Re: Apple ProRes Raw and Raw HQ

Alexander Ibrahim
 

If you note, the performance comparisons are relative. Not absolute. 
 
On the same hardware in the same software, ProRes Raw is faster than Red or C200 raw formats at the same resolution. Often more than four times as fast. 
 
So, if your computer let’s you work with R3D using 1/4 res debayer in the timeline, you can probably use full resolution with ProRes Raw, or have more complex timelines with 1/2 res ProRes Raw. 
 
As to the container ... it scales to support whatever the input format is. The limit at present is 12 bit raw. (I think that’s a limit set based on how cameras can output raw signals at present)
   
The container definition supports 32bpc... so if a need arises it can be readily extended. 
 
That said ... if you actually NEED 14 or 16 bpc raw, you probably aren’t hitting your head against performance issues and are totally satisfied with just using camera raw formats. 
 
Finally ... ProRes Raw simplifies HDR Post. In FCP X you just pick your target color space (HDR or SDR)  and go. 
 
Who is this for?
 
People having performance issues with camera raw formats. 
 
People who need the flexibility of raw but are otherwise satisfied with the quality of ProRes HQ or ProRes 4444. 
 
People who can’t afford camera media/storage/backup for manufacturer camera raw formats. 
 
People who need to simplify post and their HDR transitions. 
 
So... I do expect ProRes Raw to enable some productions to move from ProRes/Rec709 to a raw workflow and HDR. 
 
Will it matter to YOU? I don’t know.
 
It will matter to a lot of my productions though. R3D nearly breaks a lot of their post workflows. ProRes is easy, but a little too constraining. 
 
It will shift the industry, especially the low end and mid range, in ways we should all be excited about. 

Alexander Ibrahim
Sent from my mobile phone. 
Please excuse typos and brevity. 

Join cml-raw-log-hdr@cml.news to automatically receive all group messages.