BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

The place for questions about shooting with Blackmagic Cameras.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

RealSting

  • Posts: 22
  • Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 9:16 am
  • Real Name: Jay Ryde

BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostSat May 12, 2018 9:32 am

Does the new pocket 4k camera output 10 bit or 12bit RAW through it's HDMI ? e.g Could I utilise the codecs on a Ninja Inferno? I'm thinking if ProRes is not supported by the camera right away (if ever).
Offline

Uli Plank

  • Posts: 3076
  • Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:48 am

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostWed May 16, 2018 1:02 am

I don't think so, never heard of any camera delivering RAW via HDMI.
Resolve Studio and Fusion Studio
iMac 2017 Radeon Pro 580 8 GB VRAM and 32 GB RAM
Offline
User avatar

RealSting

  • Posts: 22
  • Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 9:16 am
  • Real Name: Jay Ryde

BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostWed May 16, 2018 1:14 am

Uli Plank wrote:I don't think so, never heard of any camera delivering RAW via HDMI.


C300 mkII
C500
C700
FS700
FS5
FS7
VariCam LT
EVA-1

All output a RAW signal. I’m absolutely astonished this question hasn’t already been asked and answered as this will likely be the make or break for the camera - for most, including myself. If it does we can record to the ATOMOS INFERNO in ProRes RAW if for some reason it doesn’t get incorporated into the OS.. plus of course, all of the other benefits.
Last edited by RealSting on Wed May 16, 2018 7:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

Craig Seeman

  • Posts: 454
  • Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 1:19 pm

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostWed May 16, 2018 2:50 am

Cameras that support RAW out generally do so over SDI.

Also noting that the BMPCC4K only supports HD, not 4k over HDMI. It's 10 bit out I believe.
Offline

Denny Smith

  • Posts: 8428
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 4:19 pm
  • Location: USA, Northern Calif.

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostWed May 16, 2018 3:35 am

Yes, the HDMI standard only currently supports a video signal, like 4.2.2 10-bit output at HD, UHD or 4K resolution. Raw output is not supported. For Raw output, you need a fast SDI connection.
Cheers
Last edited by Denny Smith on Wed May 16, 2018 4:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Denny Smith
SHA Productions
Offline

Andrew Kolakowski

  • Posts: 3935
  • Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:20 am

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostWed May 16, 2018 10:16 am

There is no RAW over SDI standard either. I think nothing stops you to deliver RAW over HDMI, but you have to make it yourself (well, same as it happens with SDI). HDMI has enough bandwidth (it's actually faster than SDI atm.), it's only designed for shorter cables, but in this case this is not an issue.
Offline
User avatar

RealSting

  • Posts: 22
  • Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 9:16 am
  • Real Name: Jay Ryde

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostWed May 16, 2018 10:36 am

C300 mkII
C500
C700
FS700
FS7
VariCam LT
EVA-1

support output RAW over HDMI..
Offline

Denny Smith

  • Posts: 8428
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 4:19 pm
  • Location: USA, Northern Calif.

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostWed May 16, 2018 5:19 pm

I am sorry, but according to Mitch Gross, the Panasonic USA Cinema camera manager, “Panasonic is part of the HDMI consortium. This organization sets the standard for HDMI signals so that devices can talk to one another properly. RAW is not part of the spec, so there for it will not be output over HDMI.”

Further when the EVA1is set to Raw output, the HDMI out is restricted to a HD, 1080P signal only.
I believe the Varicam also works the same.

Additionally, the Canon C300 Mk2, outputs its Raw signal, “For external recording and monitoring, twin 3G-SDI outputs capable of 4K RAW output are included on the rear of the camera body Users can choose among multiple recording modes, resolutions and frame rates to meet their production needs.” Canon USA.
Nor does the Sony FS7 or 700, HDMI is HD and 4K output only. You need to get your facts straight. ;)

Cheers.
Last edited by Denny Smith on Wed May 16, 2018 5:49 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Denny Smith
SHA Productions
Offline
User avatar

RealSting

  • Posts: 22
  • Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 9:16 am
  • Real Name: Jay Ryde

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostWed May 16, 2018 5:32 pm

Denny Smith wrote:I am sorry, but according to Mitch Gross, the Panasonic Cinema camera manager, “Panasonic is part of the HDMI consortium. This organization sets the standard for HDMI signals so that devices can talk to one another properly. RAW is not part of the spec, so there for it will not be output over HDMI.”

