Thread: New Blackmagic RAW format.

Reply to Thread
Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst ... 345678910 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 99
  1. #61  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    609
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron Lochert View Post
    I think it's a pretty smart idea to let the camera partially debayer the raw image data and give the computer a break. Especially for lower-end machines like Blackmagic's are more than likely going to be edited/graded on.

    What I am curious about is if that means the files are "locked in" at a specific quality at the time of shooting. One of the beauties about redcode is that I can take a 10 year old camera's files and run it through IPP2 which includes the latest demosaic algorithm that RED has released. RED One files are arguably getting better as time goes forward.
    That's a good point.
    Patrick Southern from Lumaforge does touch upon that issue.

    https://youtu.be/kg4RLSE3oNY?t=4m16s

    Time will tell.

    Yes regarding RED One images constantly getting "upgraded" with REDCODE advances.
    I'm still amazed by that.

    Brian Timmons
    BRITIM/MEDIA
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #62  
    Senior Member Michael Hastings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    3,951
    Regarding eGPUs one would think BMD has done whatever optimization that can be done with AMD GPUs for MacOS since they make an AMD based eGPU. That should be good news for Mac users.
    Save the Sharks
    __________________
    RED Komodo soon. Original Manufacturer of RedOne & Epic/Scarlet/Weapon Underwater housings - contact us for sale or rent. RED owner since REDONE SN206. Manufacturer of Eye2Eye direct eye contact interviewing rig. 954.937.6600 (send a text first-having to use spam blocker these days) ... aquavideo1 at yahoo.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #63  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    1,753
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Timmons View Post
    R3D is not practical?
    As a camera codec many would strongly disagree. Would like to hear your perspective.

    If you mean to edit with yes but I feel that way about all camera codecs.

    PRORES and DNXHD still cover a lot of bases for editing and delivery and again is solid.

    ADDENDUM: My thoughts below on PRORES and DNXHD are in line with the formats being used
    for the purpose of post production.
    This is NOT necessarily to support their use as a camera acquisition format. At this point RAW is the only codec type
    to me that lives up to the quality of a film negative in the digital world.


    If you have editing work to do on the road and have 20-100 hours of footage regardless of if it was shot on REDCODE, BRAW, CINEFORM, and the like it would be unwise to not transcode it to a codec like PRORES proxy DNXHD 36 for the portability.

    If you have a post house with multiple editors and projects on a central storage system you will still likely not use a camera codec and will chose a lighter editing codec like PRORES or DNXHD to maximize your storage resources and bandwidth so you don't run out of footage or compromise speed performance.

    If you are working on a small group project with you and another editor or producer the more efficient workflow will not be exchanging camera files but transcoding them to a smaller editing format like DNXHD or PRORES and handing off accordingly.

    Handing off footage between different software is yet another issue solved well with DNXHD and PRORES.

    Yes when the edit is done and you're in online going back to the camera originals makes sense to have access to your RAW data for the Color Correct but even then at some point there will likely be a conversion somewhere to an RGB format (PRORES, DNXHD, ETC).

    The faster playback is a convenience but it is not a feature that will make and break good workflow.

    Again codecs tend to be designed for specific purposes that have their own unique needs (i.e Capture,Editing, Delivery).
    Even within each codec you have different flavors to accomodate different needs (i.e proxy for low bandwidth editing - 444 for mastering)

    What's good for image capture is not always what's good for post production and delivery.


    Brian Timmons
    BRITIM/MEDIA
    Technically they all suck (partially) compared to Cineform codec's

    https://gopro.github.io/cineform-sdk/

    CineformRAW(2005) is only 20% larger than the comparable .R3D but only needs 1/4 of the compute power to playback, edit, etc... (8k on a modern laptop, or a sub $1.500 desktop).

    The Cineform intermediate codecs
    8/10/16-bit YUV 4:2:2 compressed as 10-bit, progressive or interlace
    8/10/16-bit RGB 4:4:4 compressed at 12-bit progressive
    8/16-bit RGBA 4:4:4:4 compressed at 12-bit progressive

    Are all lighter on computer resources (compute power, memory, diskspace, etc...) and delivering higher quality than its ProRes, DNxHR, X-OCN counterparts.

    BM's .braw adds sensor data to it and .sidecar files give you even more possibilities.

    ProRes is apple only and ProResRAW is even more apple only. The other codecs are multi-platform (even RED has an SDK for it's ultra top secret REDCODE RAW).


