Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

Get answers to your questions about color grading, editing and finishing with DaVinci Resolve.
  • Author
  • Message

Aleksandr_Oleynik

Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostThu Aug 30, 2012 7:07 am

Original -

Image

-5 Stop Exposition in Adobe RAW Converter -

Image

-5 Stop Exposition in DaVinci RAW Converter -

Image


BM Guys - DaVinci RAW converter much worse :(
Offline

Loïc Surprenant

  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 2:12 pm

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostThu Aug 30, 2012 2:17 pm

I have to say that your test really shows how bad the information is analysed by Davinci compared to Adobe Raw... Humm, This will show when we try to bring down highlights in Davinci.

Aleksandr_Oleynik

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostThu Aug 30, 2012 3:06 pm

I'm afraid this is not just a problem for Highlight. :(
Offline

Bernhard

  • Posts: 57
  • Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 8:00 am

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostThu Aug 30, 2012 3:48 pm

Hello,

de-bayering is basically image-resampling (scaling) which is not a trivial task.
As far as the software-video-scalers out there are all together not really convincing,
I'm afraid the software de-bayerers we will see will not be able to compete with BMCC's internal
hardware-based de-bayering.
(Remember: RED had also to update their de-bayering algorithms frequently.)

At the other hand:
BMD owns Teranex, who are the very best in regards of image resampling!

Therefor I would expect BMD to offer the very best software de-bayering
based upon Teranex' image-resampling algorithms.


Best regards,
Bernhard

Aleksandr_Oleynik

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostThu Aug 30, 2012 4:28 pm

Hello, Bernhard
DaVinci need Rial time de-baering
I think, and that's the problem, too.
Offline

Bernhard

  • Posts: 57
  • Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 8:00 am

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostThu Aug 30, 2012 6:34 pm

Hello Aleksandr,

this task screams for being passed on to the GPU.

Or BMD implements de-bayering into the Teranex and makes it therefor
capable for file-based processing, which is overdue anyway.

Speculation of course, but would make much sense.

Best regards,
Bernhard

Aleksandr_Oleynik

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostThu Aug 30, 2012 6:40 pm

Or as RED - RedRocket :(
Offline

CaptainHook

Blackmagic Design

  • Posts: 1401
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 4:50 am
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostThu Aug 30, 2012 10:24 pm

I'm assuming Resolve already utilizes the GPU for this ... ?
https://vimeo.com/acoupleofnightowls/
http://www.captainhook.co.nz/blackmagic-cinema-camera-lut/

**Any post by me prior to Aug 2014 was before i started working for Blackmagic**
Offline
User avatar

Randy Walters

  • Posts: 171
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:28 am
  • Location: Bristol, RI USA

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostThu Aug 30, 2012 11:44 pm

I've got to ask... are either of these utilities actually numbered in f- or t-stops, or are they just arbitrarily numbered scales that bear no relation to each other?

I honestly don't know offhand... but there's no reason to believe that a slider numbered from -10 to +10 in one utility and the same in another has any relationship to stops of any kind unless it explicitly states so. And that's not something I recall.
Offline

Peter Chamberlain

Blackmagic Design

  • Posts: 3212
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:08 am

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostFri Aug 31, 2012 2:33 am

We do debayer in GPU for real time operation. Take a look at the next Resolve build we release as we have been working on this during the beta phase.
Peter
DaVinci Resolve Product Manager
Offline

Loïc Surprenant

  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 2:12 pm

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostFri Aug 31, 2012 4:28 am

But to stay on topic, how can we see these results and put back our trust in the Davinci debayering since Adobe Raw seems to leave far more details in the analysis of the raw data? I just want to understand what went wrong in this exercice.
Offline
User avatar

rick.lang

  • Posts: 7568
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:41 pm
  • Location: Victoria BC Canada

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostFri Aug 31, 2012 4:36 am

Loïc, I don't think it's established that anything is wrong yet. The adjustments in the two different programs may be different. And grading isn't a blind numbers game, it's making adjustments visually until you reach a desired visual result. Obviously DaVinci can get a good grade from that original image. And it's still in Beta so things may change with the final release if version 9.
Rick Lang
Offline

