X native support for Braw?

[Robin S. kurz]

Instead of speculation about it being entirely up to BMD, here’s the word from the BMD employee behind Blackmagic Raw. https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=99200&p=745483#p744864
“We have tried a couple of times to get permission to do the work ourselves and develop a plugin to support Blackmagic RAW in FCPX like we do for Premiere/Avid. If users really want to see it then it may help to send more requests to Apple.”

Exactly. Which pretty much confirms exactly what I said. If BMD wants BRAW to run under FCP (no X btw) then they simply have to adhere to Apple’s QC requirements. Done. Which, yes, entails them working closely with Apple to ensure it a) works as expected and b) does not make for any incompatibilities or instabilities. So what’s the problem? The same goes for all the endless other OEMs that have done the same for FCP and the support for their codecs. From Arri to Canon to Nikon etc. etc…

So why exactly does BMD want/expect special treatment and why should they get it? Because they’re the hot shiz?

And exactly what excuse do they have for not supporting PPRAW in Resolve even though they already support every other flavor of ProRes and adding PRRAW does not require anything they’re therefore not already familiar with and agreed to? They certainly didn’t “do the work ourselves” then either. What’s changed?

Why did Apple give atomos exclusivity? maybe because they could shoot two birds with one bullet. 1, make PPraw available to all . 2, Hold braw back. All without showing their teeth.

So you’re saying Apple somehow knew of BRAW, literally years in advance, and only developed PRRAW to “hold back” BRAW?

😒

And how is requiring ownership of an AtomOS recorder and requiring OEMs to first support RAW output in any way “make PPraw available to all“?? Who in this scenario is “all“? 🤨

AtomOS contributed a near equal amount of R&D to PRRAW and were Apple’s ticket to getting around RED’s bs patent. I’d say that’s a pretty fair deal in exchange, no? And who says it’s exclusive? Who says that e.g. BMD asked to include it as an option on their video assists (but for some reason not in their NLE… sure) and were turned down (for either)?

Whoever believes that, raise your hand.

🦗🦗

[Robin S. kurz]

Color Finale is just transcoding and doesn’t need the Apple SDK and therefore doesn’t need Apple’s approval.

It certainly needs to adhere to e.g. the FX Plug SDK to become a valid plugin (of that magnitude).

So, no, CF’s transcoder is not a system-level extension, therefore doesn’t need “approval” in the sense that a codec would. Companies like motionVFX or FX Factory wouldn’t be who they are today if there were some sort of “approval process” for any and every plugin for FCP. Anyone can use the FX Plug SDK and isn’t going to get very far without it.