Topics

Apple ProRes Raw and Raw HQ

Colin Elves
 

So… Looks like there’s gonna be a new compressed Raw format on the block - and thanks to the Atomos Inferno and Sumo, a whole bunch of cameras will be recording to it: 


And it is fully compatible with… wait for it… FCPX! and… wait for it… nothing else!

I know you’re all excited to hear this.

Colin Elves
Director of Photography
London/Berlin

 

There must be some logic to it - if some can explain it to me.

Michael Sanders
London Based DP.

+ 44 (0) 7976 269818




On 5 Apr 2018, at 20:41, Colin Elves <colin@...> wrote:

So… Looks like there’s gonna be a new compressed Raw format on the block - and thanks to the Atomos Inferno and Sumo, a whole bunch of cameras will be recording to it: 


And it is fully compatible with… wait for it… FCPX! and… wait for it… nothing else!

I know you’re all excited to hear this.

Colin Elves
 

The deal with Red. Purchasing SMI. The endless expansion of iTunes… my guess is end to end content acquisition. So iTunes becomes another Netflix/Amazon/Hulu specialising in HDR and 3D content (I suspect they are developing a glasses free screen - otherwise why acquire SMI?) that Hydrogen becomes the new iPhone. And you can produce all this content for home and professional use on an ‘Apple’ camera, edit and grade on an ‘apple’ computer, using apple software, sell it to an Apple streaming service and watch it on an Apple TV that is an actual TV. 

It’s that whole ‘Apple eco-system’ but expanded to include entertainment and even more of what we do…

Not sure this belongs in Raw-log-HDR anymore though!

Colin Elves
Director of Photography




On 5 Apr 2018, at 21:43, Michael Sanders <glowstars@...> wrote:

There must be some logic to it - if some can explain it to me.

Michael Sanders
London Based DP.

+ 44 (0) 7976 269818




On 5 Apr 2018, at 20:41, Colin Elves <colin@...> wrote:

So… Looks like there’s gonna be a new compressed Raw format on the block - and thanks to the Atomos Inferno and Sumo, a whole bunch of cameras will be recording to it: 


And it is fully compatible with… wait for it… FCPX! and… wait for it… nothing else!

I know you’re all excited to hear this.

John Brawley
 

RAW control without leaving ProRes or having to transcode to ProRes from another RAW format. 

It’s actually great. I’d say 90% of TV drama is shot ProRes. Now we get RAW controls inside of ProRes. 

JB


John Brawley
Chicago IL
DP - Untitled Robert Levine pilot, formally Gone Baby Gone


There must be some logic to it - if some can explain it to me.

Michael Sanders
London Based DP.


Mitch Gross
 

It’s only on FCPX because Apple made it and integrated it into their software. The same thing happened with video ProRes and that eventually was made available on other platforms. 

ProRes RAW looks to be crazy efficient and easy to use. Plus it exports out of FCPX very fast — much faster than other RAW formats. 

I think it will make a great way to work for lots of people shooting on the EVA1 and VariCam LT. 


Mitch Gross
Cinema Product Manager 
Panasonic Media Entertainment Company
New York

On Apr 5, 2018, at 12:41 PM, Colin Elves <colin@...> wrote:

So… Looks like there’s gonna be a new compressed Raw format on the block - and thanks to the Atomos Inferno and Sumo, a whole bunch of cameras will be recording to it: 


And it is fully compatible with… wait for it… FCPX! and… wait for it… nothing else!

I know you’re all excited to hear this.

Colin Elves
Director of Photography
London/Berlin

Colin Elves
 

I’ve just been told it will be supported in Resolve 15 which is being announced this weekend. So that’s good!

Colin Elves
Director of Photography




On 5 Apr 2018, at 22:17, Mitch Gross <mitchgrosscml@...> wrote:

It’s only on FCPX because Apple made it and integrated it into their software. The same thing happened with video ProRes and that eventually was made available on other platforms. 

Gavin Greenwalt
 

“ProRes eventually was made available on other platforms.”

Only if you sell millions of copies of software. They still won’t license it to smaller developers which makes it hard to integrate into VFX pipelines. 

I’ve never stopped and thought to myself “I really love this raw format, I just wish that I could also have the weird gamma and rendering inconsistencies of Quicktime though too. 😃

Gavin Greenwalt
VFX Supervisor
Seattle, WA

Colin Elves
 

Oh god. Please move this to Post before Geoff or one of the other listmums gives me an almighty spanking for starting this in Raw!

Colin Elves
Director of Photography
Berlin/London. 




On 5 Apr 2018, at 22:43, Gavin Greenwalt <im.thatoneguy@...> wrote:

“ProRes eventually was made available on other platforms.”

Only if you sell millions of copies of software. They still won’t license it to smaller developers which makes it hard to integrate into VFX pipelines.  

I’ve never stopped and thought to myself “I really love this raw format, I just wish that I could also have the weird gamma and rendering inconsistencies of Quicktime though too. 😃

Gavin Greenwalt
VFX Supervisor
Seattle, WA
_._,_._,_

Nathan Armstrong
 

"it will make a great way to work for lots of people shooting on the EVA1 and VariCam LT"

Mitch are you hinting at something here?  Is Panasonic planning to record ProresRAW in-camera? Or would this be an on-board recorder scenario?

Thanks,
Nathan Armstrong
DIT, Minneapolis
801.362.1741


Art Adams
 

I think the odds of Apple turning Hydrogen into the next iPhone are slim to none. They're not going to release an Android phone. They may buy technology from it, though. They have a history of doing that.

If I had to guess, I'd say this is about making Apple relevant to industry professionals again after dropping the ball with the Mac Pro and FCPX.

I don't like that ProRes is a closed format. I do like that no one is scared of it, in that it's a tried-and-true industry staple. 95% of what I shoot is on ProRes 4444.

--
Art Adams
Director of Photography
San Francisco Bay Area

Art Adams
 

Interesting that the white paper specifically calls out Panasonic V-Log in a Final Cut Pro screen grab. :)

If these data rates are correct, and the compression artifacts are minimal, I suspect this is going to cause some big changes in the industry. The FCPX example in the white paper specifically references HDR output, so my guess is that they are trying to create a better workflow for HDR material than recording to codecs that create huge files at high bitrates.

The one thing they don't mention is the bit depth, although they compare it to 12-bit raw in one graph.

--
Art Adams
Director of Photography
San Francisco Bay Area

Fahnon
 

It looks exciting, and I'm assuming that it will be widely adopted.  RED and Blackmagic in particular would be a great fit for in-camera recording, and I wouldn't be all that surprised to see Blackmagic have support at NAB (either existing cameras or a new announcement).  If it works as advertised, I think Canon would be wise to add this to their cinema line (C200 and up) and maybe ditch Canon Raw Light on new models.

If Panasonic added it to the EVA1 for internal recording it would be the camera to beat unless you really, really need autofocus...

On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 4:59 PM, Art Adams <art.cml.only@...> wrote:
I think the odds of Apple turning Hydrogen into the next iPhone are slim to none. They're not going to release an Android phone. They may buy technology from it, though. They have a history of doing that.