CaptainHook

Blackmagic Design

  • Posts: 1401
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 4:50 am
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostFri Aug 31, 2012 7:30 am

Where has that frame in the OP come from? I'd like to test that frame myself in Resolve.
https://vimeo.com/acoupleofnightowls/
http://www.captainhook.co.nz/blackmagic-cinema-camera-lut/

**Any post by me prior to Aug 2014 was before i started working for Blackmagic**
Offline

Gabriele Turchi

  • Posts: 39
  • Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 2:33 pm

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostFri Aug 31, 2012 11:39 am

rick.lang wrote:Loïc, I don't think it's established that anything is wrong yet. The adjustments in the two different programs may be different. And grading isn't a blind numbers game, it's making adjustments visually until you reach a desired visual result. Obviously DaVinci can get a good grade from that original image. And it's still in Beta so things may change with the final release if version 9.



but i believe that Aleksandr used just the RAW debayer settings , which is step N1 on color correction before do anything else , and Adobe or BMD should give same results (or at least not as bad)

i am very interested n this topic

Aleksandr any way you can post the raw for that shot ? Also , what version of resolve did you use ?

ps: i am very glad that MR chamberlain is on this thread , i am sure they are having a look at it (since this appear to be a massive difference , and again teh RAW tab is step N1 in color correction

thanks so much
Offline

Bernhard

  • Posts: 57
  • Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 8:00 am

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostFri Aug 31, 2012 12:31 pm

Gabriele Turchi wrote:Adobe or BMD should give same results


Hello,

since de-bayering as a form of image-resampling is 50% science and 50% art,
there is simply no guarantee that two de-bayeres from two companies
could deliver exact the same result.

Think of video-scaling in different NLEs. All of them are producing worse results,
because all are using bicubic resampling algorithm, but also non of them delivers
exact the same image as the others!

RED can guarantee consistency in de-bayering (thought they release updates on that regularly),
because they offer a SDK. So there is always only ONE right way to de-bayer RED-footage
at a given time.

To stress the argument that CinemaDNG is an open format would be
a wrong comparison in this regard. It's as open, as 4:2:2 is 'open' or
a resolution of 1920x1080 pixel is 'open'. It's an open container format.
What is done with the information to calculate an image from the information
saved in this open container, depends on a company competence in image resampling.

Given the worse video-scalings inside major NLE's, I won't expect anything good from them...
That's the bitter truth.

Nevertheless I've faith in BMD to deliver the very best de-bayering based on their Teranex-algorithms.
A SDK would be nice to have a kind of standard for BMCC de-bayering.
This could guarantee consistent results.

Hope it helps.

Best regards,
Bernhard
Offline
User avatar

rick.lang

  • Posts: 7568
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:41 pm
  • Location: Victoria BC Canada

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostFri Aug 31, 2012 2:06 pm

Gabriele Turchi wrote:but i believe that Aleksandr used just the RAW debayer settings , which is step N1 on color correction before do anything else , and Adobe or BMD should give same results (or at least not as bad)


The results of the simple debayer will vary with every application since they will code the debater routine differently. But you are correct in that they will look comparable. That's not the issue in the original post where we see a debayered image first and then an image from Adobe with supposedly a 5-stop reduction in the exposure (which is called 'exposition') and another 5-stop exposure reduction in Resolve. I suspect the two programs are not making the same adjustment but the post assumes they are. I don't think we know the scale being used for both applications and the scale may have the same indicators but not mean the same thing. If truly both scales present f-stops, there is a strange discrepancy.

My point is that I am not sure there is any problem with the programs doing things differently because you only work with one program and you use your eye to judge what exposure adjustment you desire. BMD will hopefully look at the comparison too and know what's happening.
Rick Lang
Offline

Gabriele Turchi

  • Posts: 39
  • Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 2:33 pm

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostFri Aug 31, 2012 2:22 pm

thanks bernhard ,
what you said make 100% sense (even tought i am not sure that the teranex technology would help at all in terms of debayer (teranex is pretty much scaling and framerate conversions etc...)

