DNxHR 444 Support When???

[Samuel_Gursky]

When is Adobe going to add DNXHR 444 support for Premiere Pro???

Currently, every DNxHR codec is supported up to, but not including, 444.

When will Adobe add support for this???

DNxHR 444 video when imported into Premiere Pro are assumed as Full (0-255) levels. This is WRONG!!!!!

Adobe, I beg you, please fix this. PLEASE.

[yenaphe]

Hi,

please add a feature request here: http://www.adobe.com/go/wish

When entered through the feature request form, it is directly sent to the Premiere team

Hope this helps,

Seb

[Waldorf & Statler]

It do not Help!

[Waldorf & Statler]

We send a lot of informations, but nothing happens!

[Waldorf & Statler]

Over two years later, nothing happens!

[R Neil Haugen]

Keep pushing, W&S ... but I think engineers types who live by their Official Standards are not too likely to cave to mere pedestrian arguments when something is clearly WRONG. (From their Official Point of View.)

I've even had an opportunity to be around a mathematician/cosmologist and and astronomer debating whether X is actually X or should be considered Y. Very similar type discussion. Massively deep arguments on both sides, they remained polite ... a bit of a struggle for both, I'd note, but they mastered themselves ... this went on up to an hour at a time over several days ... neither budged an inch. Nor was ever going to.

There's plenty of room to argue that any 4:4:4 codec is by it's very nature full-data on all channels, which is considered RGB. As the entire concept of YUV formats was designed for using partial data ... 4:2:2 or less. And RGB is always full-range.

The only reason to consider it as YUV, and that 'legal' range is appropriate, is because Avid allows for that in their software. And is the originator of the format/codec. Which is also a solid argument.

But clearly separate from the first point. I think another way of putting it is it's a type of duck. A breed created by a bird breeder. Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck. But this breed of duck's creator says it's a dawk.

So the owner can call it a dawk to their hearts content. And to go along, anyone else is welcome to call it a dawk also. Many will.

But technical birdwatchers will still be thinking ... "It's a DUCK. Geez ... "

Neil

[R Neil Haugen]

Some general information ...

DNxHR 444 is an RGB space codec, unlike say DNxHR HQX and the other DNx formats, which are YUV.

RGB codecs are nearly always full range, YUV tend to be legal range.

Premiere ships with several Lumetri presets for converting legal to full and full to legal if you need them.

Neil

[Waldorf & Statler]

Sorry Neil,

but DNxHR 444 is a legal range Codecit is the same looks like HQX.

The DNxHR 444 works in the AVID as legal range Codec.

A lot of people see at AVID 444/RGB but thay do not ask for Full or Legal.

But when you ask AVID and when you test the AVID than you must work from a Grading to the AVID in legal range!!!

So, when you work in a company, where you work with ADOBE & AVID you need the same RANGE,

it is not ok, to transcode the Footage for 2 tools in diferent ranges.

Waldorf

[R Neil Haugen]

I've had several pro colorists tell me full ... but I'm asking a few more to get further information. I've no personal experience with Avid software unfortunately.

Neil

[Miriam123+]

thank you, it's important asap

[Waldorf & Statler]

Hello Neil,

the right question is not what do I have to play to make it work in ADOBE!
But the question is, what is right for the YUV 444 Codec!

Another point! Why doesn't ADOBE correctly interpret both (full-range & legal-range) as Blackmagic does?
Or why can't you change it like on the Autodesk Flame?

One thing should be clear between the two of us, however, that DNxHR 444 is a codec from AVID and if the codec in AVID Media Composer is interpreted legally correctly as YUV 444 codec, that this is correct and other companies should adapt to it,
and not everyone has to adapt to ADOBE on this point.

greetings
Waldorf

[R Neil Haugen]

This sparked a fun set of responses on a private Slack channel.

Two major colorists, "A" works a lot with the BlackMagic team and teaches Resolve for BM at things like NAB, including demoing both the full $30G panel and the editing keyboard full-time in the BM booth. He was part of the on-screen team for DolbyVision's in-house produced series on working in Dolbyvision HDR.

The other, "B", is another major colorist, also noted as A for his technical knowledge of the media and the craft. Both have done their share of features, docs, shorts, commercials, and episodic work.