If I had to guess, I'd say this is about making Apple relevant to industry professionals again after dropping the ball with the Mac Pro and FCPX.

I don't like that ProRes is a closed format. I do like that no one is scared of it, in that it's a tried-and-true industry staple. 95% of what I shoot is on ProRes 4444.

--
Art Adams
Director of Photography
San Francisco Bay Area




--
Fahnon Bennett
Filmmaker/Photographer
Brooklyn, New York
323.375.4332

Colin Elves
 

I’ve been told that’s exactly what the intention is: To make HDR workflows more accessible and they’re probably developing an HDR display to go with it (and I’m assuming HDR streaming for iTunes). 

The Atomos says 12bit RGB: https://www.atomos.com/proresraw 8K+ etc

Mitch mentioned the LT and EVA1 as on the list of supported cameras - so you’ll be able to record the raw streams from those as ProRes Raw using an Inferno from Monday.

In terms of the phones: I’m not suggesting that Apple will start selling the Hydrogen as an iphone, I just mean they might well buy up Red or a big chunk of them and take the tech to put into an iPhone…

Looks like the first ‘camera’ to get ProRes Raw internally will be the DJI ZenmuseX7: https://www.dji.com/newsroom/news/dji-updates-zenmuse-x7-camera-with-support-for-apple-prores-raw

Colin Elves
Director of Photography
Berlin/London




On 5 Apr 2018, at 23:14, Art Adams <art.cml.only@...> wrote:

Interesting that the white paper specifically calls out Panasonic V-Log in a Final Cut Pro screen grab. :)

If these data rates are correct, and the compression artifacts are minimal, I suspect this is going to cause some big changes in the industry. The FCPX example in the white paper specifically references HDR output, so my guess is that they are trying to create a better workflow for HDR material than recording to codecs that create huge files at high bitrates.

The one thing they don't mention is the bit depth, although they compare it to 12-bit raw in one graph.

--
Art Adams
Director of Photography
San Francisco Bay Area

Jessica Gallant
 

Newsshooter.com reports that Atomos’ implementation of ProRes RAW (via a firmware upgrade on
their Shogun Inferno and Sumo 19) will support up to 12 bit RAW:

https://www.newsshooter.com/2018/04/06/prores-raw-is-here/

I just got the 12 bit RAW upgrade for my FS5 a few weeks ago and have been waiting patiently for
Atomos to offer a RAW upgrade for their recorders so it looks like my timing was good. : )

Jessica Gallant
Director of Photography | Los Angeles | CA
http://jessicajgallant.com
http://wb.imdb.com/name/nm0002680/
cell: 818-645-2787
email: jessicajgallant@...
Skype: jessicajgallant


On Apr 5, 2018, at 2:14 PM, Art Adams <art.cml.only@...> wrote:

The one thing they don't mention is the bit depth, although they compare it to 12-bit raw in one graph.

Adam Wilt
 

According to RedShark News - Huge News from Atomos and Apple: a completely new species of ProRes

Atomos is the launch partner with Apple for the inclusion of the new ProRes Raw format in its recorders.

Apple ProRes Raw will be available as an upgrade to the Sumo 19" recorder/monitor and on the Shogun Inferno. Both of these have sufficient processing power for Apple ProRes Raw. Earlier Atomos recorders will not be upgradeable because they do not have powerful enough processors. 

Out of the gate, there are eight cameras supported from today: Panasonic EVA1, Panasonic Varicam LT, Canon C300 Mk II, Sony FS700, Sony FS5 and Sony FS7 with the optional XDCA add-on.

As to bit depth, today’s Panasonic press release says: 

With the new EVA2.0 firmware, the EVA1 can output 10-bit Log-encoded RAW data in 5.7K up to 30fps, 4K up to 60fps, and 2K up to 240fps.

I expect by Monday we’ll know a whole lot more.  :-)

Adam Wilt
technical services: consulting / coding / camerawork
Vancouver WA USA (no, not that Vancouver, the other one)

Gavin Greenwalt
 

Bitrate wise ProRes Raw and ProResHQ compare very favourably with ProRes 422HQ and ProRes4444 respectively. “

That strikes me as a bit odd considering ProRes 4444 has to store 3ish channels but ProRes RAW only has to store 1.  I would expect ProRes RAW for similar image quality to have 1/3rd of the data requirements of its RAW Equivalent. Maybe they mean compared to the 1080p version of the 4k footage?  Or maybe they are finding that RAW requires higher bitrates to not artifact when later debayered.

Gavin Greenwalt
Pixel Peeper
Seattle, WA

Mahrer, Stephen
 

One last question… both have things to do… ;-)      Will there be any “special” training on this… there had better be!

We need a story and a laminated card for the TAMs to quote from, not just paraphrase next week.

 

Cool!

 

Steve

 

From: cml-raw-log-hdr@... [mailto:cml-raw-log-hdr@...] On Behalf Of Art Adams
Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 3:14 PM
To: cml-raw-log-hdr@...
Subject: Re: [raw-log-hdr] Apple ProRes Raw and Raw HQ

 

Interesting that the white paper specifically calls out Panasonic V-Log in a Final Cut Pro screen grab. :)

 

If these data rates are correct, and the compression artifacts are minimal, I suspect this is going to cause some big changes in the industry. The FCPX example in the white paper specifically references HDR output, so my guess is that they are trying to create a better workflow for HDR material than recording to codecs that create huge files at high bitrates.

 

The one thing they don't mention is the bit depth, although they compare it to 12-bit raw in one graph.

 

--

Art Adams

Director of Photography

San Francisco Bay Area

 

nsoltz@...
 

I was on the Atomos call at bit earlier today, so a few things that I picked up.

 

ProRes RAW bit depth depends upon what the camera sends out. So for Varicam it would be 14 bit, for Sony FS it would be 12 bit, etc etc

 

Jeromy also intimated that Atomos will be the only recorder that will encode ProRes RAW “for a while.” That implies to me (note, my interpretation here) that Convergent-Design, etc are frozen out for the moment.

 

I would also expect that Resolve 15 would support ProRes RAW but I have no direct information from BMD that I can share.

 

They were showing the AJA IO 4K box for output of HDR to reference monitor which doesn’t surprise me since in an earlier test with FCP X 10.4 and HDR coming from a Decklink 12G Extreme 4K to HDR monitor via SDI, I could not successfully output HDR signal. Atomos told me at that point that only the AJA box would work dependably. Note, however, that the same HLG footage brought into Resolve and processed accordingly would output properly.

 

There will be Apple people in the Atomos booth at NAB so I’m looking forward to a closer look and more technical details, particularly when it comes to workflow.

 

Ned Soltz

Owner-operator/editor/colorist-wanna-be

NewBay Media

Redsharknews.com

Teaneck, NJ

Mitch Gross
 

On Apr 5, 2018, at 1:33 PM, Nathan Armstrong <armstrong.nathan@...> wrote:

Mitch are you hinting at something here?  Is Panasonic planning to record ProresRAW in-camera? Or would this be an on-board recorder scenario?