Rick : what scares me is that if in resolve using the RAW tab , lowering down the exposure the information does not show up (bit it does on the adobe ) ...that is an issue ...

i am not concern that the level of exposure does not match exactly in the 2 apps , i am concerned that in the image adjusted in resolve the more he stepped down produced not highlight details recovery (it still looks clipped )

off course we need to know if no other adjustments has been done ...

it would be great have the raw ...


g
Offline
User avatar

rick.lang

  • Posts: 7568
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:41 pm
  • Location: Victoria BC Canada

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostFri Aug 31, 2012 3:02 pm

Gabriele Turchi wrote:Rick : what scares me is that if in resolve using the RAW tab , lowering down the exposure the information does not show up (bit it does on the adobe ) ...that is an issue ...

i am not concern that the level of exposure does not match exactly in the 2 apps , i am concerned that in the image adjusted in resolve the more he stepped down produced not highlight details recovery (it still looks clipped )

off course we need to know if no other adjustments has been done ...

it would be great have the raw ...


g


If it only looks clipped in Resolve (and Adobe appears fine) after a dramatic exposure reduction, then it is a problem with their routine not picking up the sensor data correctly in the debayer. It was so dark I thought that was the concern. To me the original is very over exposed so there isn't much detail to be recovered, especially if some of the highlights are clipped to begin with. Whatever is clipped is lost forever.
Rick Lang
Offline
User avatar

Noel Sterrett

  • Posts: 274
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 9:12 pm

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostFri Aug 31, 2012 3:31 pm

Although it's meant for single images, you might want to try a free program called RawTherapee for comparison.

Cheers.
Noel Sterrett
Admit One Pictures
Offline

Bernhard

  • Posts: 57
  • Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 8:00 am

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostFri Aug 31, 2012 3:48 pm

Hello,

glad I could help!

Gabriele Turchi wrote: teranex is pretty much scaling and framerate conversions


In fact, de-bayering IS scaling :D
(scientific term: 'image resampling')

For practice it doesn't make much difference if you collect a handful of R/G/B samples from
a bayer pattern or from an already-R/G/B (or YCbCr in video) image to process a new set of R/G/B
values that constitute a new pixel for a smaller or bigger image. And Teranex is world-class in image resampling.

I would be deeply disappointed, if BMD had not mobilized their Teranex-engineers to this task... ;)

Best regards,
Bernhard
Offline

Felix Steinhardt

  • Posts: 205
  • Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 9:45 pm
  • Location: Karlsruhe / Germany

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostSat Sep 01, 2012 12:11 am

I messed with the file, too and while magnifying some parts I found a red hot pixel where the bags lie.

I hope those are not in the production models :geek:

This is what you get from the first frame when using Cineform RAW

Edit: Ups,didn´t correct the magenta tint
Attachments
cineraw.jpg
cineraw.jpg (411.91 KiB) Viewed 62062 times

Aleksandr_Oleynik

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostSat Sep 01, 2012 5:38 am

Gabriele Turchi wrote:Aleksandr any way you can post the raw for that shot ? Also , what version of resolve did you use ?

CaptainHook wrote:Where has that frame in the OP come from? I'd like to test that frame myself in Resolve.

This is not my footage
This is Ty Evans
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=427
exposure test:

I us Resolve 9 b3.

Aleksandr_Oleynik

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostSat Sep 01, 2012 6:00 am

rick.lang wrote: If truly both scales present f-stops, there is a strange discrepancy. .

Problem is not in a strange discrepancy exposition values.
Problem DaVinci debayering - killed details in over highlight - lost 3-4 stop information which can be restore.
You are ready to refuse it?
Offline
User avatar

Frank Glencairn

  • Posts: 1570
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:07 am
  • Location: Germany

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostSat Sep 01, 2012 7:57 am

You need to get used to Resolve. Every suite and program is a bit different.

1. I lower exposure in the raw tab (usually about -2) and watch the histograms till all the highlight information is there. That may crush your shadows first.

2. Than I finetune my shadows, mids and highlights with the normal toolset.
http://frankglencairn.wordpress.com/

Set your zebras to 100%, ETTR and you're golden - and NO, you can't use TB as output for an external monitor, and you can't download the footy via TB ether.

