Red SDK and Adobe

[Salem Kapic]

Jim's words:

"...We expect Adobe support fairly soon..." :biggrin:

[Sanjin Jukic]

You're just naive that Adobe can give you what you want :) ,
don't follow 'Kusta's' way anyway,
(not even Maradona's Church like hand of God approach) can help you :) :) :) .

[shashbugu]

You're just naive that Adobe can give you what you want :) ,
don't follow 'Kusta's' way anyway,
(not even Maradona's Church like hand of God approach) can help you :) :) :) .


Why do you say that?
Adobe works with many hardware and software developers to create solutions. Red workflow I have heard from other forums is on thier list of things to get to. they have suported every highend codec and workflow to this point. they did with Aftereffects forthe longest time, and now for thier Dynamic link aproach they support ingest formats with PProCS3.

I hope I am not wrong about Adobe's interest in supporting this new technology.

please explain what you mean

[Kevin Halverson]

I expect that we will see some pretty amazing things from a RED / Adobe pairing in the near future. The level of integration across the Adobe products and the fact that Adobe is cross platform makes for a very compelling argument. The inclusion of fully (or mostly) integrated support for RED source files would considerably increase the value of both products.

Fingers crossed over here!

[Jason Diamond]

and just think about the possibilities of leveraging their current product line and technologies to the RAW moving image.

[Thor Wixom]

I would love to see Red participate in the Adobe RAW initiative... maybe even have the Red One record directly to the Adobe RAW standard as an option in addition to Redcode.

This would be down the road, but it would be nice.

-Thor

[Steve Freebairn]

Yep, we need adobe to support CinemaDNG (their raw workflow). I would keep putting in feature requests so that adobe knows we want it. We also need to make sure RED knows we're interested.

[Jay A. Kelley]

I'd be happy with the release of the SDK.. there are solutions out there that are ready in hours, not days.

Jay

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I'm not certain that RED could write to CinemaDNG. I'm suspicious that they're using more purpose built hardware on the encoding end and trying to cram a DNG codec through it would be predicated on the assumption that RED is using a generic DSP.

[Mark Crabtree]

I could be wrong but I think that recording to Cineform codec or the proposed new standard directly from the camera would only be possible if Red were to make available the RAW port.

[Eddie]

Why do you say that?
Adobe works with many hardware and software developers to create solutions. Red workflow I have heard from other forums is on thier list of things to get to. they have suported every highend codec and workflow to this point. they did with Aftereffects forthe longest time, and now for thier Dynamic link aproach they support ingest formats with PProCS3.

I hope I am not wrong about Adobe's interest in supporting this new technology.

please explain what you mean

nevermind sanjin, he is such a snob, always prowling around tirelessly promoting macs and banged up vintage glass with shitty coatings.
I am sure Adobe is going to be a good workable solution. AND you get to use a PC!!!

...btw sanjin, how is the CA on that "superman" lense, still got that magic green-krypto look?

:tongue:

[REDefine]

..........waiting for SDK. I don't want to go mac route.

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

A slight offtopic:

Wouldn't that One RAW Codec to Rule Them All be a kind of monopoly?

My brain tells me that monopolies are bad... and having different options is good.

[REDefine]

after build 16, next milestone is SDK for Adobe. I beleive there are hundreds of Red owners desperately waiting for it.

[Obin Olson]

I'd be happy with the release of the SDK.. there are solutions out there that are ready in hours, not days.

Jay

I know EXACTLY what your talking about. it's about time that SDK was out.

Things will be looking far better in PC land when this happens.

[David Wilson]

Plus one...

[REDefine]

Jim stated few days back that they will start working on SDK as soon as they are finished with Build 16 and Redcine.

[Kevin Halverson]

Finger's still crossed here too for the SDK!

[Adam Glick]

.....

[chocblu]

A slight offtopic:

Wouldn't that One RAW Codec to Rule Them All be a kind of monopoly?

My brain tells me that monopolies are bad... and having different options is good.

I think there is a difference between a monopoly and an open standard.

There arent many complete monopolies in the software world. but say company X had a complete monopoly over a product. It would be a monopoly if they had some trade secret that they did not give out that nobody else could use that made thier product better.

On the other hand there is something like HTTP. Its a protocol that we all use and love. its the ONLY(well pretty much) thing we use to browse websites on the internet. Now because its an open standard, there are three major browsers, and many minor ones that use that standard, and they all (largely) do the same thing but in different ways.

The cinemaDNG i hope will be like a complicated version of HTTP. Open standard that if tomorrow i wanted to make a camera/editing platform i could implement as an ingest format, freely without any penalties or legal ramifications. They need to do this for ingest AND sequence format ideally. and then the post production suites are really competeing on interface, just like the browsers..

[Craig Bowman]

Jim stated few days back that they will start working on SDK as soon as they are finished with Build 16 and Redcine.

Correct. Adobe can announce anything any time they want but until the SDK is far enough along there isn't much they can do except continue the work on CS4.

[Jay A. Kelley]

Ummm guys you are aware that normally adobe does not do anything directly. They simply open their software so that third party vendors can write whatever they wish and make it a part of the program through plug-ins.

While RED is quite popular, I serious doubt they will be directly supporting anything. The better situation is similar to that of Cineform/Adobe.

In fact if you think about it, Adobe is the LAST one you want directly involved with RED support, as bugs would take forever to get fixed. I prefer this stay with a fast moving 3rd party vendor.