Both the EVA1 and VariCam LT RAW outputs will be supported by the Atomos recorders for ProRes RAW capture. 4K60p/2K240p at launch on Monday, EVA1 5.7K30p in May. 


Mitch Gross
Cinema Product Manager 
Panasonic Media Entertainment Company
New York


Mitch Gross
 

On Apr 5, 2018, at 2:14 PM, Art Adams <art.cml.only@...> wrote:

The one thing they don't mention is the bit depth, although they compare it to 12-bit raw in one graph.

I believe it depends on the input signal. For instance, you can get 12-but or 10-bit Log RAW from the VariCam LT depending on camera mode. 

Mitch Gross
Cinema Product Manager 
Panasonic Media Entertainment Company
New York


Mitch Gross
 

On Apr 5, 2018, at 12:52 PM, John Brawley <john@...> wrote:

RAW control without leaving ProRes or having to transcode to ProRes from another RAW format. 

It’s actually great. I’d say 90% of TV drama is shot ProRes. Now we get RAW controls inside of ProRes. 

Bingo. John’s got it. 

Y’all can twiddle your thumbs and question if the dress is blue or black, but watch this become a predominant format and a major required deliverable in the next few years. 

Mitch Gross
Cinema Product Manager 
Panasonic Media Entertainment Company
New York


Geoff Boyle
 

Much as I’m not a fan of Apple I think this will be huge as Mitch says.

 

Adobe could have done this but, well who knows?

 

Maybe the Academy should have, we need a universal RAW format and cDNG just didn’t have any impetus.

 

Cineform maybe could have but…

 

Cheers

 

Geoff Boyle NSC FBKS

Cinematographer

Zoetermeer

www.gboyle.co.uk

+31 (0) 637 155 076

 

From: cml-raw-log-hdr@... <cml-raw-log-hdr@...> On Behalf Of Mitch Gross

 

Y’all can twiddle your thumbs and question if the dress is blue or black, but watch this become a predominant format and a major required deliverable in the next few years. 

Mitch Gross

 

 

I suppose the big question a lot of Sony F5/55 owners in particular are asking is whilst Prores RAW sounds great, would it have killed Apple to include support for other RAW formats such as XCON?  Or will the be a way of going from XCON to Prores RAW?

Michael Sanders
London Based DP.

+ 44 (0) 7976 269818




On 6 Apr 2018, at 04:04, Mitch Gross <mitchgrosscml@...> wrote:

Bingo. John’s got it. 

Y’all can twiddle your thumbs and question if the dress is blue or black, but watch this become a predominant format and a major required deliverable in the next few years. 

deanan@gmail.com
 

There's also Jpeg-XS coming which is currently being standardized numerous usual suspects are involved.
It's based on Tico which is a lightweight wavelet, has a raw mode, and fpga implementations.

Options are good. Because maybe it's help convince Apple to support Prores Raw properly on other platforms.
Or not... 

Deanan DaSilva
Playa del Rey, CA


On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 10:44 PM, Geoff Boyle <geoff@...> wrote:

Much as I’m not a fan of Apple I think this will be huge as Mitch says.

 

Adobe could have done this but, well who knows?

 

Maybe the Academy should have, we need a universal RAW format and cDNG just didn’t have any impetus.

 

Cineform maybe could have but…

 

Paul Curtis
 

IMHO This is an odd and possibly pointless move from Apple but maybe i'm missing something.

The debayering of a particular sensor could take that sensor into account, stuffing data into a generic RAW package would prevent that. 12 bit RAW isn't enough for some cameras. And the manufacturers would have to implement (and knowing the hoops Apple make you jump through that would not be a simple undertaking).

I presume we can't encode into ProRes RAW, and i'm not convinced what the point would be in using that as a mezzanine codec.

The fact that we have data pre white balance is interesting but it won't be a container to store all other RAWs as they're so different so other RAWs would be transcoded and then why use this?

And the most odd thing? ProRes or similar is quite capable of storing everything in a camera source file post debayer. I would have thought the higher end flavours of normal ProRes would be better quality than what looks like a compressed RAW. I would kinda wished that Apple would have created an open source mezzanine container side by side with EXR at al. 

The problem as i see it is workflow not data. We are used to RAW acting like raw stills in lightroom. Having wonderful control over the image compared to typical NLE controls but that's a application thing, not a data thing. We could do the same with data in another codec but we don't, we assume that's all in a gamma.

Red, Arri and Sony wouldn't be interested in this? I mean all these RAWs are different enough that they wouldn't work?

Is FCP X using this as it's internal codec now then? That is interesting within that ecosystem, meaning that it's just for internal performance and the rendered output would be from a real source codec?

Only just started a coffee,

cheers
Paul

Paul Curtis, VFX & Post | Canterbury, UK




On 5 Apr 2018, at 22:27, Mahrer, Stephen <steve.mahrer@...> wrote:

One last question… both have things to do… ;-)      Will there be any “special” training on this… there had better be!
We need a story and a laminated card for the TAMs to quote from, not just paraphrase next week.
 
Cool!
 
Steve
 
From: cml-raw-log-hdr@... [mailto:cml-raw-log-hdr@...] On Behalf Of Art Adams
Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 3:14 PM
To: cml-raw-log-hdr@...
Subject: Re: [raw-log-hdr] Apple ProRes Raw and Raw HQ
 
Interesting that the white paper specifically calls out Panasonic V-Log in a Final Cut Pro screen grab. :)
 
If these data rates are correct, and the compression artifacts are minimal, I suspect this is going to cause some big changes in the industry. The FCPX example in the white paper specifically references HDR output, so my guess is that they are trying to create a better workflow for HDR material than recording to codecs that create huge files at high bitrates.
 
The one thing they don't mention is the bit depth, although they compare it to 12-bit raw in one graph.
 
-- 
Art Adams
Director of Photography
San Francisco Bay Area
 

Daniel Rozsnyó
 

As far as I know, the TICO is a closed proprietary codec and the algorithm is not openly defined, forcing you to buy any form of the implementation from a single vendor (the creators). They were not targeting file based storage, just streaming, the JPEG-XS is sort of long run. However TICO is very much based on the DIRAC PRO, the same type light wavelet codec (that is 1D, as opposed to 2D wavelet which is JPEG2000/RED and maybe C200). It even made its way to SMPTE as VC2, but very strangely no camera vendor choose to support such an open standard. Both Tico and DiracPro are nonRAW (yet), so one has to double the data with debayering to 422 in order to compress it than back.


The group of DCT based codecs is JPEG, ProRes and DNX (and in some respect AVC/HEVC when we fix the block size and i-only operation)

The Baseline JPEG (8bit) is not enough pro (yet it is used for raw as JP4 by Elphel), but JPEG extended profile (12bit) would suit RAW encoding very well - only if one took some time to define Bayer mapping as either four quadrants (deinterlaced in both axis) or as 4 separate color planes (jpeg allows for 1 in mono and 3 for rgb or yuv, so why not 4, right?). Blackmagic took some effort to find gray areas in DNG specification and did a strange pixel remapping (either to patent the process, or just be still reasonably within the spec, or hardware limitation wise) and introduced this as their lossy 3:1 or 4:1. No word of JPEG though (same as no word from RED that REDcode is actually JPEG2000). Adobe, which seems to have the last word - will not support of JPEG-EXT because of imaginary "legal reasons". Well, accepting and implementing a well written ISO/IEC/ITU standard is a trouble - there is not proprietarity in there. And they also terminated SpeedGrade, saying - f*** raw, go away from me you Pros!

