-
Blackmagic RAW
-
[Shawn Miller] “now, if they would just bring it to the Ursa 4.6k cameras…”
I certainly hope so and Grant says other BM cameras in the video. I am wondering if that is why DNx was dropped not so long ago. Leaving room for BRAW implementation? I see less need to have any ProRes flavours onboard with 8:1 and 12:1 RAW. They have clearly modeled this codec on the r3d with the metadata carrying info about how to display, so a Rec 709 look can be applied but still have access to highlight and low light recovery. Like REDs camera defined gammas, fully changeable in Resolve.
I wonder if Apple knew this was coming and rushed ProResRAW to the market half baked.
-
[Michael Gissing] ”
[Shawn Miller] “now, if they would just bring it to the Ursa 4.6k cameras…”
I am wondering if that is why DNx was dropped not so long ago. Leaving room for BRAW implementation? I see less need to have any ProRes flavours onboard with 8:1 and 12:1 RAW.”
I think that’s a very real possibility. I was a little skeptical when Grant positioned BRAW as a replacement for cDNG and compressed video, but after playing with samples, it makes more sense to me now. I’m very impressed with what I’ve seen so far and I can’t wait to shoot my own material in BRAW. I’m also cautiously optimistic that I’ll be able to substantially reduce my reliance on ProRes.
[Michael Gissing] ”
I wonder if Apple knew this was coming and rushed ProResRAW to the market half baked.”That’s a good question… I thought it was odd that Apple released a raw format which doesn’t give access to camera metadata like iso, color temp, white balance, ect., but people seemed to spin it as an ease of use feature – thinking about it though, PRR seems more half baked than easy to use.
Shawn
-
BTW – the App Store versions of Resolve’s update that supports BMD RAW dropped today. Some initial testing with the few sample clips floating around look very promising. On a fast machine and with fast drives, performance is superb and really point to Resolve as a very functional NLE using native BMD RAW files. Better render times than with RED or large ProResHQ/4444 files. Way more and better color control of these files in Resolve than with ProRes RAW in FCPX.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
[Oliver Peters] “On a fast machine and with fast drives, performance is superb”
On my 2015 MacBook Pro with Thunderbolt 2 Raid the files are VERY smooth.
-
It makes sense that Black Magic to create their own format if Cinema DNG has limitations.
Why would Arri want to use BRaw when they’ve had lots of success with ArriRaw , ProRes and their own color science. They’ve been doing this long before Black Magic got into the game.
All the other major camera makers have their own RAW formats and color science. I only see some DIY project using it because it’s open source
ProRes RAW could be preferable because Apple isn’t competing as a camera maker.
-
[Thomas Mathai] “ProRes RAW could be preferable because Apple isn’t competing as a camera maker.”
But Apple is competing in the NLE market, so will we eventually be able to decode ProResRAW in anything other than FCPX?
I don’t think you’ll see wide adoption of ProResRAW If you can’t import and edit with it in Avid, Premiere, or Resolve. And the same is true of Blackmagic Raw. But I think Blackmagic will get it supported by at least Premiere and Avid relatively quickly, and it’s already in Resolve (naturally).
—————-
Michael Hancock
Editor -
[Michael Hancock] “And the same is true of Blackmagic Raw. But I think Blackmagic will get it supported by at least Premiere and Avid relatively quickly, and it’s already in Resolve (naturally).”
I agree. BMD already makes the Avid hardware, so it stands to reason that they’ll have support for BRAW in Avid…and certainly Adobe. And unless PRORES RAW sees support in Adobe or Avid…I cannot see high end camera makers implimenting it. If they can’t get it to the client to edit, why use it?
Of course, camera makers ALWAYS make new formats that no NLE supports for a month or two…which is patently silly. But yeah, since Apple isn’t a camera maker, they need to convince the camera makers to adopt that format. And to limit that to FCP-X…if they did that? You won’t see many camera makers adopting it. 2.5 Million users or not. IMHO. How many of that 2.5M is high end enough to use that format?
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
Well, at this point, we know very little, really. It’s early. I doubt that either codec will get wide acceptance until more camera manufacturers are on board. Most DPs have no big interest in using external recorders, so not having in-camera support is a deal-breaker. While BMD is offering its RAW in-camera, they are going to have to attract other camera manufacturers. That’s going to be tough, because they are a direct competitor.
IIRC, Grant has mentioned making BMD RAW an open codec available to all. That isn’t the case with ProRes RAW. But, assuming that at least decoding opens to more than just FCPX, then other NLE makers will add support. However, RAW complicates matters. With ProRes, companies like Avid or BMD have no direct control over the codec. It’s essentially a closed, “black box” from the standard of third parties. That’s fine for playback and record, but I would imagine you need more direct hooks into the codec when it’s RAW. Of course, maybe each will offer a RAW module, like RED does.
I can say that, for the moment, BMD RAW inside of Resolve is better and more functional than ProRes RAW is inside of FCPX. But, for most DP/editor/colorist purposes, neither codec offers all that much more than what we already have available to use with log profiles. So wide adoption is certainly no given.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
[Oliver Peters]”But, for most DP/editor/colorist purposes, neither codec offers all that much more than what we already have available to use with log profiles. So wide adoption is certainly no given.”
The ability to change color temp and ISO plus 12 bit is a big improvement over 10 bit log in a .mov or mxf wrapper. The fact that it is also compressed makes it a smaller file size than either ProRes rec 709 codecs and ProRes RAW without penalty. As soon as my camera gets the update, I expect to switch to BRAW and not use ProRes again for 4k shooting both to save storage space and to get the full dynamics of the sensor.
I was at a presentation of the new Arri Alexa LF a few days ago and the topic of BRAW was raised, especially as the presentation included the experience of two local ACS members who had shot a promo with the camera. Uncompressed RAW with a 4.4k sensor resulted in massive data and they were forced to switch to ProRes. The Arri rep pointed out that Arri don’t have a compressed RAW, partly because they expect RED to take action on their patent for compressed RAW, something that BM have either negotiated or choose to ignore. Either way, if Arri choose to they could provide compressed RAW either by coming to an agreement or just using BRAW. I think we are about to see that compressed RAW will be demanded as it has grade and space advantages as well as not being a bloody quicktime codec belonging to a competing software company.
-
[Michael Gissing] “Cross platform and open codecs are essential.”
Despite all of the nonsense marketing from Apple, this is the real future of our industry. Adobe and Blackmagic are well aware of this and therefore they’re positioning themselves for the future.
Windows 10 Pro | i7-5820k CPU | 64 gigs RAM | NvidiaGeForceGTX970 | Blackmagic Decklink 4k Mini Monitor |
Adobe CC 2018 |Renders/cache: Samsung SSD 950 Pro x2 in Raid 0 | Media: Samsung SSD 960 PRO PCIe NVMe M.2 2280 | Media: OWC Thunderbay 4 x 2 Raid 0 mirrored with FreeFileSync
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up