Further when the EVA1is set to Raw output, the HDMI out is restricted to a HD, 1080P signal only.
I believe the Varicam also works the same way.
Cheers.


Ahhh ok, then its possible the information I’ve come across is incomplete.. My aim is to use an Atomos Inferno and take advantage of its ProRes RAW. It has been ‘assumed’ that BMPCC 4K will include this in its flavours of ProRes, but I’m not banking on it. It would be nice if the Atomos had USB-C input so the Atomos would be the main recorder.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Offline

Denny Smith

  • Posts: 8428
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 4:19 pm
  • Location: USA, Northern Calif.

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostWed May 16, 2018 5:52 pm

Fine, but you do know the Atomos Inferno only records Raw via its SDI inputs also, as does the Convergent Design recorder. So even if a camera could output Raw via HDMI, there are currently no recorders that can record Raw via HDMI. ;)
Cheers
Last edited by Denny Smith on Thu May 17, 2018 3:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
Denny Smith
SHA Productions
Offline

Craig Seeman

  • Posts: 454
  • Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 1:19 pm

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostWed May 16, 2018 6:09 pm

RealSting wrote:C300 mkII
C500
C700
FS700
FS7
VariCam LT
EVA-1

support output RAW over HDMI..


They all support RAW over SDI actually. No RAW HDMI out.
Offline

Andrew Kolakowski

  • Posts: 3935
  • Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:20 am

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostWed May 16, 2018 6:20 pm

Denny Smith wrote:I am sorry, but according to Mitch Gross, the Panasonic USA Cinema camera manager, “Panasonic is part of the HDMI consortium. This organization sets the standard for HDMI signals so that devices can talk to one another properly. RAW is not part of the spec, so there for it will not be output over HDMI.”

Cheers.


Yes, it's not in HDMI spec, but neither it's in SDI spec. It's all about official spec.
You can add it if you want, but then you most likely break HDMI licensing rules etc.
With SDI it's easier as it's not consumer, licensing based format as far as I understand it.
Technically it can be done same way as it's done with SDI. You could even simply send RAW as "normal" 12bit video as long as receiving device knows its real nature and processes it properly. It all would be proprietary like currently every RAW over SDI.
Offline
User avatar

RealSting

  • Posts: 22
  • Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 9:16 am
  • Real Name: Jay Ryde

BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostWed May 16, 2018 7:18 pm

Denny Smith wrote:Fine, but you do know the Atomos Inferno only records Raw via its SDI inputs also, as does the Cinvergent Design recorder. So even if a camera could output Raw via HDMI, there are currently no recorders that can record Raw via HDMI.
Cheers



Ahh ok.. i had my wires crossed. Thanks for clearing that one up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Offline

michaeldhead

  • Posts: 86
  • Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 5:41 pm

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostWed May 16, 2018 10:03 pm

Denny Smith wrote:Fine, but you do know the Atomos Inferno only records Raw via its SDI inputs also, as does the Cinvergent Design recorder. So even if a camera could output Raw via HDMI, there are currently no recorders that can record Raw via HDMI. ;)
Cheers


If you want to get technical and look to the near future, the Atomos Ninja V will record Prores raw via HDMI (the only input it has), but no camera (currently) outputs raw over HDMI.

At NAB, Atomos said "Tell your camera maker you want raw over HDMI". It might be possible in the future (even with the current batch of cameras, since raw output would be less processor intensive than the current crop of compressed codecs), but it remains to be seen. If there's enough demand for it, then Panasonic might do it...then Sony....then Canon in five years on a $15k camera, but someone will hack the T2i to output raw before that....

:)
Offline
User avatar

RealSting

  • Posts: 22
  • Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 9:16 am
  • Real Name: Jay Ryde

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostWed May 16, 2018 11:31 pm

michaeldhead wrote:
Denny Smith wrote:Fine, but you do know the Atomos Inferno only records Raw via its SDI inputs also, as does the Cinvergent Design recorder. So even if a camera could output Raw via HDMI, there are currently no recorders that can record Raw via HDMI. ;)
Cheers


If you want to get technical and look to the near future, the Atomos Ninja V will record Prores raw via HDMI (the only input it has), but no camera (currently) outputs raw over HDMI.