ProRes - while many of you either love or hate Apple, getting this into your product is not that hard as someone pointed out. They just have a strict quality control. It is very cleverly designed codec - while its origins are dated much back in time, the bit encoding/decoding is very efficient on modern GPUs as well as in FPGAs. I wonder if they had just luck in their choices or Apple really designed it to practical for both the user and developers. We've been asking about the mapping for RAW and a year later, here it is. Just perfect.

DNxHD / DNxHR - not much to say here. AVID never responded to us and it seems others are going away from DNxXX as well. I have a feeling there can easily be DNxRAW next, but it might be just too late.

GV HQX - no info whether it is DCT, but so far limited to 10 bits.

HEVC could be another candidate as it is the only one which offers more than 12 bit profile - up to 16 bits. Somebody just has to define the mapping and make a subset of features - then standardize it as "raw profile". I guess some vendors might took this path (XOCN) as they have a history of turning public AVC standards into their closed variations (XAVC, -L, -I, -S).


Generally speaking, any 422 codec can be turned into RAW codec with just a definition of mapping the pixels/color channels, because the grouping of 4 components - either YYCbCr or RGBG. The RAW will be however 1/2 of the size of the 422, because it has no chroma data to compress (same applies to mapping RAW into SDI - the link rate required is just half. Canon did it, we did it and Blackmagic discovered that as well).

The limiting factor for RAW will be the bit depth, 12 bits is really a minimum to map the 14+ stops of DR in a visually loss-less way.


Daniel Rozsnyo
camera developer
Prague, Czech Republic





On 04/06/2018 09:15 AM, deanan@... wrote:
There's also Jpeg-XS coming which is currently being standardized numerous usual suspects are involved.
It's based on Tico which is a lightweight wavelet, has a raw mode, and fpga implementations.

Options are good. Because maybe it's help convince Apple to support Prores Raw properly on other platforms.
Or not... 

Deanan DaSilva
Playa del Rey, CA

sferril@...
 

On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 01:58 am, Daniel Rozsnyó wrote:
Generally speaking, any 422 codec can be turned into RAW codec with just a definition of mapping the pixels/color channels, because the grouping of 4 components - either YYCbCr or RGBG. The RAW will be however 1/2 of the size of the 422, because it has no chroma data to compress (same applies to mapping RAW into SDI - the link rate required is just half. Canon did it, we did it and Blackmagic discovered that as well).
The label ProRes RAW will probably add some confusion, as it does not seem to handle RAW from many cameras.  I think ProRes Bayer would have been more accurate.  It is a possible compression of the sensor raw, and most raw codecs are compressed in some form or another anyway.   It is un-De-Mosaic-ed (my term) and it may prove to be very useful.  It is a way to reduce the file size but adding more computational time for the option of white balancing.  A new slew of cameras may no longer need to record RGB codecs.  Reductions in hardware on cameras could be a cost reduction as well?

I'm certain "RAW" will now permanently change to mean a Bayer pattern, whether I agree or not.  This has happened to some extent already.
 
Big budgets projects will likely ignore a ProRes Raw, as the original raw workflow will remain the same unless there is no quality compromise. That is doubtful.  And I don't think that is the target, but I may be wrong.

If I am wrong, the DIT may now have the job of converting raw files from certain cameras to ProRes Raw for edit.

Still, with Aces type workflows becoming more popular, and inclusion of metadata, there is a chance this can work well, and eliminate the workflow step of creating dailies on many medium to small productions.  With a little luck, more products may include a simple hand off to a quality colorist as a final step.  At minimum, some poorly white balanced shots can be matched.

Scott Ferril
Post supervisor
Minneapolis, USA

 

James Marsden
 

The thing is the lack of support on windows for QuickTime, tried to explain this to a producer at Disney recently, still it is good that are now at least 10 flavors of ProRes for when production says can we just have ProRes, ok which kind proxy, LT, 422, 422 HQ, 4444, 4444 QX, Raw...... they normally glaze over and say they need to make a phone call halfway through that list.

Incidentally sure ProRes is more popular that DNxHD because the name is easy to remeber and has no numbers init

James Marden

DIT workflow 

London

John Brawley
 

On Apr 6, 2018, at 7:55 AM, James Marsden <james_marsden@...> wrote:

Incidentally sure ProRes is more popular that DNxHD because the name is easy to remeber and has no numbers init
Or maybe because DNX is always a “me too” codec and ProRes just seemingly works better at a performance level ?

I’ve never understood the Apple hate. I mean I do because obviously there are some platforms and scenarios that just aren’t supported, but by and large it’s an incredibly robust and consistent format for the end user, and it seemly will run on much lower specced machines than other similar data rate codecs. It’s well understood even for it’s downsides.

And this is just the beginning. I’m sure in the very near future once the launch exclusivity arrangements lapse, any ProRes recording camera today could become a ProRes RAW camera tomorrow.

Like for example, Alexa.

I would guess even an old clunker Alexa could theoretically could suddenly get a ProRes RAW onboard recording update. I’m certain Arri wouldn’t want to actually do that to a legacy product, but I’d imagine the demand for SXS cards would suddenly go up again !

And in the not to distant future, just like they’ve been doing for years, a new flavour of ProRes RAW that can do 16 Bit (or whatever) would be added.

I can’t imagine the Alexa would have been as successful a camera without ProRes, especially in the early days.

The only thing that will kill ProRes is the lack of high end machines that leverage the Apple hardware advantages to using it.

JB

John Brawley
Chicago Illinois
DP - Pilot Gone Baby Gone

Art Adams
 

One thing I've learned due to becoming a part time Arri trainer is that their cameras use mostly FPGAs instead of custom chips that do only one thing. Where one manufacturer may use a chip that encodes to one codec but does it really well and doesn't draw a lot of power, Arri mostly uses chips that are completely reprogrammable. They draw more power, but if Arri wants to add a new codec at a later date it's likely only a firmware update away.

I don't speak for Arri, and I have no knowledge of their future plans in this area, but I do think this is a cool feature. I wouldn't think we'd see ProRes RAW would hit the earlier cameras for a number of reasons, but the newer cameras are so flexible that I would think it's a possibility. I'm sure there are other factors at play, though. This stuff is never as simple as "Is it technically possible?". I've worked for Apple, and they are a... complex company. (I do own quite a few of their products, though.)

By the way, my next Arri training class is going to be held later this month in Vancouver, BC:


It's primarily for people who have experience in the camera department at any level but not much with Arri products, or film students who want to acquire general knowledge while also learning the specifics of the Arri system of cameras and accessories. If you're a seasoned assistant or DP who works with Arri cameras regularly then you know a fair amount of this already, but for everyone else... well, let's just say that it runs 2.5 days and we fill every minute of it.