A says that well, it can be argured either way technically, but Avid currently treats it like legal range in Avid, so ... that's probably how everyone should treat it.

B came right back saying that is just WRONG. As a general rule, if the codec is full RGB then you don't need to have over/under values to account for gamut/encoding errors. This technically should be full range, and Avid um ... screwed up.

A says well again it could be either, BM gave up and decided to go with Avid, but Premiere doesn't have a way to allow the user to over-ride their view of codec standards.

B comes back with ... its' wrong, fella, just admit it's wrong ...

A says ok, Avid is wrong about a lot of things, but hey, they made this format ...

B says "Thank you for admitting it. Your honor, I rest my case."

I've personally discussed this in the past with Lars Borg, chief color scientist for the Adobe video apps. His take is purely technical: as a full RGB codec, by all that is right and Holy in video formats and codecs, and like all other full RGB codecs, DNxHR 444 should be treated as full range. And further, he also made the same statement as B's comment, that as a non-chroma subsampled codec it doesn't need protection from overs/unders and rounding, which is the only reason to continue the whole full/legal range mess to begin with.

Even though I'm not an Adobe staffer, I do considerLars ...  a bit above my pay-grade. As well I do with the two colorists mentioned above.

Yea, I would personally prefer we had the option in Premiere to 'set' full/legal as in Resolve, but currently we don't. They do ship the full->legal and legal-> full Lumetri presets which if you drop onto the clips in the bin, it will appear on them as a Master clip effect. This will accomplish that for you the same as if you had a switch.

They have options for 8, 10, and 12 bits each way. The use a LUT in the Basic tab of that Lumetri effect, so if the clip ... clips or crushes ... create another Lumetri effect, put it above the other one in the Master tab, and trim the clip while viewing the scopes and monitor for best blacks/whites.

Neil

[Waldorf & Statler]

Dear Neil,

Colorist A, is a good man!
Colorist B, I like to invite us to Corona for a beer
to discuss that.

Colorist A is right, the codec is made by AVID,
moreover, the codec is not called RGB as Colorist B mistakenly thinks.
In Germany, too, some people always think 4: 4: 4 is = equal to RGB, but that's not it.

I'm certainly not getting paid as well as colorist A + B: 2
but one crucial point my two favorite colorists C + D did with me, tried it in the AVID and read it in the AVID forum and spoke to the manufacturer about the codec.

AVID is primarily a broadcast tool, I assume that for this reason, in addition to 4: 2: 2, you then developed 4: 4: 4 as a better codec and deliberately not RGB. I think it's a little inappropriate to say AVID screwed it up.

The codec is called DNxHR 444 and not DNxHR RGB!

[R Neil Haugen]

They're both really good guys. And way above my capabilities and knowledge, and it's an honor to get to 'hang' with them. And like most of the other colorists I know, oh my ... can they get into detailed arguments WAY down the rabbit hole!

I haven't been able to meet with Lars Borg in person, but I've had a number of emails and one long phone call with him over some tech questions for a tutorial I was doing for MixingLight.com. Another very, very knowledgeable person. He's quite a bit the engineer/scientist type, he knows his stuff in deep detail and doesn't budge for anyone who doesn't have the solid technical argument for support.

But I've noted in the many conversations at NAB or MAX that I've had with engineers for Premiere, SpeedGrade (yea, that was my first couple NABs some years back now), AfterEffects, and Audition ... even though every one of them is actually a good user of their product, they tend to have a certain viewpoint from the engineering side. Most of the time I can actually keep up with their explanations of why X option is set the way it is, though in the end, I'll note that both as a user and as some one who helps others learn this massive app ... it don't make no sense.

And then yes, we go have that beer. Though I tend to prefer darks and stouts, personally.

IBC ... um ... oh yea, wanna get there. I do some teaching and testing for several companies/organizations, and the missus and I are hoping one or more will decided my presence at IBC is worth paying some airfare/hotels. There's quite a group of European folk I've met over the years online, at NAB, at Max, and they are occasionally 'here' for NAB/MAX, but normally 'there' for IBC.

Having dinner on boats in the canals ... in Amsterdam in September ... which has to be a LOT more beatiful than Vegas in any weather!

Neil

[Waldorf & Statler]

I think the right drink will not be the problem, it is important that the glasses are full 🙂