PDA

View Full Version : full-frame archiving codec



andrewtv
05-10-2005, 01:30 PM
Anyone try using mjpeg2000 for archiving frames (i.e. Morgan's)? What have people found useful for frame archival?

thanks!

Lukesutherland
05-10-2005, 03:49 PM
i use plain ole JPEG :)

operation
05-11-2005, 03:30 AM
you can use a losseless codec.
There is some free on the web.

If you have money a good one is Microcosm from Digital Anarchy (64 bits) and Alapry codec from Alparysoftware (32 bits) . (hope I am not wrong about the bits.. but Anarchy handla Alpha channel, Alpary not)


If you want to get one for free : Huffman codec 2.1 .
You can archive your video project without loosing "data informations". I am doing this since 2 years... and I am working in this format too !

Operation

WizCraker
05-11-2005, 05:19 AM
I never compress, I always send to Image Sequence. My format of choice is Cineon (10 bit log, comparable to SMPTE DPX) which I believe was developed by Kodak.

I only save in a animation file like .wmv only for test previews. The Image Sequences will either stay on my file server or burned to disk.

lardbros
05-11-2005, 06:14 AM
I tell what i found out with frame archival... this is probably blatently obvious, but when i found it out, i was saving my 5 gigs worth of frames onto a CD rather than one and a bit DVD's!!! And i was rather pleased with myself too! :D


My image sequences were all .tga's and around 5 meg each... i think?, it's not important anyway... but just grab the images you want to backup and bung them into a RAR or ZIP. I saved mine out to a RAR file which was named to each relevent scene. Some of the 1gig worth of images scenes were compressing to rediculously small sizes. The bottom line is i managed to get the whole thing onto a single CD in the end.

I had a think about this method, and just assume that RAR'ing or ZIP'ing files like TGA just compresses them down to the size of a JPEG pretty much. If anyone sees any faults with this method, i'd LOVE to know. If i have deleted all my frames and backed them up this way, and i can't get them back as they were i'll be pretty pi$$ed off.

Exception
05-11-2005, 06:33 AM
No thats a fine way Lardbros.
Even better would be if Lightwave would support LZH compression of TIFF files, which would keep them accessible (eg not in an archive) and still the small size as if they were in a rar or zip.

Would there be a possible future implementation of the LZH compression option for tiffs?

lardbros
05-11-2005, 06:38 AM
Yeah, thought it was obvious.

Anyway, that sounds like it would be much better. Maybe in the future!?

Bytehawk
05-11-2005, 04:38 PM
just be carefull if you archive to one file.
what if the disk gets scratched or mishandled ?
you get a crc error and you cannot recover the rest of the archive....
be sure to check the data recovery options in winrar.

lardbros
05-11-2005, 04:50 PM
Good point... and i have thought of this. Even the lastability of CD's becomes an issue at some point in the future.

What does everyone else do? Keep it archived on a hard drive and buy a new one when it runs out?

I thought my 200gb hard drive was big, but rendering large frames with alphas/separate passes or using .PSD exporters quickly eats up space.

kcole
05-11-2005, 08:34 PM
I use uncompressed frames written to a compressed directory (Win 2k/XP Pro supports this). The compression is not the best, but it helps.

toby
05-11-2005, 10:27 PM
Anyone try using mjpeg2000 for archiving frames (i.e. Morgan's)? What have people found useful for frame archival?

thanks!

Actually I found jpeg2000 to be excellent. I use it to archive my final frames, since it can't store an alpha. There's no color shift like there is with regular jpg, I'd say it's 99.5% lossless at 1/4 to 1/8 the size of uncompressed footage.

Test it yourself - layer an uncompressed frame over a jpg2k compressed frame and set the upper layers' blend mode to 'difference' (only pixels that differ will be visible - solid black means identical).

operation
05-12-2005, 01:27 AM
Hi to Toby:

Can you test for us :

Try to compress a gradient background with a medium object in the middle of the screen.

Or ... make a gradient , render an animatiob.reload it a compositing tool..

Tell us if it 's "gradient destructive".

With my experience of JPG compression, It was. And some colors are "shifted" (but to test that you need to have a video outpout).

I didn't make test with JPG2000. In case it works.



Operation

toby
05-12-2005, 10:06 PM
Not sure what you mean exactly, gradients will be the first thing to degrade - how bad is 'destructive'? I did a test and found that about 1/2 the pixels were shifted by 1 point in red, green or blue, and they were spread out pretty evenly, not clumped in bands or anything. Is that good enough for you?

starbase1
05-13-2005, 10:28 AM
Yes, for most codecs, very gentle shifts in colour very easily become banded or blocky. I did one run that was basically similar to animated smooth caustics, and it was a real mess - interestingly the Microsoft Video 1 codec seemed to do a better job on it...

Anyone know a good codec for animated fractals or similar? i.e. sharp edges between solid blocks of colour, the sort of thing an animated GIF is good at?

Nick

geoff3dnz
05-14-2005, 03:35 AM
No thats a fine way Lardbros.
Even better would be if Lightwave would support LZH compression of TIFF files, which would keep them accessible (eg not in an archive) and still the small size as if they were in a rar or zip.

Would there be a possible future implementation of the LZH compression option for tiffs?I do know that licensing the LZW (you do mean LZW don't you?) algorithm can cost a lot of money - although I've just read that the Unisys owned patent expired in July 2004 (June 2003 in the States) so maybe that's not an issue. But you won't get as overall good compression as you will from RAR - LZW for tiffs works better for flat, solid colour based images than something with lots of detail / different colours (it's the same compression that gifs use).