Oh, and during my last class in Chicago I had the pleasure of meeting Mr. Brawley in person, as he was prepping a show across the street from where I was teaching. It truly was a pleasure.

--
Art Adams
Director of Photography
San Francisco Bay Area

Gavin Greenwalt
 

“Apple, getting this into your product is not that hard as someone pointed out. They just have a strict quality control”

I wish I could find it but I used to have a spreadsheet created by a comp Supervisor that had a green, yellow and red coded chart which would tell you which 2 software handoffs would change the gamma of your ProRes interpretation.

Strict quality control is the last phrase I would associate with ProRes. It was one of, if not the least predictable formats of this generation. Just google “ProRes gamma shift”.

I can’t speak for everyone but a good deal of my “Apple hate” as John wondered about for me was caused by that problem alone. Combined then with a lack of codecs on the Windows and Linux side while ad agencies demanding ProRes meant perpetual workflow headaches to satisfy Apple’s sales objectives instead of satisfying what was best for production.

As to R3D/jp2k. It initially was definitely jp2k and I even wrote a few tools to read it until JJ threatened to sue me into oblivion and encrypted the format. Since then every time I say it’s “jp2k” a little red fairy will whisper in my year “jp2k compatible” not jp2k. Which I would say just further confirms it.

Gavin Greenwalt
Pixel stuff
Seattle, Wa

Paul Curtis
 

On 6 Apr 2018, at 16:25, Gavin Greenwalt <im.thatoneguy@...> wrote:
“Apple, getting this into your product is not that hard as someone pointed out. They just have a strict quality control”
I also included the *time it takes* to go through corporate sign offs.

The problem has never been ProRes as such but the QuickTime low level drivers on Windows more than anything. There was a great post from the guy behind cineform many years ago which showed some of the myriad issues between source internal formats and applications requesting data via the wrong pixel formats. In Nuke they used to expose the pixel format choices which led to all sorts of interesting experiments getting the most out of files. I'm sure Gavin did the same 'produce a test chart of all the ways QT could be borked'...

But it just became unnecessarily complex hence why QT was killed off and Adobe for example wrote their own. So now the same prores file could be read in different ways by different applications. Nice.

cheers
Paul

Paul Curtis, VFX & Post | Canterbury, UK

James Marsden
 

Hi
On a long train journey so have read the white paper, looks like the biggest problem will be that it will be in a QuickTime wrapper which means not supported on Windows, this also creates a problem for cross-platform post software which is just about everything except FCPX, also only 10 or 12 bit which though enough for now but if the development RAW formats for stills is anything to go by we will soon see 14bit RAW implemented and of course Sony 16 bit RAW, and headroom for HDR workflows will help.

Jack Jones Colourist
 

Boring but worth mentioning here that there is some confusion about the future of QuickTime on Windows.

Although QuickTime 7 as a piece of software is discontinued QuickTime is still in development and use. This is all down to the 32-bit performance limitations.

Only a few days ago Adobe released it’s latest versions of Premiere and After Effects without legacy QuickTime support yet it does support ProRes, Animation, H.264, Uncompressed and many other MOV wrapped codecs. Main codecs affected are things like Cinepak or Sorensen Video.

Apologies for the rather dry information there.....



On Fri, 6 Apr 2018 at 18:55, James Marsden <james_marsden@...> wrote:
Hi
On a long train journey so have read the white paper, looks like the biggest problem will be that it will be in a QuickTime wrapper which means not supported on Windows, this also creates a problem for cross-platform post software which is just about everything except FCPX, also only 10 or 12 bit which though enough for now but if the development RAW formats for stills is anything to go by we will soon see 14bit RAW implemented and of course Sony 16 bit RAW, and headroom for HDR workflows will help.

--
Cheers,
Jack Jones
CTO, Roundtable Post Production
+44(0)7496 170 481
jack@...
http://www.roundtablepost.co.uk

James Marsden
 

Hi
   One thing worth mentioning is I have just spent a week editing and re-grading a load of DNG RAW from motion capture footage recorded a couple of years ago from an FS700 using a Oddessy Q7 ( thank you Mitch ) and mostly because of Blackmagic's use of Cinema DNG for their camera's the default look from this DNG RAW is so much better than it was, it was kind an orphan RAW format that no camera maker really developed the colour science for as it was basically the choice of those camera makers that could not really afford to develop their own RAW format, no value jugment here just telling it like it is, well as I see it.
    So basically now that Blackmagic have a line of camera's that Cinema DNG they have put the time and money into making the defaults in DaVinci work as well as say the default 709 LUT for the Alexa and in turn the default colour science for the Alexa shooting LOG gained hugely from Arri's experience in supporting their film scanners that would record to DPX image sequences that were the result of Kodak's work on the Cineon film scanner workstations.
     I suppose my point is knowing the history of this stuff helps to understand where we are at now and why they guy responsible for ProRes was headhunted from Avid after creating DNxHD which is why they are both very similar motion JPEG based codec's, the biggest problem with DNxHD is that for Avid to understand it must be in a OP Atom flavor .MXF with separate audio files for each track, the biggest problem with OP Atom .MXF is it is not extensible or in other words you need to know the length of the clip when you start writing hence no camera or recorder can use it, they must instead the OP1-a form of .MXF which is no more Avid native than ProRes !
     99% percent of my work for the past few years has been 4k RAW, mostly Phantom .cine or Sony 16 bit RAW with a bit of Red .r3d and Cinema DNG, almost always either transcoding to something for Avid, either ProRes LT HD .mov or DNxHD36 OP-Atom for Avid, in the case of one client I build projects in Premiere Pro so they can cut 4k Sony 16 bit RAW natively, and if you set Premier up correctly this is not a Problem, you do need to use drives like Sony Pro RAID's or LaCie thundebolt 2 LaCie 2big, basically anything with a 400MB sec read write rate, I find the G-TECH G-RAID thunderbolt drives are 2 slow.
     The point is I don't see ProRes RAW helping with any of this, and I find Almost all clients are editing in Premier or Avid, I have just one client that uses FCPX, and to clear I bought FCPX on the day it was released, find a useful tool to have licence for but not as useful as Premier or DaVinci, I have a full Media Composer licence which gets little use other than QCing Avid delivery.
My point is though all this runs on Mac software I am fairly software agnostic, but in the last week I spent more time in Premiere Pro and DaVinci and I think most editors are the same. Also looking carefully through the White Paper on ProRes RAW most of the comparisons are for an 18 core iMac Pro, and no doubt when the new Mac Pro eventually arrives if ever it will work great on that too. So this won't solve the problem which is most production company's broadcasters don't have the latest and greatest software and Hardware.
     A good example of this was the setup Canon had the BSC show Battersea this year, a brand new maxed out 18 core iMac Pro with under the desk a Blackmagic UltraStudio 4K Extreme 3 which only works on Thunderbolt 3 and a Thunderbolt 3 LaCie RAID, all to show Canon C200 RAW in HDR on their £24K 24 inch HDR monitor, hope you see my point here, ProRes RAW is unlikely to work on a 2012 Mac Pro.
    So I like RAW and I have experience of how much better than ProRes 4444  Sony 16 bit RAW, Arri RAW, .r3d using IPP2 and Even Cine DNG can look, and it worth remembering that ProRes RAW HQ is about the same data rate ProRes 4444 just it will be much less compressed as it automatically 1/3 the size before compression unlike RGBA ProRes 4444.
    So great well done Apple, but why not as Michale suggest's don't they just add support Sony 16bit RAW support and Cinema DNG, the white paper contains nothing to say it will be easier  to supply to a client's with anything less than the latest Apple Kit and FCPX, does look like it solves any problems just creates an especially Apple flavored version of an exsysting one

James Marsden

Apple user since 1986
    

Robert A. Ober
 

On 4/6/18 13:08, Jack Jones Colourist wrote:
Boring but worth mentioning here that there is some confusion about
the future of QuickTime on Windows.