At NAB, Atomos said "Tell your camera maker you want raw over HDMI". It might be possible in the future (even with the current batch of cameras, since raw output would be less processor intensive than the current crop of compressed codecs), but it remains to be seen. If there's enough demand for it, then Panasonic might do it...then Sony....then Canon in five years on a $15k camera, but someone will hack the T2i to output raw before that....

:)


I remember seeing that video too and was part of the reason (by confusion) for my original post.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 782
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostFri May 18, 2018 2:03 pm

Believe it or not, it is supposed to be 1080p.

4k below refers to UHD and cinema 4k.

Many years ago I put forward an idea to pack 4k raw into a 1080p HDMI signal. The industry being slow and dense only Axiom tried it, but apparently HDMI recorders stuffed up the result (not pixel accurate recording). It still won't be useful unless the version of HDMI supports high enough data rates. USB 3.1 recording would be preferable, but does it support newer USB 3.1.

If they made recorders to support it, things would be better.

Old HDMI was a data pipe of prescribed format, new hdmi is more a data pipe. The latest 1.4 version was reconfigurable to take HDMI 2's 4kp50 4:2:0 mode. HDMI 2 takes a lot more data. But we seem to be stuck with a pre HDMI 1.3 version. But, using some creative design, you can do what is called data packing into the HDMI data structures. If the thing is fast enough at all.

See, at 1080p you need a place to park 4 pixels in a 1080p signal. 4:4:4 provides three positions plus an alpha. But that can be maxed out, and the HDMI might not support it. However 4kp30 might go into HDMI 4kp60 4:2:2, but no 4kp60 raw. Another is to do bit packing in a higher bit depth. So, 8 10 bit raw pixels could go into five 16 bit hdmi pixel values (4:4:4, plus 4:4 of the next 4:4:4 pixel, with the left over going to another pixel and a bit).

So, its so complicated, you wonder why they didn't just do a version of hdmi 2, tb3, or USB 3.1 compatible with standard equipment to start with (in HDMI you could just output 2kp240 monochrome frames, each frame one of the four 4kp60 Bayer colors in rotation).
Offline

Mark Grgurev

  • Posts: 59
  • Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 7:22 am

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostFri May 18, 2018 2:23 pm

One of the reasons they may not support Prores RAW in-camera is because it's exclusive to Atomos and FCPX at the moment. The other reason would be because there's no real advantage to ProRes RAW over the 3:1 and 4:1 compressed cDNG formats that the Pocket 4K can already record. Of course, you can only edit those formats in Resolve but, to my understanding, any NLE could implement support for them if they wanted to.
Offline
User avatar

RealSting

  • Posts: 22
  • Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 9:16 am
  • Real Name: Jay Ryde

BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostFri May 18, 2018 3:32 pm

Mark Grgurev wrote:One of the reasons they may not support Prores RAW in-camera is because it's exclusive to Atomos and FCPX at the moment. The other reason would be because there's no real advantage to ProRes RAW over the 3:1 and 4:1 compressed cDNG formats that the Pocket 4K can already record. Of course, you can only edit those formats in Resolve but, to my understanding, any NLE could implement support for them if they wanted to.


Mark, There are huge advantages of ProRes RAW over RAW DNG. For example PRORES RAW is a continuous video stream whereas DNG is a series of still images. This makes for much smoother editing as it’s less processor intensive and much easier to manage. It’s not just FCP taking advantage of this as several NLE’s can use ProRes too. ProRes has already established itself as an industry standard.

Of course I’ve only just touched the tip of the iceberg.. but this is one of those very rare instances where you should believe the hype... ProRes RAW is a huge deal for many.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Offline

Denny Smith

  • Posts: 8428
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 4:19 pm
  • Location: USA, Northern Calif.

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostFri May 18, 2018 3:49 pm

Yes, it is going to be a real contender. But at the moment Panasonic, Atomos and Apple FCPX have an exclusive. After that we may see it expanded to other cameras. Currently, ProRes Raw, as implemented so far, is only via SDI on the Pana EVA1 and VariCam. Atomos is only supporting it via SDI also, along with Cinema DNG tecordimg to provide Raw recording to cameras like thr EVA1 that can not record Raw internally.

