Linked by Eugenia Loli on Wed 17th Sep 2008 23:09 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 330647
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-06-29
These are not that common in workflows for cinema... Not only to editing frame by frame (like VFX), but for standard color correction tools like Autodesk Lustre (quite popular), cleaning tools, and similar ones... this kind of application is necessary when you target projection quality and dynamic range... The industry usually uses sequence files (be it DPX/Cineon or OpenEXR or even TIFFs...) to these tasks... (with several limitations... TIFFs are usually uncompressed, metadata--like keycodes-- is very important to keep, and several other limitation depending of your workflow, printing machine, delivery LUTs or even projector type.)
Also, there's nothing wrong in generating standard video files from PNG sequences... it's a well supported format, lossless (8bit per channel only, but lossless...) and easy to deliver to encoding facilities via internet or optical media... some other format or solution may depend proprietary software, incompatible versions or may limit who can encode your work to the delivery format... You may prefer your workflow, but there's nothing wrong in this PNG one... it may have advantages depending of your needs...