APPLE FINAL CUT PRO: Apple Final Cut Pro X FCPX Debates FCP Legacy FCP Tutorials

Blackmagic RAW

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Craig Seeman
Blackmagic RAW
on Sep 14, 2018 at 10:13:16 am

Blackmagic RAW. Perhaps it's their "answer" to ProRes RAW.
Of course we can debate FCPX implementation.










Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Blackmagic RAW
on Sep 14, 2018 at 11:42:38 am

At this point I think it BMD has no reason to support ProRes RAW and will leave it to Apple to implement. I think the SDK is the gauntlet thrown. I don't think Apple will implement though.

If Apple doesn't it may push some people to move to Resolve. While clients don't care what you edit with, they do care about quality and if BMD RAW looks better than Apple ProRes (if you shoot with BMD cameras and many do) some productions may move from FCPX to Resolve.

Apple may facilitate Arri to implement in their cameras but short of that, I think this is a serious strike to FCPX in some markets where RAW may be important. Arri has its own RAW so that's not integral to Arri. I'm honestly not sure how Apple competes with this.



Return to posts index

Eric Santiago
Re: Blackmagic RAW
on Sep 14, 2018 at 11:54:05 am

A lot of maybes but man would you edit in Resolve today?

I tried, trust me I tried.


Return to posts index


Craig Seeman
Re: Blackmagic RAW
on Sep 14, 2018 at 2:33:25 pm

You tested the BMD RAW samples in Resolve 15.1 (just released)?
I'd have thought BMD would have tested that specifically.



Return to posts index

David Cherniack
Re: Blackmagic RAW
on Sep 14, 2018 at 12:43:50 pm

[Craig Seeman] "I'm honestly not sure how Apple competes with this."

I can't see it either. This another mind boggling leap from these magnificent freaks.

David
http://AllinOneFilms.com


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Blackmagic RAW
on Sep 14, 2018 at 12:54:49 pm

A valuable difference between ProRes RAW in FCPX versus BMD RAW in Resolve (and potentially other apps) is that with BMD RAW, you have access to the RAW settings in post, just like with REDCODE RAW. ProRes RAW color processing happens after the DeBayer (demosaicing) step. Also, according to Grant's video, you can re-render to BMD RAW for consolidation/trimming of the clips.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Michael Gissing
Re: Blackmagic RAW
on Sep 14, 2018 at 1:29:58 pm

At 12:1 you are looking at files close to half the size of ProresRAW. I can now see why Grant was so dismissive of ProResRAW at NAB. The Blackmagic RAW is a vast improvement on both cDNG and ProResRAW. With an open SDK it isn't as proprietary as ProResRAW. I think cDNG and ProResRAW are going to languish. I doubt RED will embrace it but who knows if they and Arri might not offer it as an option instead of ProRes codecs.

Cross platform and open codecs are essential. I think ProResRAW is effectively an isolated format and likely to never gain traction. If X doesn't include BRAW it will also become isolated. I'm so looking forward to never using quicktime ever again.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Blackmagic RAW
on Sep 14, 2018 at 2:22:55 pm

[Michael Gissing] " if they and Arri might not offer it as an option instead of ProRes codecs."

I can certainly see Arri using it. I think a big question is licensing.
If the SDK encourages implementation in Avid and PPro then BMD RAW may be to their advantage.
What we don't know is if BMD intends to license the codec to other camera manufacturers.
We don't know the business model specifics.

Keep in mind BMD and Apple are businesses. Neither really are dependent on NLE sales for the bulk of their revenue.
Both Apple and BMD are really hardware companies.
Apple wants to sale computers (and phones).
BMD wants to sell cameras, switchers, grading consoles, capture/convertors.
Both may look at codec licensing as part of their business model.
If allowing BMD RAW into other cameras creates competition for BMD cameras it may mean Licensing is an alternate revenue stream. I don't think they're going to give that away. Giving it away to NLEs is a different story if it makes BMD cameras a more viable purchase because of a usable RAW workflow.

Apple can hold out implementing BMD in FCPX but I'm not sure what leverage they have at this point.
I can't see how ProRes RAW is preferable to BMD RAW for camera manufactures though.



Return to posts index

Michael Hancock
Re: Blackmagic RAW
on Sep 14, 2018 at 2:35:23 pm

From the Blackmagic website:

"Blackmagic RAW is the world’s only truly modern, high performance, professional RAW codec that is open, cross platform and free. The codec is supported via the free SDK on Mac OS, Windows and Linux systems. Best of all, there are no hidden licenses or ongoing fees. Blackmagic RAW has been designed to provide the industry with an open, elegant and standardized high quality image format that can be used across products and in customer workflows absolutely free!"

This is what ProResRAW should have been from day 1 if it wanted fast, widespread support/adoption.

[Craig Seeman] "If allowing BMD RAW into other cameras creates competition for BMD cameras it may mean Licensing is an alternate revenue stream. I don't think they're going to give that away. "

Go to 24:30 in the video. He says it may be possible to implement it in another camera, but doesn't commit to it.

I'm about 99.99% certain I'll get BlackmagicRAW files before I ever get ProResRAW. I downloaded the sample clips and have been playing with it a bit. It's impressive.

----------------
Michael Hancock
Editor


Return to posts index


Eric Santiago
Re: Blackmagic RAW
on Sep 14, 2018 at 3:33:49 pm

I honestly thought they should have had this done years ago.
I purchased two BMCC at the start and ended canceling due to their screwed up availability dates.
I am glad they have an option.
We all win :)


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Blackmagic RAW
on Sep 14, 2018 at 6:05:58 pm

[Michael Hancock] "This is what ProResRAW should have been from day 1 if it wanted fast, widespread support/adoption."

Honestly, this is what I had always hoped for Cineform RAW - but I'm glad BMD is taking this approach. I think this increases the value of BMD cameras (that shoot BMDRAW) tenfold... now, if they would just bring it to the Ursa 4.6k cameras...

Shawn



Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Blackmagic RAW
on Sep 15, 2018 at 12:27:43 am

[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.


Return to posts index


Shawn Miller
Re: Blackmagic RAW
on Sep 15, 2018 at 4:21:24 pm

[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



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Blackmagic RAW
on Sep 21, 2018 at 6:26:26 pm

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Blackmagic RAW
on Sep 21, 2018 at 7:06:19 pm

[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.


Return to posts index


Thomas Mathai
Re: Blackmagic RAW
on Sep 21, 2018 at 9:37:28 pm

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.


Return to posts index

Michael Hancock
Re: Blackmagic RAW
on Sep 21, 2018 at 10:10:24 pm

[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


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Blackmagic RAW
on Sep 21, 2018 at 10:22:45 pm

[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


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Blackmagic RAW
on Sep 22, 2018 at 12:41:23 am

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


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2018 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]