The new BM Pocket Camera 4K can record Raw internally, so,it does not need to output it to an external recorder. After the six month exclusive, BM may choose to add ProRes Raw to the Camera’s internal recording (and USB/C output). We will just have to wait and see how this all shakes out.
Cheers
Denny Smith
SHA Productions
Offline
User avatar

Jack Fairley

  • Posts: 702
  • Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2016 7:58 pm

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostFri May 18, 2018 7:01 pm

RealSting wrote:
Mark Grgurev wrote:One of the reasons they may not support Prores RAW in-camera is because it's exclusive to Atomos and FCPX at the moment. The other reason would be because there's no real advantage to ProRes RAW over the 3:1 and 4:1 compressed cDNG formats that the Pocket 4K can already record. Of course, you can only edit those formats in Resolve but, to my understanding, any NLE could implement support for them if they wanted to.


Mark, There are huge advantages of ProRes RAW over RAW DNG. For example PRORES RAW is a continuous video stream whereas DNG is a series of still images. This makes for much smoother editing as it’s less processor intensive and much easier to manage. It’s not just FCP taking advantage of this as several NLE’s can use ProRes too. ProRes has already established itself as an industry standard.

Of course I’ve only just touched the tip of the iceberg.. but this is one of those very rare instances where you should believe the hype... ProRes RAW is a huge deal for many.

ProRes RAW is missing basic ingredients that make RAW useful in the first place, and by adopting it, you will be shackling yourself to the restrictions of proprietary mechanisms that have plagued us with ProRes for many years.
Offline
User avatar

RealSting

  • Posts: 22
  • Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 9:16 am
  • Real Name: Jay Ryde

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostFri May 18, 2018 7:19 pm

Jack Fairley wrote:
RealSting wrote:
Mark Grgurev wrote:One of the reasons they may not support Prores RAW in-camera is because it's exclusive to Atomos and FCPX at the moment. The other reason would be because there's no real advantage to ProRes RAW over the 3:1 and 4:1 compressed cDNG formats that the Pocket 4K can already record. Of course, you can only edit those formats in Resolve but, to my understanding, any NLE could implement support for them if they wanted to.


Mark, There are huge advantages of ProRes RAW over RAW DNG. For example PRORES RAW is a continuous video stream whereas DNG is a series of still images. This makes for much smoother editing as it’s less processor intensive and much easier to manage. It’s not just FCP taking advantage of this as several NLE’s can use ProRes too. ProRes has already established itself as an industry standard.

Of course I’ve only just touched the tip of the iceberg.. but this is one of those very rare instances where you should believe the hype... ProRes RAW is a huge deal for many.

ProRes RAW is missing basic ingredients that make RAW useful in the first place, and by adopting it, you will be shackling yourself to the restrictions of proprietary mechanisms that have plagued us with ProRes for many years.


Such as.. ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Offline

Mark Grgurev

  • Posts: 59
  • Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 7:22 am

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostFri May 18, 2018 9:12 pm

RealSting wrote:Mark, There are huge advantages of ProRes RAW over RAW DNG. For example PRORES RAW is a continuous video stream whereas DNG is a series of still images. This makes for much smoother editing as it’s less processor intensive and much easier to manage. It’s not just FCP taking advantage of this as several NLE’s can use ProRes too. ProRes has already established itself as an industry standard.


That's technically not an advantage of PreRes RAW. While Blackmagic has decided to implement CinemaDNG as image sequences, the CinemaDNG standard supports using an MXF wrapper. So CinemaDNG can be a single continuous file as well.

That being said, the way BMD currently records cDNG has an advantage for recording... though it doesn't apply to the Pocket 4K.

Because the Ursa Mini Pro has two SD card slots and 2 Cfast slots, it can record all odd frames on one card and all even frames on another. This allows you to use two slower and smaller cards as if they were one faster, larger carder. This saves on the price of media and can even allow for bitrates higher than the max speeds that Cfast and UHS-II SD cards can reach.

CDNG also support lossless compression as well as different levels of lossy compression. While BMD currently only has 3:1 and 4:1 lossy modes which have bitrates about on par with PRRHQ and PRR, it's possible to do 5:1, 7:1 and anything in between without needing to specifically support each ratio in software. ProRes RAW is ALWAYS lossy and only has two levels of compression.

