I took a good look at the scopes of the newly rendered 422 file and I didn't see the usual "holes" you would get by converting a file to 422; seems legit to me.

Same here.

What I found is some levels shift between the SStP and original clips though - might be just a side-effect of Catalyst Browse conversion...

Piotr

theory for thought:

- upscale 1080 4:2:0 to 4K 4:2:0, Vegas fills in the tween pixel colorings during upscale
- downscale/convert back to 1080 4:4:4 10 BIT....

it doesn't MAKE a better image, but fills in extra tween colors similar to the 4k colors downscaled

just a thought, since I have no scientific method to prove this works. tests I did on my own showed me it created color fill pixels instead of simply duplicating nearby colors.

[I]What I found is some levels shift between the SStP and original clips though - might be just a side-effect of Catalyst Browse conversion...[/I]

Yes, the converted file when used on a 32bit full range project has a lot more contrast but that can be easily be corrected. The bigger issue however is to get the 422 out of Vegas into a playable mp4 file. Any ideas?

Again - for my hobbyist needs, VLC is the answer to this "bigger issue" as well. When I say "hobbyist" I only mean my 4k early attempts; other than that I'm still producing my classical music DVDs/BDs professionally.

And I know for the fact that my nanoFlash HD422 projects do show the chroma resolution advantage over say EX1 420 quite clearly on a 50" plasma watched at 1-1.5m distance.

Piotr

the single reason for me now to use 4k is to do a better 1080p, and 4k really does it.

with avisynth you can use sharper resizers like lanczos, do a proper luma/chroma resizing (you can do separatedly) and get a cleaner sharper with less posterize/more color resolution.

the sad part is to convert again to 4:2:0 for the clients. :(

I framserve from Vegas to Handbrake, great workflow, but I have no clue how to get HB to render a high422 file. Anyone?

I know virtually nothing about Handbrake ( I know, I should) but I read a thread recently - I believe on StackExchange - that ffmpeg can output x264 in 4:2:2 and even 4:4:4 with CLI tweaks. Perhaps the same is possible in Handbrake? It does use x264 lib, right?

yes it should do 422 from what I read on the Internet I just don't know how to get it done.

OldSmoke,

This really is an interesting idea - I wonder why this thread has so few followers. Using free Catalyst Browse, it's as simple as 3 mouse clicks to produce a 10 bit, 4:2:2 I-only mxf out of an XAVC-S clip (8 bit 4:2:0, L-GoP). If it really upgrades color resolution from 4:2:0 to 4:2:2, it would be too beautiful to be true, I'm afraid...

Piotr

Piotr

I think the low attention to this thread is due to not many uses adopting 4K yet. While the converted 4K 420 will not be as good as a camera that recordes HD 422 in the first place, I must say the result is still very good. I will do some testing converting the pseudo HD 422 to DVD vs HD 420 to DVD and also 4K 420 to DVD straight. I just wish my camera could do 4K @ 60p because 60p is my prefered frame rate.

It's been around the block on 4K camera forums since 4k cameras releases. If you bought a 4K camera and looked into it, you'd run across this. It was all the rage 6 months ago and hassince died down.

wwjd

Do you have any links? Any reason why it died off?

My unscientific method of applying extreme crop on a prevailing primary (R) color area and comparing the edges indicates that - unfortunately, though quite expectedly - the conversion of an 420 4k MP4 clip to 422 mxf version does not "fill" the vertical jagies. With a truly 422 off-camera footage in 4:2:2 has no vertical jaggies as the horizontal color resolution is FULL (as opposite to HALF in 4:2:0 color resolution). As I said - it would be to easy a "cheat", to convert XAVC-S clips to full 4:2:2 just by upconverting them with Catalyst Browse - if it is at all possible (as yor OP would suggest, basing on Cineform guy information - the process would need to be much more complicated than that. Please blow the below pics onto at least a 50" screen!

The only difference is some levels shift, as I mentioned earlier.

Are you comparing 4K 420 converted to 4K 422? You should compare 4K 420 converted to HD 422 with either true HD 422 or HD 420.

OK - but still unconvincing:






Edit: when I look at it, it seems we do have full 422, after all - I confused resolutions though: it's the vertical that is FULL with 4:2:2, and it shows! Not as convincing as in my nanoFlash 4:2:2 material - but hey! - this is free 10 bit, 4:2:2 video from AX100, a camera only able of 8 bit, 4:2:0 :)

Piotr

here's one of the early posts from 2014

http://www.eoshd.com/2014/02/discovery-4k-8bit-420-panasonic-gh4-converts-1080p-10bit-444/

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?322001-Convert-4K-8bit-to-1080p-10bit&highlight=4k+to+1080

I don't mean the process has died down, just the flurry of forum posts died down

ha, I see that is what you linked to (I never clicked your orignal link up top there)
yeah, it's been around since feb '14

I'd still like proof if Vegas fills in legit colors when upscaling 1080 to 4K!!

if that works, could up upscale 4k to 8k, fill in the blank colors, scale back down and get 4k 4:4:4?

wwjd

I think upscaling is a different beast. 4K down to 1080 you have 4 pixels to make one. As mentioned in an earlier post, how do we get the HD422 out of Vegas into a MP4 file that I can play on my TV. I read that HB can do 422 but I have no idea to make it do it.