03-26-2020 04:00 AM
@danielr15 ha scritto:
GoPro no longer owns Cineform. As I stated earlier, they released to to opensource.
....but apparently the "open source" community didn't use it, since it didn't become a standard.
As far as Cineform VS MP4 is concerned, I made the following tests:
- I started from a .360 file with a duration of 33 seconds and a size of 264MB.
- I used GoPro MAX Exporter to generate three different files: a Cineform, a HEVC and an H264, obtaining these dimensions:
- Cineform: 3.37GB, 864Mb/s, 5760x2880.
- HEVC: 143MB, 35.6Mb/s, 3840x1920.
- H264: 235MB, 58.6Mb/s, 3840x1920.
- I processed the HEVC and H264 files in Insta360, managing to do the reframing and obtaining the final movie. The .mov file (Cineform) cannot be opened with Insta360.
- I tried to view Cineform with VLC, but it is impossible to use: heavy on exaggeration.
- I have used Cineform with Davinci Resolve 16 and with MAGIX, but also here the heaviness of the file makes it unusable, as well as the final results are identical to those with MP4.
My conclusions on using Cineform: it's not worth it!
Explain to me how it is possible to obtain a 3.37GB file (for only 33 seconds of video) at a bitrate of 864Mb/s if the original recording bitrate is certainly not higher than 100Mb/s?
If the original ".360" movie is recorded at a lower bitrate, then it is not possible to hope to obtain greater results going further with the bitrate: you only get a larger (exaggeratedly larger) file for a minimum improvement. So Cineform is useless.
03-26-2020 04:42 AM
Again, for best results, reframe with the GoPro mobile app.
03-26-2020 06:14 AM
@danielr15 ha scritto:
Cineform is a standard and is used in professional video editing programs. You not understanding the minutiae of how it works is irrelevant and not worth the time trying to explain.
Certainly for professional use it can be fine, recorded with professional cameras.
But if you see my proof that I did: explain to me what sense it makes to create an 864Mb/s bitrate file starting from a file that at most is recorded at 78Mb/s (from MAX specifications). It may be fine if the starting recording was 900Mb/s, did I explain myself?
The advantages of Cineform could be had if you record with a professional camera directly in that format, without losses and without compression: but I don't think that MAX's ".360" file is recorded in Cineform, otherwise there would be that huge difference of file size (see the example of my test).
It would be like taking a photo in JPG and then hoping that if the JPG file is converted to RAW I get the same result as having it initially stored in RAW.
03-27-2020 04:40 AM
the main benefit is, how easy (or not) your computer can handle it.
Yes there cannot be an increase in quality BUT.
The original is a LONG-GOP Format ...means...only every 15th frame has a really full picture...the other 14 inbetween contain only the differences to the one before or after. That makes them so small ......but to extract ...it is for any programm super cpu-intense, always to recalculate the real full frame.
Cineform, like ProRes is an I-Frame only Codec....meaning...here every frame contains a full picture..... easy to understand that this one must be much bigger .....and there is no recalculation needed for the app...
believe it or not......
or better try to playback both.....the superbig Cineform...smooth...the original...jerky