QT PNG or QT JPEG2000
Thanks bro, you saved me a lot of GB!
I even discovered that "AVID DNxHD"" is even smaller than both QT PNG or QT JPEG2000
thanks again, from u post I started looking at codec as a solution.
Thank you for sharing. I have not found a case where DNxHD with Alpha (or no) will create a smaller file than a QT Png or Jpeg2000. I just made a simple setup rendering in Ae this shape without keyframes for 6 seconds in a 1920X1080 25fps Comp:
this is the configuration for DNxHD with this 8-bit high quality settings:
these are the results
DNxHD-C and DNxHD-U are for Compressed Alpha or Uncompressed.
for video with a mask the competition was closer but still PNG wins for lossless alpha compression. this is a compressed mp4 video with a mask for 6 seconds on a 1280x720 Composition.
please share your type of setup, I am interested to see in which cases DNxHD will give better compressed results (alpha or no alpha) than PNG.
lemme check and get back to you.
YouTube. It figures. If you don't know who makes this stuff, don't trust it.
Dunno what this dude is talking about in this clip.
He gave the impression that AVIDs were smaller & faster
I have watched the video for a while. it looks like he knows what he is talking about. he is comparing rendering one minute of footage and not talking about alpha or graphics so this is not the same thing. Quicktime PNG is very compressed but also very slow so I would not use it for longer shots unless I really have to.