    Still prefer the total Cineform range of codecs over the just BM .braw
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #64  
    Senior Member Michael Hastings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    3,951
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Hastings View Post
    Regarding eGPUs one would think BMD has done whatever optimization that can be done with AMD GPUs for MacOS since they make an AMD based eGPU. That should be good news for Mac users.
    Just noticed this:

    From Grant Petty video:

    "[Blackmagic Raw] also works with the new Blackmagic E-GPU for extra performance, but [the codec is so fast that] it doesn't really need it, which I probably shouldn't say."
    Save the Sharks
    __________________
    RED Komodo soon. Original Manufacturer of RedOne & Epic/Scarlet/Weapon Underwater housings - contact us for sale or rent. RED owner since REDONE SN206. Manufacturer of Eye2Eye direct eye contact interviewing rig. 954.937.6600 (send a text first-having to use spam blocker these days) ... aquavideo1 at yahoo.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #65  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Toronto & Vancouver
    Posts
    3,817
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Hastings View Post
    Just noticed this:

    From Grant Petty video:

    "[Blackmagic Raw] also works with the new Blackmagic E-GPU for extra performance, but [the codec is so fast that] it doesn't really need it, which I probably shouldn't say."
    Yeah, I loled when he said that.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #66  
    Senior Member Bruce Schultz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Malibu, CA
    Posts
    160
    I've been wondering - is it crazy to think about having BMRAW in DaVinci Resolve as an Intermediate codec? Let's say you are coming to Resolve with RAW files from Red, Sony, Arri, etc and you load them into the Media page, then make Intermediate files using BMRAW. Essentially RAW to RAW but with a highly reduced overhead for multi-layer playback and having RAW files for grading in the BRAW format. In theory, you wouldn't have to go back to the originals if the quality is maintained, and you get better playback at higher screen resolutions in the program - so no need for Red Rocket X or high end NVidia cards for playback.

    I know it's designed to be partially processed in-camera, but I am wondering about it in a standalone setting like this. Perhaps I'm missing a crucial point though . . .
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #67  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    1,753
    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Schultz View Post
    Perhaps I'm missing a crucial point though . . .
    My educated guess is that only Kinefinity would be brave enough to let this happen (KineRAW = CineformRAW = not supported by Davinci Resolve) but doubt BM is willing to do this (with their own upcoming 6..8k camera at NAB 2019). BRAW is not just a RAW codec, it also gives the UMP 1 stop more DR in the shadows.

    Most of the others would rather go bankrupt and die than use this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #68  
    Quote Originally Posted by Misha Engel View Post
    My educated guess is that only Kinefinity would be brave enough to let this happen (KineRAW = CineformRAW = not supported by Davinci Resolve) but doubt BM is willing to do this (with their own upcoming 6..8k camera at NAB 2019). BRAW is not just a RAW codec, it also gives the UMP 1 stop more DR in the shadows.

    Most of the others would rather go bankrupt and die than use this.
    I keep seeing that BRAW gives 1 extra stop of shadow DR. Is there really more information there, or is there less FPN making the stop on the lowest end more usable?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #69  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    1,753
    Quote Originally Posted by Savannah Miller View Post
    I keep seeing that BRAW gives 1 extra stop of shadow DR. Is there really more information there, or is there less FPN making the stop on the lowest end more usable?
    An interview with a RED shooter(Bas Goossens) at around 04:00



    Bas and his Helium

    Last edited by Misha Engel; 09-16-2018 at 03:43 PM. Reason: Some extra info about Bas
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #70  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Hollywood, CA
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Schultz View Post
    I've been wondering - is it crazy to think about having BMRAW in DaVinci Resolve as an Intermediate codec? Let's say you are coming to Resolve with RAW files from Red, Sony, Arri, etc and you load them into the Media page, then make Intermediate files using BMRAW. Essentially RAW to RAW but with a highly reduced overhead for multi-layer playback and having RAW files for grading in the BRAW format. In theory, you wouldn't have to go back to the originals if the quality is maintained, and you get better playback at higher screen resolutions in the program - so no need for Red Rocket X or high end NVidia cards for playback.

    I know it's designed to be partially processed in-camera, but I am wondering about it in a standalone setting like this. Perhaps I'm missing a crucial point though . . .
    I'm sure a lot of us are thinking along these lines, Bruce. But even though Grant Petty mentions in the video at 24:45 that "...you can render to the Black Magic file." The Braw codec option is not on the Resolve 15.1 deliver page that I'm looking at. It does allow you to consolidate/media manage back into BRAW though. I'm I misinterpreting something?
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts