Tif vs Quicktime

[cinemano]

heres a side by side image that shows hows misleading the quicktime is.. it made me think my red had a focus problem.. making a tif from red alert saved my night's sleep.. thanks for help everyone

 

[cinemano]

the tif is still a liiiitle bit soft but im using a cheap-ass fragile-feeling plasticy nikon lens

 

[jbeale]

Quite a difference, isn't it? I'm not sure if the wall behind the subject might be a bit more crisp than the talent himself.

 

[Simon Valderrama]

interesting ... how are your quality settings in QT?
you should see if "Use high-quality video setting when available" option is checked under General Preferences ...
Also, what QT codec were you using?

 

[Deanan]

Which quicktime proxy were you viewing and in which app?

 

[cinemano]

i just opened the biggest quicktime file in the RED folder..
Did a 1 to 1 jpeg of a duck.. its still a bit soft using a new 85mm Zeiss lens.. perhaps my nikon mount isn't on perfectly flat.. I dont know how to "fix the back-focus" on the camera.. how does that work?

 

[cinemano]

oh. about the wall being sharper than talent.. its possible cos the talent was also the cameraman lol just a "hit-record-run-and-sit" thing.. was home alone to try the camera.

 

[Brook Willard]

Be sure to enable high quality. It makes the difference less dramatic.

 

[Chris Kenny]

If I'm not mistaken the 4K QuickTime proxies are, at present, actually up-scaled 2K (and the 2K isn't even decoded at the highest quality possible). I think the reason they exist is because there might be workflows where it's useful to have a proxy file that's the same resolution as the rendered footage you eventually plan to swap in later. They're not intended to be used as your final output at this stage.

 

[Brandon Fraley]

yeah, definitely check to see if your quicktime is set to high quality. My QTs look just as sharp as my tiffs to my eye