Jay

[Joel Kaye]

Ummm guys you are aware that normally adobe does not do anything directly.

In fact if you think about it, Adobe is the LAST one you want directly involved with RED support


So all the RAW SLR Format support in Photoshop is done by third parties?
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/cameraraw.html

[Adam Glick]

Ummm guys you are aware that normally adobe does not do anything directly. They simply open their software so that third party vendors can write whatever they wish and make it a part of the program through plug-ins.

While RED is quite popular, I serious doubt they will be directly supporting anything. The better situation is similar to that of Cineform/Adobe.

In fact if you think about it, Adobe is the LAST one you want directly involved with RED support, as bugs would take forever to get fixed. I prefer this stay with a fast moving 3rd party vendor.

Jay

I think Jay has the right idea on this.

And even after SDK & 3rd-party support is provided to the industry, you won't be able to do any online editorial or VFX with the r3d files directly.

Because the .r3d format is not a true "CODEC" we will always be limited to cuts-only offline edits and CC/playout toolsets (ala Scratch) until the footage is transcoded.

The footage will likely ALWAYS need to be transcoded into some intermediate or final CODEC or file type (like Cineform) before any real post production can start.

Somebody please correct me if i'm wrong.

[Joel Kaye]

The footage will likely ALWAYS need to be transcoded into some intermediate or final CODEC or file type (like Cineform) before any real post production can start.

Sounds right, but I sorta suspect RED knew that all along and has their own intermediate codec gameplan. Pure speculation on my part here, but they know post is a big deal and the more you can use REDCODE for "real" the better their cameras will sell.

Think about Scarlet for a minute... are average consumers really going to transcode everything? Or are they going to want to drop it into FCP and Premiere or iMovie and just "go". That's gotta be the target workflow if at all possible.

[Yuval Shrem]

I think Jay has the right idea on this.

And even after SDK & 3rd-party support is provided to the industry, you won't be able to do any online editorial or VFX with the r3d files directly.

Because the .r3d format is not a true "CODEC" we will always be limited to cuts-only offline edits and CC/playout toolsets (ala Scratch) until the footage is transcoded.

The footage will likely ALWAYS need to be transcoded into some intermediate or final CODEC or file type (like Cineform) before any real post production can start.

Somebody please correct me if i'm wrong.


.r3d actually is a very real codec. RED simply doesn't supply an encoder for it but rather only a decoder. The only encoder into .r3d is a hardware encoder within the camera itself.
my guess is that it will remain that way.

It is not quite accurate to say that transcoding is the only way to post or finish RED materials, as it is always possible (if you can afford it) to finish in an uncompressed format, such as Tiff sequence etc.

So far it seems to me that there are only two good ways to go:

1) once .r3d is natively fully supported, editing native and then CC-ing into an uncompressed format, finishing uncompressed, or...

2) Transcode to Cineform RAW 4k, and stray there all the way.

[Adam Glick]

...It is not quite accurate to say that transcoding is the only way to post or finish RED materials, as it is always possible (if you can afford it) to finish in an uncompressed format, such as Tiff sequence etc.
...

Actually, if you consider that "transcoding" simply means converting one type of digital media file into another, then, yes, all r3d footage must be transcoded at some point.

I guess the point is, and I think you're right on this, that true high-quality CODECs such as Cineform are going to be important. And hopefully the transcode processing times for these alternative CODECs will not be too painful. As I understand it, the import/transcode for r3d files into Cineform happens pretty quickly - faster than transcoding to many other high-quality formats.

[Yuval Shrem]

However, there's one thing that makes me wonder whether we are both wrong with our assumptions:
"Red-Ray" Red's 4k player which was announced at NAB.
I wonder if this is going to mean that they will eventually make an .r3d software encoder available for post-production and/or delivery purposes...

[REDefine]

RED Team will start working on SDK in a day or two. Is it a complex thing or easily acheivable?
I don't know anything about java, c++, viual basic. Thought someone with relevant background can enlighten me.

[Mark B.]

RED Team will start working on SDK in a day or two. Is it a complex thing or easily acheivable?
I don't know anything about java, c++, viual basic. Thought someone with relevant background can enlighten me.

Creation of an SDK tends to be anywhere from difficult to very difficult. If they only just started making the SDK, then it will be a while before they're done. On the other hand, I think they've already built most of the necessary code by way of their earlier software efforts.

Ease of implementing an SDK in a 3rd party creation tends to be anywhere from very easy to very difficult - it depends on how the SDK interface is designed and how much documentation is available explaining the nuances of interfacing with it.

If you aren't already familiar with computer programming, the SDK won't be of much use to you. Experienced programmers will utilize the SDK to create new tools though, so you might benefit from the tools they make.

[Tom Lowe]

Ummm guys you are aware that normally adobe does not do anything directly. They simply open their software so that third party vendors can write whatever they wish and make it a part of the program through plug-ins.

While RED is quite popular, I serious doubt they will be directly supporting anything. The better situation is similar to that of Cineform/Adobe.

In fact if you think about it, Adobe is the LAST one you want directly involved with RED support, as bugs would take forever to get fixed. I prefer this stay with a fast moving 3rd party vendor.

Jay

I don't really agree with this. All we are talking about is Camera RAW-style support. Adobe adds dozens of new DSLRs to their Camera RAW plugin with every release - Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc. I don't see how Red's RAW format is all that different.

Adobe is one of the greatest software companies on the planet, IMO. Many of us PC guys are praying that Adobe and Red will play nice together, as it is in the interest of both companies to do so.