musicvid10 wrote on 11/16/2010, 8:24 AM
Search DNxHD on these forums. You will find enough reading to keep you occupied for a very long time. Yes, it's a great solution, but it's not the holy grail.
Jay Gladwell wrote on 11/16/2010, 8:25 AM

Do a search here for "DNxHD" and you'll find it has been discussed quite a bit previously in this forum.

Laurence wrote on 11/16/2010, 8:52 AM
A bit of a rundown as compared to Cineform:

1/ The Avid codec can only exist in a .mov Quicktime wrapper. A big deal on a lower powered computer like my Core2Duo but pretty much a non-issue on any quad core.

2/ Neo has that handy converter utility that will not only batch convert all your source clips, but do it with cRGB to sRGB if you need it (Canon DSLRs do). The HD Link utility will also to handy things like 30p to 29.97 slowdown on conversion.

3/ Cineform will smart-render. Both these codecs look good enough on rerenders that this may not be much of an issue quality wise, but boy does it save rendering time!

4/ If you move up to Neo HD, you can use First Light for color correction. This is pretty amazing since it is so comprehensive and is so incredibly light CPU-wise. It also makes moving color correction between programs (like After Effects to Vegas) quite painless.

I have both codecs installed and both are excellent. I do use Cineform more, but I'm on a Core2Duo laptop and the lower power makes the avi wrapper necessary.
cliff_622 wrote on 11/16/2010, 9:21 AM
I dont know about Cineform, but I noticed there is no 1080p in 29.97 frame rate with DNxHD. Damn.

How do the bit rates compare? 220 Mbps is the highest DNxHD bitrate.

I imagine that the two codecs are about equal in multiple re-render quality?

I'm just shocked that DNxHD is FREE! Very hard to believe.


ps...another strange thing is that the codec configuration box is "garbled" and tough to make out in Vegas. (the OK button is shoved under the codec options texts) It looks the same in two machines I tested. (it's still usable though)
PerroneFord wrote on 11/16/2010, 10:16 AM
1. Sure there is 1080/30p. The things on the list for you to select are SUGGESTIONS. Use 1080/24p. It will work just fine, and won't change your video to 24p.

2. Bit rates are not comparable because CIneform and DNxHD use different encoding techniques. Don't bother trying.

3. Yes, I'd say they both hold up nicely out to 5-7 re-renders. I've tested them out to 10.

4. DNxHD is free because it is an ISO standard. Avid wasn't trying to make money off their codec. They were trying to establish a standard for editors on multiple platforms using multiple editors. And keep colors consistent between them all. Works great.

The box is garbled and has been for a long time. Hey, what do you want for free. If you buy Avid, the box is perfect! :)
PerroneFord wrote on 11/16/2010, 10:21 AM
1. Not true. However, the FREE version only exists inside an .MOV. And yes, this is a problem for Vegas.

2. Who said the DSLRs need a cRGB to sRGB? And unless someone has a very old 5D, the 30.00 to 29.97 isn't really going to be an issue.

3. This is a big deal.

4. Lots of people seem to like first light. Nice that they include with the upmarket products.

RodC wrote on 11/16/2010, 10:55 AM

PerroneFord - "The box is garbled and has been for a long time. Hey, what do you want for free. If you buy Avid, the box is perfect! :) "

Avid updated/fixed it with the Oct release:

Avid QuickTime Codecs LE 2.3.2
PerroneFord wrote on 11/16/2010, 11:03 AM

I know a lot of people were mad at Avid for a long time, but their new CEO is kicking butt and taking names.
jwcarney wrote on 11/16/2010, 12:01 PM
If you need a tool to convert to DNxHD you can tryout Avid's Metafuze
cliff_622 wrote on 11/16/2010, 1:06 PM
Yup,..October version fixed it. Yup, (again) it will make 1080P- 29.97 files...SWEET

Anybody know how to render an .MXF wrapped file straight from Vegas.

Wow,..and I "almost" spent some bucks on Cineform Neo. I'm guessing DNxHD should be an solid HQ archiving format.

Way to go Avid! (sorry Cineform) : -(


P.s....Damn,..I LOVE the word "free"! lol
RodC wrote on 11/16/2010, 1:34 PM
Speed is the main problem I have with it, and its worse with Win 7 64 bit. Using the same hardware playback in Win 7 is waayyy too slow compaired to Win XP.

My hardware may be a bit old, but I think they need to do some work for 64bit OS performance.
PerroneFord wrote on 11/16/2010, 2:14 PM
They who?
PerroneFord wrote on 11/16/2010, 2:15 PM
Metafuze will make great MXFs... for Avid. But they won't work in Vegas. Or Premiere, or FCP.

PerroneFord wrote on 11/16/2010, 2:16 PM
"Anybody know how to render an .MXF wrapped file straight from Vegas."

Vegas only supports the Sony codecs inside MXF. Sorry.
robwood wrote on 11/16/2010, 4:18 PM
RodC wrote:
Avid updated/fixed the DNxHD Codec Configuration Window with their Oct release...


omg that's great, thx for posting that.
farss wrote on 11/16/2010, 4:35 PM
Will Metafuze read Panasonic's MXF?

I'll add my voice to the others saying "way to go Avid".

What Avid has done is to make this codec a SMPTE standard. By doing so it is "open". That doesn't entirely mean it's free. What it means is Avid agrees to license the IP to anyone and at the same price.

RodC wrote on 11/16/2010, 4:38 PM
robwood - "omg that's great, thx for posting that..."


We should put this in its own thread so everyone see it, maybe do a remider when this thread dies.

If you search for DNxHD you get a link to the older 2.1 drivers, I'm sure someone is still downloading them thinking they are the latest.
PerroneFord wrote on 11/16/2010, 4:53 PM
I don't know that Metafuze reads any MXFs. But it's been quite some time since I used it. It was designed to accommodate film and RED workflows and create Avid MXF files from various sources like DPX files, or R3Ds.
Mike M. wrote on 11/16/2010, 6:53 PM
Cliff and the gang:

Could someone point me to the link for the DNxHD download files and the process of installing them to work with Vegas?

I'd like to try it out.

Former user wrote on 11/16/2010, 7:24 PM

Just install like you install any program.

Dave T2
Mike M. wrote on 11/16/2010, 10:48 PM
Thanks DaveT2:
I followed the link and installed without error, but I don't see the option in "Render As". I do see a QT7 option, but the custom setting is greyed out.

So, I'll play stupid on this one........

Running Vegas 9 and tried both x32 and x64 versions
PerroneFord wrote on 11/16/2010, 10:54 PM
You may need to restart the computer. I never had to though...

Render should be to Quicktime 7 .MOV, do custom, and select your codec. If the custom button is grayed out, you might need to select a template, or enter a filename or something else. But that's how you do it.
Mike M. wrote on 11/16/2010, 11:08 PM
I was thinking that the issue might be that I don't have QT installed yet....duh. Is there a way to get just the authoring codecs without the player? From what I've read here, I think the latest version will work with 9e Correct?
DidierP wrote on 11/17/2010, 1:41 AM
Before starting a game "Cineform vs DNx", did you notice that there is a problem with V10a and CineForm?
When I compare side by side an original file and its CineForm version in V10, it seems I have a sRGB and a cRVB ....

So, in my projects (I often mix several codec) CineForm has become almost unusable.
Hello ? Sony ? Waiting for a V10b, urgently!