Hi all, I know this isn't a quicktime forum, but anyhow, I have created an animation (using SA of course) from an image sequence, opened it in QT 7 pro, saved it out and it is 2.43GB, it stutters and drags on playback, both on desktop and viewed in iMovie / SA. Just out of interest, I opened it in QT 10, and saved it as (converted).mov, and now it doesn't stutter or drag on desktop or in iMovie / SA, and also its now only 615.3MB in size.
I see from the inspector its format is now Apple ProRes 4444, I don't know wether thats a good thing or not? Quality seems comparable
As I must have said earlier, I had the opportunity to test one of my movies twice in a movie theatre, once in ProRes 422 (HQ) and the other in ProRes 4444.
At that huge size, any flaw and differences are/can be very noticeable.
It was obvious that computer generated images (at millions+) look a lot better in 4444 than 422 (HQ) (I have been told that 422 HQ is fine for movies done with straight camera footage). It was obvious that my film looked a lot better in 4444 than in 422 (HQ), so much so that the festival has decided to accept ProRes 4444 since even if the files can get very large (they used to take 422 HQ or lesser, they like to keep the file sizes below 20 GB per film, not always possible depending on duration and resolution).
If you plan on doing sustained serious work with these kinds of monster files, you are going to need a lot more than one 1TB drive: I have in excess of 60 TB storage on hand (all original material, practically no backup copies of anything), and am starting to feel cramped once again.
Also, and this is important: if you do serious editing in FCPX or similar, having the source files on one or several drives other than the boot drive where the application resides makes the work a lot easier, smoother.
Thanks Jean, all very interesting, I shall probably want to get FCPX at some point.
I just popped on to share this page on Rousseau which has a quote from him about Cezanne which I'm sure you will find amusing!
Thankfully, Rousseau did not finish Cézanne’s paintings, it probably would have been as “convincing” as this “restauration”!
For the record, I am one of those who never really “finish” a piece, we most often simply abandon it (and in this, I am in very good company).
Here’s a quote about Cézanne’s work that points in the right direction (from Ronald Hayman in the Spring 1980 Yale Review): “The mature Cézanne had no designs on the field of vision except to uncover the designs he saw in it. It is this suspension of will power that gives him admission to the undifferentiated world which precedes knowledge, to Eden as it was before Adam conferred separating names on each form of vegetal and mineral growth."
I quoted Hayman in my "Black & white, the most direct way to making the visible visible” article.
I have been using FCP since version 1.5, and when FCPX appeared, I was really turned off by the enormous changes in the way it works.
I stayed with FCP 7.x but could see functions in X that were very appealing, so I bought X and took a class on FCPX at the Apple Store here in Montréal.
That was a good idea and it enabled me to get the hang of it fairly quickly, I even managed to a do a piece during the class: Milles Regretz
I kept FCP 7.x on one of my older Macs, but I barely use it these days, FCPX won the battle.
My first major in Art school was “Mural and Decorative Painting”, and there I learned how to deal with very large paintings/murals/frescoes.
It was fascinating, and at times frustrating, to see how a small sketch blown up on a large surface would show “things” that were not visible in the original sketch, ’things” now glaring on the large surface, and others, really dominant in the sketch, becoming barely noticeable on the large piece.
The very same “things” are at work in the transition from 27” iMacs to movie theatre screens, I look forward to seeing my movies in festivals much more for learning purposes than for mere exposure.
There’s so much to discover.