The difference between DNxHR and ProRes codecs

What Is The Difference Between ProRes and DNxHR?

By Lowepost

xap18.218.245.179

 

T he Avid DNxHR and Apple Prores codec families are designed to meet the needs of modern, streamlined post-production workflows.

These days we capture source material on a variety of cameras- action cams, smart phones, drones and high-resolution cameras, and codecs makes it easy to work with any formats. With the growing demand for 4K deliveries, we need fast and reliable codecs that ensure reel-time playback while maintaining superior image quality. 

Both the DNxHR and ProRes families offer a variety of codecs for different compressions, data rates and file sizes. Some with just enough image information needed for editing, others for high-quality color grading and finishing, and lossless ones for mastering and archiving.

Below are the full list of codecs from both families.

Codec Color sampling Usage
DNxHR 444 4:4:4 Finishing
DNxHR HQX 4:2:2 Finishing
DNxHR HQ 4:2:2 Mezzanine*
DNxHR SQ 4:2:2 SQ Editorial
DNxHR LB 4:2:2 LQ Editorial
     
ProRes 4444 XQ 4:4:4 Finishing
ProRes 4444 4:4:4 Finishing
ProRes 422 HQ 4:2:2 Mezzanine*
ProRes 422 4:2:2 Mezzanine*
ProRes 422 LT 4:2:2 SQ Editorial
ProRes 422 Proxy 4:2:2 LQ Editorial


* In this case, Mezzanine means a compressed file that can be used to produce additional compressed files, but it is not necessarily useful for finishing work.

Codec facts:

  • DNxHR 444, ProRes 4444 and ProRes 4444 QC are the only codecs with embedded alpha channels.
  • DNxHR 444 and ProRes 4444 XQ are the only codecs that fully preserve the details needed in HDR- (high-dynamic-range) imagery.
  • Both codec families are resolution independent, but bitrate will vary depending on if you output a proxy file or a higher resolution file.
  • Both codec families can be wrapped inside MXF or MOV containers.

For more detailed specifications:
Full DNxHR codec list
Full ProRes codec list
 

Codec differences

DNxHR and ProRes was optimized to be visually lossless through many generations of decoding and re-encoding. Some claim to have noticed performance differences, but studies have shown that the quality and speed differences are negligible.

An important difference, however, is that some of the major editing and finishing systems available lacks support for ProRes encoding for Windows. This means Windows users can read a ProRes encoded file, but in some cases cannot export one. For this reason, many post-production facilites have abandoned ProRes and implemented a full DNxHR workflow.

There are systems that Apple fully supports such as the Adobe programs, Nuke and Scratch, but DNxHR is accessible universally.

Another important reason for the success of DNxHR is that Avid can read the files natively from its own MXF file structure. This eliminates the need to import clips and timeline rendering.

 

Lowepost

 

  • Like 1

Go to home

User Feedback

Recommended Comments



Fady melek

It would be great to discuss if QT and DNX files are expected to be full range or legal range or both. There has been a long debate about proress 444 being full or legal or both. Also different systems render out prores differently. I was told by baselight team that all prores are expected to be legal. However, i heared davinci renders prores 4444  as full range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lowepost
6 hours ago, Fady melek said:

It would be great to discuss if QT and DNX files are expected to be full range or legal range or both. There has been a long debate about proress 444 being full or legal or both. Also different systems render out prores differently. I was told by baselight team that all prores are expected to be legal. However, i heared davinci renders prores 4444  as full range.

Challenge accepted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest James Moore

Guest James Moore

I am puzzled why one would transcode to high res codecs for finishing as opposed to working with the original file format when finishing.  For real time work wouldn't you be working with low bandwidth codecs in both cases?  Why inject the extra step?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abby Bader
8 minutes ago, Guest James Moore said:

I am puzzled why one would transcode to high res codecs for finishing as opposed to working with the original file format when finishing.  For real time work wouldn't you be working with low bandwidth codecs in both cases?  Why inject the extra step?

Because not all camera formats are optimized for real-time playback and enormous file sizes can slow things down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Evan Anthony

I try to avoid .mov files. Especially in DnX. If I export as a Op1a/mxf I have no issue with data/video in any software or OS.

Edited by Evan Anthony
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Amada Daro

Adobe has discontinued MOV for h264 files, and only allow h264 codecs in MP4 containers. Probably because the most known players doesn't always recognize the file as legal and fail to remap it to full range, resulting in lifted blacks and washed out images. I have experienced the same flagging issues with DNxHD inside of MOV and I would go for MXF too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John Brown

Why are you hiding the text in low contrast? Does not make sense!

Low contrast designs are a good indicator for lack of basic professionalism. Do not do that, thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chad Smith

Be aware that ProRes is 10Bit and DNxHR is both 8 and 10bit depending on what flavor you choose.  This would have been good to have as one of the headings in the above graph.  

Also of note, not all Avid systems are able to play back the 10bit variant HQX.  So before delivery, make sure the client is able to play it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×