Although QuickTime 7 as a piece of software is discontinued QuickTime
is still in development and use. This is all down to the 32-bit
performance limitations.

Only a few days ago Adobe released it’s latest versions of Premiere
and After Effects without legacy QuickTime support yet it does support
ProRes, Animation, H.264, Uncompressed and many other MOV wrapped
codecs. Main codecs affected are things like Cinepak or Sorensen Video.
_________________________

Actually QuickTime was deprecated by Apple years ago.  The replacement
code is referred to as AV Framework.  And yes, the 32 bit code is still
around.  Even Media Composer still uses it for QuickTime export.

I haven't done any testing but some folks will tell you that whether you
see the gamma shift depends on what you player you use.

On the matter of DnXXX,  Avid has bungled the acceptance somehow but
since the vast majority of theatrical features(those that make it to a
theater) are edited in Media Composer, that codec family is not going
away.  Resolve, Squeeze, and others support DnXXX.  Convergent Design
products can record to DNxHD but not DNxHR.

One can certainly put H.264 and H.265 in an mp4 container and many other
codecs in the MXF OP1A container.  As I'm sure most of you realize, 
perhaps the main problem with moving from ProRes to a codec with
universal platform support is legacy workflows dictating ProRes and the
lack of desire to change.

Hope y'all have a fun weekend,
Robert

Robert A. Ober
IT Consultant, Vidcaster, & Freelancer
www.infohou.com
Houston, TX

Robert A. Ober
 

On 4/6/18 15:27, James Marsden wrote:
     I suppose my point is knowing the history of this stuff helps to
understand where we are at now and why they guy responsible for ProRes
was headhunted from Avid after creating DNxHD which is why they are
both very similar motion JPEG based codec's, the biggest problem with
DNxHD is that for Avid to understand it must be in a OP Atom flavor
.MXF with separate audio files for each track, the biggest problem
with OP Atom .MXF is it is not extensible or in other words you need
to know the length of the clip when you start writing hence no camera
or recorder can use it, they must instead the OP1-a form of .MXF which
is no more Avid native than ProRes !
Actually Media Composer can read OP1A mxfs, assuming they contain a
supported codec.  Pretty sure Media Composer can output a an OP1A as well.

Robert

Robert A. Ober
IT Consultant, Vidcaster, & Freelancer
www.infohou.com
Houston, TX

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. 

Aasulv Wolf Austad, FNF
 

On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 01:05 am, Paul Curtis wrote:
12 bit RAW isn't enough for some cameras
ProRes RAW is apparently NOT limited to 12 bit. If a camera could feed 16 bit to this ProRes RAW codec, it would take it. BUT right now there aren't any cameras that can pipe 16bit out of their SDI spigots. Will be interesting to see if there is a bit limit in the ProRes RAW codec and if so, what that is.

--
Aasulv 'Wolf' Austad, FNF
DP, Altadena, California
http://wolfaustad.com

alister@...
 

I think this is a huge deal that will really shake up the entire video production world. For decades we have been taking the data from sensors, processing it with limited in camera processors and squirting it out with a limited amount of data about the scene compared to what the sensor captured. With more and more cameras moving to bayer and other CFA single chip designs you have to start wondering if you really need to keep doing this.

For several years I’ve been working with Sony’s raw codec, often editing it and grading it on my now ageing 2013 Macbook Pro laptop. And it isn’t an unpleasant experience. In some cases I find it easier to deal with the Sony raw than Sony’s 4K XAVC-L which is a real processor hog. 

Many will perhaps say - we don’t need that much data or that the workflow is too confusing. But it doesn’t have to be. Present the shooter with a normal looking image in the VF and present the editor with the same image by default and using raw need be no more complex than working with component video. But when the editor chooses to go deeper into the data, turn off the preset and allow him/her to do whatever transforms they wish. Raw is only difficult because current (or maybe past) workflows have been more complex than vanilla 709 because they have often been made up of different components using different standards from different supplier. But it doesn’t have to be that way. A common Raw codec and workflow, Preset raw project settings that automatically transform to a fixed output such as 709, HLG, maybe HDR10 with nothing more than exposure and white balance sliders would be easy enough for most people to deal with (easier than log?) and not really that difficult for the edit software to implement.

Opening up the ability to record the sensor data on cheap external recorders to inexpensive media (that now works out to be one of the cheapest per minute workflows) is going to make it easier for camera manufacturers to get on with the job of making great, lower cost cameras. They won’t need to develop their own codecs, just put a good sensor in a nice box and squirt the data out in the appropriate manner. I’m sure we will also see ProRes Raw find it’s way inside many cameras in time. Sony recently announced SD cards with peak data rates of 300MB/s so it’s conceivable that in the very near future you might be able to record ProRes Raw on to SD cards (god help us).

The current low cost cameras taking advantage of this all have some limitations. 12 bit linear raw from Sony, 10 bit log raw from Panasonic, neither are ideal or perfect, but these are just the first steps down what I think will become a sea change in how people shoot. Really I can’t see any reason why not to shoot ProRes Raw with these cameras, why bother with log? Especially as most people like to use some form of external monitor.

Once manufacturers start putting ProRes Raw inside cameras I would expect this to trickle down through all aspects of video production. Most of the manufacturers have smaller single chip cameras and even these could make use of it. Over time we might cast off the restrictions and inefficiencies of component video with single chip cameras. Once upon a time in photography raw was something only available in the most expensive professional digital cameras. Now a lot of point and shoots have it and it’s used by all kinds of photographers from Pro’s to holiday snappers. Storage is cheap, the workflow isn’t difficult.

The big question is how will Apple licence and manage it? From a business stand point they might have struck a bit of a home run if they restrict it to their own products or platform. I was a windows user for many years until Final Cut Studio came along. It was so much better for me than anything on a windows box. So I invested heavily in Apple workstations and have been using Mac’s ever since. But Windows is now quite tempting. I’m getting a little fed up with paying Apple Tax for no real hardware/software benefit these days and I think Apple need to do something to keep people like me on-side. I’m not against this, do it right, DO IT WELL and I’ll buy into it. But it will piss a lot of people off. But we have to remember, like it or not, Apple are a business, they are not a charity so it’s not entirely fair to expect them to pay for all the R&D and then give that away by opening it up to everyone.