Aleksandr_Oleynik

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostSat Sep 01, 2012 12:52 pm

I have the license DaVinci Resolve about three years.
I well know this program, all its pluses and minuses.
About a year I use DaVinci for work with Raw of my RED Epic.
Therefore paid attention to serious problems of a debayring of RAW DMG in it.
Offline
User avatar

rick.lang

  • Posts: 7568
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:41 pm
  • Location: Victoria BC Canada

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostSat Sep 01, 2012 2:53 pm

Aleksandr_Oleynik wrote:About a year I use DaVinci for work with Raw of my RED Epic.
Therefore paid attention to serious problems of a debayring of RAW DMG in it.


I'm beginning to think Julian in the BMCC Low Light Noise thread and Aleksandr in this thread may have found a shortcoming in either the new Resolve debayer or in the colour correction routines. Since each thread appears to show at both the brightest highlight and darkest shadows, Resolve (and other programs such as the Aperture I used to grade a still DNG) is not working well with the data values so it appears to clip highlights and posterize shadows when they are pushed in a grade. The problems don't show up readily in a well lit image but at the extremes, things appear to break in Resolve, but not in a comparison with Adobe Camera Raw at least.

BMD reads these messages and hopefully they are already reviewing their code to find where they are dropping sensor or subsequent colour information. Somewhere in the process, there's a loss of precision in either the big end or the little end of the values. It doesn't do any good for BMD to be confident that everything is done right at this time for beta release because something is wrong. Peter Chamberlain has said there are changes coming to the beta code in another version. It may take some time to improve though and isn't a concern about the BMCC, just how to get the most out of its superb data. I'm sure it will be improved.
Rick Lang

Aleksandr_Oleynik

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostSun Sep 02, 2012 9:42 pm

Need to negotiate with Adobe! Cinema DNG RAW is their format.
Offline
User avatar

rick.lang

  • Posts: 7568
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:41 pm
  • Location: Victoria BC Canada

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostMon Sep 03, 2012 3:34 am

Aleksandr_Oleynik wrote:Need to negotiate with Adobe! Cinema DNG RAW is their format.


John Brawley has posted on BMCuser that BMD is working on the problem. Not sure if any negotiation is required but we shall wait and see when they can improve their debayer algorithm.
Rick Lang
Offline

John Brawley

  • Posts: 1809
  • Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:57 am
  • Location: Atlanta Georgia

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostMon Sep 03, 2012 7:13 am

Resolve is still in beta guys and they are working on the DNG conversions for the next release.

jb
John Brawley
Cinematographer
Atlanta
Georgia
Offline

CaptainHook

Blackmagic Design

  • Posts: 1401
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 4:50 am
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostMon Sep 03, 2012 7:20 am

Great to hear! I think we all just want Resolve to be amazing and the team at Blackmagic are really showing they are committed to delivering the best and listening to feedback. Very cool!
https://vimeo.com/acoupleofnightowls/
http://www.captainhook.co.nz/blackmagic-cinema-camera-lut/

**Any post by me prior to Aug 2014 was before i started working for Blackmagic**

Aleksandr_Oleynik

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostMon Sep 03, 2012 3:10 pm

Thanks for good news, John!

I want to say that I'm really impressed with the result -
Now we all know that with Blackmagic Cinema Camera we have opportunity of 3 to 4 stops HighLight material bring back to the range.
Offline

Gabriele Turchi

  • Posts: 39
  • Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 2:33 pm

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostTue Sep 04, 2012 12:13 pm

what adobe application Raw manipulation enabled that also have SDI preview is the best to be used in order to compare with Resolve (image quality wise )

premiere ?

thanks
g

Aleksandr_Oleynik

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostTue Sep 04, 2012 12:37 pm

Adobe Premier today do not have cinema dng import, alas.
After Effect.
Offline

Peter Chamberlain

Blackmagic Design

  • Posts: 3212
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:08 am

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostWed Sep 05, 2012 7:32 am

Not long now Aleksandr till we have the release build of Resolve for you to see the improvements we have been working on.
Peter
DaVinci Resolve Product Manager
Offline

Brett Harrison

  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:12 am

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostWed Sep 05, 2012 8:35 am

I am very excited to find out what these improvements are, and I get the feeling they are what various people in the know have been bursting to tell us. JB recently described Resolve as BMDCC's secret weapon.
Last edited by Brett Harrison on Wed Sep 05, 2012 8:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

