[Craig Seeman]

Remember the days when people complained that Resolve worked best with Nvidia cards. I’ve heard from some quarters Resolve can be quite zippy on Macs (and AMD of course) at least with some functions.

I wonder if Adobe’s base will be eroded by Resolve over time. Perhaps not there yet but maybe a couple of years down the road.

[Craig Seeman]

CoreMelt TrackX/SliceX There’s also FXFactory CrumplePop EasyTracker.
Otherwise, frame by frame by hand.

[Craig Seeman]

Are the drivers Mojave compatible?
Sony is often far behind in OS compatibility on Mac.

[Craig Seeman]

[Grzegorz Kwiatkowski] “We don’t want to loose any bit of quality.”

Transcodes generally impact quality. They may not be observable and, with the right one, may have little impact on compositing or grading. That said, the best way to go would probably be to transcode to ProRes 4444. Of course, depending on your workflow, there may little appreciable difference between recording ProRes Raw and recording ProRes HQ which the Atmos Shogun also supports and you’d save the transcode, the time and space involved with that.

When choosing an acquisition codec you really need to evaluate your entire workflow as sometimes more isn’t better, it’s just more, more time, more money, more storage space.

Do you really need a ProRes Raw to ProRes 4444 workflow over ProRes HQ?
Of course, if you were working in FCPX, ProRes RAW could easily make sense over ProRes HQ in many cases.

If not losing any bit of quality is REALLY your primary concern then you would edit in FCPX on Mac. Again you need to really determine what your priorities are and what is the best workflow for your job from an agnostic position.

[Craig Seeman]

A meaningful example.

From this forum about 8 years ago.

[Craig Seeman]

That’s a very broad question. Theoretically yes if your source falls within Blu Ray specs.

In order to have any kind of meaningful response you have to describe your workflow and indent.

[Craig Seeman]

Presets couldn’t be much more intuitive and there’s always the Help menu too. That links to the complete User Guide (manual).

[Craig Seeman]

RippleTraining Digital Distribution and Encoding with Compressor costs all of $19.

[Craig Seeman]

It depends on what your intent is with the resultant files. VirtualDub hasn’t been updated in more than five years and doesn’t support some of the “modern” codecs preferred in typical video post production workflows.

If you can access x264 encoder that might be a workable option but it would be .mp4 extension. Again it’s not clear what your intent is. x264 wouldn’t be my choice for post production work.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKgkLAoAEv8

Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!

This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.

[Craig Seeman]

[David Cherniack] “Well BRAW is an acquisition codec like ProresRaw only tied (so far, and probably indefinitely) to BM cameras. Not being a delivery codec like Prores, I don’t see how it might factor in A’s decision to license Prores to Adobe.
“
Because, as you see here on this on other forums, there’s a general residence to trust Apple’s proprietary codecs. It may well factor into the business decision a camera manufacturer may make in their decisions to license codecs.
BRaw is being made freely available. ProRes Raw is not. Industry players (both manufacturers, developers, end users) may make decision on paying an “Apple Tax” (licensing) especially when there are alternatives.

We’ll never know for sure but I can’t help but think BRaw, announced shortly after Apple’s ProRes Raw, the (short term) ATMOS deal along with implementation by DJI, may have resulted in Apple rethinking its approach to codec license if its goals standardization based on market share.