Alister Chapman

DoP - Stereographer
UK Mobile +44 7711 152226
US Mobile +1(216)298-1977


www.xdcam-user.com    1.5 million hits, 100,000 visits from over 45,000 unique visitors every month!  Film and Video production techniques, reviews and news.


 

I agree it has huge potential, as long as the people in the edit know how to manipulate it.

There is no point putting RAW in the hands of an someone who is just going to slap a generic Rec 709 LUT over it.  

I suppose I’m just scared that at some point I’m going to get asked to show RAW and it’s going to end up looking crap.  It’s about educating people to know when to use RAW or when to use burnt it.

Michael

Michael J Sanders: Director of Photography 
  

Mobile: +44 (0) 7976 269818   
Linkline Diary: +44 (0)20 8426 2200

On 7 Apr 2018, at 10:03, alister@... wrote:

I think this is a huge deal that will really shake up the entire video production world. For decades we have been taking the data from sensors, processing it with limited in camera processors and squirting it out with a limited amount of data about the scene compared to what the sensor captured.

Mitch Gross
 

On Apr 7, 2018, at 2:03 AM, alister@... wrote:

I think this is a huge deal that will really shake up the entire video production world.

While I agree that ProRes RAW is a pretty terrific opportunity to “bring RAW to the masses” let’s all make sure not to get too carried away. ProRes RAW may be (Apple) processor friendly, don’t forget that the files are still something like three to four times the size of something like AVC-Ultra or All-I codecs. And they’re approaching 10 times the size of a high quality LongGOP. 

I think ProRes RAW is a great development. It will certainly make RAW workflow more accessible to many and will likely become a standardized deliverable to post just like video ProRes files are today. But no matter how fine a steak you may cook, sometimes a great cheeseburger is what’s called for. 

Mitch Gross
Cinema Product Manager 
Panasonic Media Entertainment Company
New York


alister@...
 


On 7 Apr 2018, at 10:41, Michael Sanders <glowstars@...> wrote:

There is no point putting RAW in the hands of an someone who is just going to slap a generic Rec 709 LUT over it.  

I suppose I’m just scared that at some point I’m going to get asked to show RAW and it’s going to end up looking crap.  It’s about educating people to know when to use RAW or when to use burnt it.


Why not just convert it direct to 709, you do that every time you shoot anyway, the raw sensor data gets converted to 709. The only difference  with raw is that instead of converting the sensor output to 709 in the camera, do it in a computer. If the workflow is properly done, which may mean locking out a lot of the variables, this should be more or less transparent to the user and behave no differently to doing it in camera. The big benefit being that if you do screw up your exposure or white balance post should have a much better chance of recovering something useable.

I think we need to think a bit differently to how we do now. We tend to assume raw must be graded, must have a load of post work done, when really that’s not necessarily the case. We are simply moving the process of converting the sensor data to 709 (or whatever) from the camera to the computer.

This is why ProRes Raw which could/might become a defacto standard is exciting. With a single standard it’s much easier to lock things down so they work as expected every time. 


Alister Chapman

DoP - Stereographer
UK Mobile +44 7711 152226
US Mobile +1(216)298-1977


www.xdcam-user.com    1.5 million hits, 100,000 visits from over 45,000 unique visitors every month!  Film and Video production techniques, reviews and news.

sid firstframe.com
 

So many codecs, so little time. For me, ProRes Raw is what Betacam was to those of us who used it... one format that lasted long enough to recoup your investment.... I am all for a codec “standard”. Let’s see how long it lasts. 

- Sid

SID LEVIN | Principal | DP | Editor
FirstFrame Inc - 978.501.0488


On Apr 7, 2018, at 7:26 AM, "alister@..." <alister@...> wrote:


On 7 Apr 2018, at 10:41, Michael Sanders <glowstars@...> wrote:

There is no point putting RAW in the hands of an someone who is just going to slap a generic Rec 709 LUT over it.  

I suppose I’m just scared that at some point I’m going to get asked to show RAW and it’s going to end up looking crap.  It’s about educating people to know when to use RAW or when to use burnt it.


Why not just convert it direct to 709, you do that every time you shoot anyway, the raw sensor data gets converted to 709. The only difference  with raw is that instead of converting the sensor output to 709 in the camera, do it in a computer. If the workflow is properly done, which may mean locking out a lot of the variables, this should be more or less transparent to the user and behave no differently to doing it in camera. The big benefit being that if you do screw up your exposure or white balance post should have a much better chance of recovering something useable.

I think we need to think a bit differently to how we do now. We tend to assume raw must be graded, must have a load of post work done, when really that’s not necessarily the case. We are simply moving the process of converting the sensor data to 709 (or whatever) from the camera to the computer.

This is why ProRes Raw which could/might become a defacto standard is exciting. With a single standard it’s much easier to lock things down so they work as expected every time. 


Alister Chapman

DoP - Stereographer
UK Mobile +44 7711 152226
US Mobile +1(216)298-1977


www.xdcam-user.com    1.5 million hits, 100,000 visits from over 45,000 unique visitors every month!  Film and Video production techniques, reviews and news.

axel.mertes
 

While I see the release of ProRes RAW as a very clever move to enable already ProRes licensed camera manufacturers to enable a way of RAW recording to their camera fleet, with minimum requirements, I doubt it is the super clever format some seem to hope for right now. It will take less I/O, it'll not require the demosaic from Bayer to RGB, so it actually saves efforts inside the camera.

Saying this new codec is 6.x times faster than R3D is a bit of unfair. RED is stuck to JPEG2000 encoding. The by far best single frame encoding scheme available to date - bit rate vs. quality wise. However, the EBCOT bitstream entropy coding is fairly slow. GPUs, FPGA, ASICs all help and there are numerous hardware implementations, often driven by the begium team behind IntoPix (who already worked on the OpenJPEG in the beginning), who are also the heads behind TICO. However, ProRes will only enable this by either being not compressed or DCT compressed. Uncompressed is large, DCT can introduce artefacts.

TICO is a line by line wavelet codec. So you can decode a line at lower horizontal resolution, but you can only skip lines to decrease the vertical resolution. So itsa a 1D wavelet only. Not a big saving. Designed to enable 4K via HD SDI lines.

R3D/JPEG2000 and GoPro-Cineform/SMPTE VC5 are true 2D wavelet codecs. You can actually decode at lower resolution, with using less computing resources, and get a best quality downscale image, line/collumn skipping not spoken here. No other codecs can do this, no ProRes, no ProRes RAW, no DNxHD, no DNxHR or whatever. This is the MAIN feature of wavelets, and so many poeple out there still don't get it.

With ProRes RAW you'll need a beast of a machine, because you NEED to decode full res or you are set for line/column skipping to see proxies.
In fact, I can edit and play 4K, 6K or even 8K R3D on a 2002 HP xw8400 workstation or on my i7 notebook in its native format. I doubt I can to that with ProRes RAW of the same resolution source.
And Cineform/SMPTE VC5 is about 5-7 times faster than R3D, because this codec employs a much faster bitstream entropy coding (huffmann), which will give it that benefit. In other words, Cineform/SMPTE VC5 can be expected to be as fast as ProRes RAW (if told numbers remain true), but with smaller requirements for the playback hardware. And its open source now, while ProRes RAW will be proprietary. Big point IMHO.