Aleksandr_Oleynik

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostWed Sep 05, 2012 8:38 am

Peter Chamberlain wrote:Not long now Aleksandr till we have the release build of Resolve for you to see the improvements we have been working on.
Peter

Thank you Peter!
Waiting release build of Resolve 9 and the opportunity to buy a camera
Offline

Gabriele Turchi

  • Posts: 39
  • Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 2:33 pm

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostWed Sep 05, 2012 12:20 pm

Peter Chamberlain wrote:Not long now Aleksandr till we have the release build of Resolve for you to see the improvements we have been working on.
Peter


Thanks peter ,
look very forward to that
off cours ei expect to have a Log gamma curve in the Raw cinema DNG tab

also , i really thing debayer improvements are needed , yesterday i was testing the Raw posted here on My resolve feeding a 58" plasma , and the image where she is playing the pool (shot 1 ) as you decrease the exposure (NOT touching anything else ) you see clearly how the skin posterize (like if it was 8 bit footage ) (ps: i was suing rec 709 for both gamma and matrix)

thanks
g
Offline
User avatar

Aaron Nanto

  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:54 am
  • Location: Seattle, WA

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostFri Sep 07, 2012 4:52 pm

Anyone try the new final Resolve 9 that was released overnight to see if this issue has been fixed? I would have tried but it was already 2:30AM and i needed sleep :\
--
// Aaron

Aleksandr_Oleynik

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostFri Sep 07, 2012 6:35 pm

Peter Chamberlain wrote:Not long now Aleksandr till we have the release build of Resolve for you to see the improvements we have been working on.
Peter

Peter,
i try release version. And there is some improvements indeed. But its still far behind Adobe version.
I attach one more still gab for compare.

Adobe -

Image

BM -

Image
Offline

valentine andreyev

  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 6:58 pm

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostFri Sep 07, 2012 7:09 pm

My own test confirm the same - Davinci debayer math can`t compare with adobe, at list for now.

I understand that write a GPU debayer isn`t easy task but i belive in you guys))))
Offline

Sergey Goncharov

  • Posts: 9
  • Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 9:49 pm

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostFri Sep 07, 2012 10:37 pm

I apologize for my English.
Alexander, maybe you did not understand it to the settings. Here's the same frame. The first picture taken in ACR off with noise reduction, the second in DaVinci. I think the difference in quality debayering minimal.

Image
Image

The picture was fitted "by eye"
Offline

Peter Chamberlain

Blackmagic Design

  • Posts: 3212
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:08 am

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostSat Sep 08, 2012 4:07 am

That looks correct Sergey. How does the original skateboard shot now compare?
Peter
DaVinci Resolve Product Manager

Aleksandr_Oleynik

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostSat Sep 08, 2012 9:29 am

Sergey Goncharov wrote:I apologize for my English.
Alexander, maybe you did not understand it to the settings.


Thanks, Sergey!
You are right - i missed it. I take Luminance Noise Reduction to 0, but forgot about Color Noise Reduction.
But try compare Davinci with ACR on a skateboard shot. Difference is huge. ACR retain brown texture on a Zion Whole Sale signboard, and Davinci make it horrible yellow solid color without any texture.

DaVinci -
Image

Adobe (take Noise Reduction to 0, Luminance and Color) -
Image


And one more thing I want pay attention to (mostly its for Peter and other peoples from Blackmagic team) - raw conversion is one of most important part in modern postproduction. Your camera as good, as your raw processing app can make it. Just compare r3d with different version of color science.
Blackmagic give us Resolve lic with camera and its great peace of software (I use it since first batch of Resolve for Mac became available in Ukraine). But raw conversion of CinemaDNG in resolve pretty basic, and more important that result are not stellar. In my opinion it`s more important to get a better results, than realtime when we make transition from raw to DI format like prores or dnxhd. As of today I force not to use Resolve, but to go with ACR route, and thats huge bottleneck in postprocessing pipeline. In my opinion Blackmagic just should not give up to make Resolve comparable with ACR, or even better! Or write separate app to make raw conversion not in realtime, but with max quality possible.
Offline

Sergey Goncharov

  • Posts: 9
  • Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 9:49 pm

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostSat Sep 08, 2012 12:54 pm

Yes, the frame with skateboarder shows the complete failure of BMD.
Made in ACR
Image

Unfortunately, DaVinci can not be so. I hope that in the next generation Davintsi BM redo work with hilight.
Offline

AndreasK

  • Posts: 33
  • Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 2:51 pm

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostSat Sep 08, 2012 2:53 pm

Perfect example Sergey, this scene is exactly why I'm interested in the BMCC and the raw-process. Having a lot of experience with photos and AdobeRaw/Lightroom this is exactly what I was hoping to achieve with the BMCC. Tough when I see that davinci resolve fails totally at this task I'm a little bit worried :(

Can you post your ACR settings for this result? And did you try cineformRaw? Maybe that works better ?

Aleksandr_Oleynik

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostSat Sep 08, 2012 8:02 pm

Image
Offline

Peter Chamberlain

Blackmagic Design

  • Posts: 3212
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:08 am

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostSat Sep 08, 2012 8:51 pm

Thanks for the feedback. We continue to strive for improvement and if you could share a link to the source dng to our support email davincihelp (at) blackmagicdesign (dot) com then our algorithm guys we can explore this further.
Peter
DaVinci Resolve Product Manager

Aleksandr_Oleynik

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostSat Sep 08, 2012 9:00 pm

Peter,
This is not my footage, i haven't camera :(
This is Ty Evans -
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=427
exposure test:
http://wtrns.fr/81e28Aw61yL33-6
Frame001250.dng
I sent this frame to e-mail.
Offline
User avatar

Nick Bedford

  • Posts: 352
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 3:56 am
  • Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostSun Sep 09, 2012 12:15 am

I too found the raw conversion to be very "basic" compared to Adobe Camera Raw, not to mention I ended up with banding in the final ProRes 422 HQ output. Yet in Final Cut Pro X with ProRes film log footage, it held up and looked wonderful. No banding at all. Maybe I missed some vital setting, but I shouldn't have to.

To be honest, given the all-encompassing nature of the process of raw conversion in ACR, I would have expected much better tools in Resolve than what we currently have (or at least what Resolve 9 Lite has). I understand that there are all the normal correction tools already, but in ACR, you convert your raw file to a final perfected image ready for any post work (compositing, keying etc etc), not something to then colour correct.
Nick Bedford, Photographer
http://www.nickbedford.com/
Offline

CaptainHook

Blackmagic Design

  • Posts: 1401
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 4:50 am
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Adobe vs DaVinci RAW Converter

PostSun Sep 09, 2012 6:56 am

Well thats interesting because i would think the Prores log files would have been debayered using similar if not the same algorithms as Resolve (in the interview with Grant Petty he said as much). And i would guess the GM release of 9 has an updated (better?) version than the one in the camera at the time that John shot the prores footage. I think this is a case of so many people new to resolve not knowing how to get the best out of it. I certainly didn't find my prores grading of John's footage better than raw (are you saying you found the prores better to grade? i can't tell..) but it was different and i compared them here:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=374&start=10#p2144

Adobe has a long history of debayering raw, indeed giving it an edge for some tasks shown in this thread. But i think Capture One is even better at producing pleasing images from raw than adobe. Which is more important to me than the extreme image recovery attempts in this thread. 5 stop recovery? I'm generally doing 1 stop overall adjustments at most in Capture One for raw stills. Anything more than 2 i would consider a screw up. :D I know for Johns footage dropping down around 2 stops was standard for some shots in Resolve (in capture one the default actually showed the raws being slightly dark needing a boost!!) but it's because he exposed for the highlights to get maximum dynamic range in raw from the BMC. His exposure's were not accidental or mistakes.

Also, i get what you're saying in the 2nd paragraph but all the "normal correction tools" are still manipulating the raw data as far as i understand it.. (Peter?) So the point of resolve in that case IS to convert the raw into a final perfected image colour wise just as it is with adobe. And i don't think it's toolset for colour is lacking compared to ACR. I would argue the opposite except for the cases of image recovery. One would hope 'recovery' is the exception we deal with though, not the rule. :P
https://vimeo.com/acoupleofnightowls/
http://www.captainhook.co.nz/blackmagic-cinema-camera-lut/

**Any post by me prior to Aug 2014 was before i started working for Blackmagic**
Next

Return to DaVinci Resolve

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Feral McElreavy and 30 guests