On systems where I can edit R3D in 2K proxy, I can edit Cineform/SMPTE VC5 in 4K easily due to its speed benefit. Too bad RED and Cineform didn't manage a cooperation back in the beginning of RED...

Bottom line:
ProRes RAW is welcome to increase RAW recording options. However, I tend to transcode e.g. to Cineform/SMPTE VC5 RAW for better options in post for my workflow if I really need RAW. Or pregrade and go to e.g. Cineform RGB instead.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Best regards,

Axel Mertes

Workflow, IT, Research and Development
Geschäftsführer/CTO/Founder
Tel: +49 69 978837-20
eMail: Axel.Mertes@...

Magna Mana Production
Bildbearbeitung GmbH
Jakob-Latscha-Straße 3
60314 Frankfurt am Main
Germany
Tel: +49 69 978837-0
Fax: +49 69 978837-34
eMail: Info@...
Web: http://www.MagnaMana.com/

Diese E-Mail enthält vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich geschützte Informationen. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind oder diese
E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte sofort den Absender und vernichten Sie diese E-Mail. Das unerlaubte Kopieren
sowie die unbefugte Weitergabe dieser E-Mail sind nicht gestattet.

This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in
error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorised copying, disclosure or distribution of the material
in this e-mail is strictly forbidden.


Mitch Gross
 

On Apr 7, 2018, at 2:15 AM, axel.mertes <axel.mertes@...> wrote:

Saying this new codec is 6.x times faster than R3D is a bit of unfair.

Well, it is factually correct. 

The point is not the technology. Don’t look at this as how good a codec ProRes RAW is or isn’t. Don’t think about the flexibility of the systems requirements compared to other platforms that are either proprietary or failed in the market. 

ProRes RAW will work because it is Apple. With a single step it is supported in lord-knows-how-many-thousands of systems and a host of cameras. These cameras were like ships without a home port, wandering the seas with no effective and manageable RAW workflow. Uncompressed CinemaDNGs? The data load is ridiculous and the workflow a bit mercurial from one camera to another and one post system to another. 

ProRes RAW makes it easy. It levels the playing field. All those cameras go into it and will work just fine in FCPX. Finding and applying the correct LUT is easy. Everything just works. That’s the beauty of it. 

I’ve been dealing with handholding people through RAW workflows for a decade now. First it was Phantom, which was before RED and before Blackmagic Design purchased DaVinci. Just about every post House was clueless. 

“How do I load this into my DaVinci 2K?” “Why is it all contrasty?” “What do you mean I have to run it through Final Cut to set the gamma? We don’t have that in our grading suite.”

RED was a huge education for many people, but of course theirs is a closed loop, with tools that are only for their cameras. Then came a bunch of RAW outputting cameras from various manufacturers and RAW recorders from Atomos and Convergent Design. And the process was a little different with each camera and the workflow a little different with each post system. Wanna try to argue that it’s not so complicated? Just look at that Sony Venice thread from last week, which came down to a single oddball setting in Resolve. Don’t tell me this crap ain’t complicated. 

I travel a lot and every time I climb into a rental car it takes me maybe 30 seconds to figure out where the basic controls are and I’m able to drive away. That’s ProRes RAW. Then I try to turn on the radio and tune a station at highway speeds and nearly drive off a bridge because every system is a little different, the controls aren’t where you expect, and now there’s all these extra features & crap that gets in my way. That’s what RAW is like up to now. I want to be able to switch from car to car and I don’t want to have to think much about how to make the damn thing go. I just want it to work. 

And that’s why ProRes RAW is so nice. 


Mitch Gross
Cinema Product Manager 
Panasonic Media Entertainment Company
New York


Gavin Greenwalt
 

The great thing about a common RAW path is that it’s consistent. The problem with a common RAW path is that there is no room for differentiation.  That’s great for companies who historically do a poor job of supporting their cameras and it means you aren’t waiting on sdk support. But it also means you can’t get special processing as finely tuned.  If the Sony debayer is superior to the ProRes debayer... too bad you get the ProRes debayer. If Sony improves their color processing, it better be updatable as a matrix override... need more than a matrix? Sorry.  

There are benefits to consistency, but a lot of inconsistency comes because of missing features in the standard. Applicable XKCD: https://www.xkcd.com/927/

Now people will just complain “did you use the manufacturer’s debayer or Apples?”.  The nice thing about ACES is that you can get nearly everything good about RAW out of the image but you still use code custom tuned to the sensor to debayer not just a simple lowest common denominator. As a side note, R3D relying on jp2k’s absurdly high processing requirements has been a far too long uncorrected oversight. It was excusable when it looked like GPUs could some day decode it but the cost/benefit needs to be re-evaluated. Hopefully ProRes raw if nothing else will pressure ARRI to compress and RED to find a less cpu heavy encoding.

Gavin Greenwalt 
VFX
Seattle, WA

Mitch Gross
 

On Apr 7, 2018, at 6:33 PM, Gavin Greenwalt <im.thatoneguy@...> wrote:

The great thing about a common RAW path is that it’s consistent. The problem with a common RAW path is that there is no room for differentiation.

The same could be said for much of post. So many facilities tried to present themselves as having some secret sauce. They you looked behind the curtains and it was all the same stuff. Individuals can have talent and craft, but technical processes stop being individual science experiments and instead become accepted, locked methodology. 

ProRes RAW doesn’t have to be the very, very best. It just has to be very good and consistent. 

And so, my dear friends, do all of us and all our tools. 



Mitch Gross
Cinema Product Manager 
Panasonic Media Entertainment Company
New York


Leonard Levy
 

This is all a little confusing to me and gets a bit beyond my tech knowledge. How well will the new ProRes Raw codec interface with a camera like the FS7 that outputs 12BIT Raw, but that’s generally been disparaged compared to the 16Bit raw of the F5 and F55. 
Adding to my confusion on that is that the Atomos recorder as I understand only accepts 12bit Raw in first place so how will that interface with  say the F5 compared to the FS7?

Leonard Levy, DP
San Rafael, CA





sid firstframe.com
 

Well said Mitch.

- Sid

SID LEVIN | Principal | DP | Editor
FirstFrame Inc - 978.501.0488


On Apr 7, 2018, at 9:54 PM, Mitch Gross <mitchgrosscml@...> wrote:

On Apr 7, 2018, at 6:33 PM, Gavin Greenwalt <im.thatoneguy@...> wrote:

The great thing about a common RAW path is that it’s consistent. The problem with a common RAW path is that there is no room for differentiation.

The same could be said for much of post. So many facilities tried to present themselves as having some secret sauce. They you looked behind the curtains and it was all the same stuff. Individuals can have talent and craft, but technical processes stop being individual science experiments and instead become accepted, locked methodology. 

ProRes RAW doesn’t have to be the very, very best. It just has to be very good and consistent. 

And so, my dear friends, do all of us and all our tools. 



Mitch Gross
Cinema Product Manager 
Panasonic Media Entertainment Company
New York


Previous Topic Next Topic