Because lossy CDNG in BMDs cameras is a fixed bit-rate, it's more predictable. If you know the bitrate, you can determine how much footage you can fit in a given amount of space and you don't have to worry about bit-rate spikes creating dropped frames during recording and playback. However that doesn't mean that CDNG can't do VBR. It can and SlimRAW can currently convert lossless RAW files to it. Meanwhile, PRR ONLY supports VBR.

Am I against BMD bringing ProRes RAW to their camera's? No. But at the moment it doesn't seem to be technical superior to CinemaDNG at all.
Offline

Andrew Kolakowski

  • Posts: 3935
  • Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:20 am

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostFri May 18, 2018 9:39 pm

There is still one key element undetermined and this is efficiency.
In my simulation with "normal" ProRes encoding RAW images ProRes is more efficient than DNG. It may be the case that 4:1 ProRes RAW is better quality than 3:1 DNG which is quite important in whole comparison. DNG is not that efficient.
Other than this- ProRes can also have many levels of quality. Its just up to Apple (+others) to decide how many are useful and needed.
Lossless is a very specific thing and it's really not much related to video codecs itself as it's very different way of encoding. You can't use any of the "tricks" related to human vision etc. which are key in video compression with lossless mode. It's basically zipping RAW data. I would prefer 3:1 optimised lossy codec than any lossless.

Whole Cinemas DNG format is also not looking that great in terms of specification. Who does maintain it, who pushes changes/improvements etc? It's bit messy- where is the spec for compressed modes?
Adobe made it, but it seems to be not that bothered with it anymore. Format itself seems to be based on very old technology. Nothing is perfect :)
Offline

Mark Grgurev

  • Posts: 59
  • Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 7:22 am

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostFri May 18, 2018 11:51 pm

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:There is still one key element undetermined and this is efficiency.
In my simulation with "normal" ProRes encoding RAW images ProRes is more efficient than DNG. It may be the case that 4:1 ProRes RAW is better quality than 3:1 DNG which is quite important in whole comparison. DNG is not that efficient.


I'm curious to see how they compare in that regard. How did you do your simulation? I'm assuming ProRes 4444 HQ on a monochromatic video? What did you find?

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:Other than this- ProRes can also have many levels of quality. Its just up to Apple (+others) to decide how many are useful and needed.


Everything that I've seen has shown all previous standards of ProRes have standard bitrates per specific resolutions and framerate. Sure Apple can add more but my point is that Apple has to create that new version of it and license it out in order for camera manufacturers to use it. That isn't the case with compressed CDNG as is the case with Kinefinity's cameras. Not once has BMD shipped a camera with 7:1 compressed cDNG but Kinefinity implemented it in their cameras and they played back in Resolve immediately.

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:Lossless is a very specific thing and it's really not much related to video codecs itself as it's very different way of encoding. You can't use any of the "tricks" related to human vision etc. which are key in video compression with lossless mode. It's basically zipping RAW data. I would prefer 3:1 optimised lossy codec than any lossless.


Of course it's a different form of compression. Why does that matter? I'm pretty sure most effects houses prefer to shoot lossless codecs over compressed ones any day. Sure, you can't use any tricks but no body is really asking it to. It's all the benefit of uncompressed data but at a smaller file size. It's great to have that option and PRR doesn't provide it.

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:Whole Cinemas DNG format is also not looking that great in terms of specification. Who does maintain it, who pushes changes/improvements etc? It's bit messy- where is the spec for compressed modes?
Adobe made it, but it seems to be not that bothered with it anymore. Format itself seems to be based on very old technology. Nothing is perfect :)


I don't think anybody maintains it necessarily but I wouldn't say that its "not looking great". It's actively being used in products by Atomos, Convergent Design, Norpix, Weisscam, DJI, BMD, Kinefinity, slimRAW, and Fastvideo. The last four on that list all support the lossy version that BMD created.
Offline

Andrew Kolakowski

  • Posts: 3935
  • Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:20 am

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostSat May 19, 2018 9:17 am

Mark Grgurev wrote:I'm curious to see how they compare in that regard. How did you do your simulation? I'm assuming ProRes 4444 HQ on a monochromatic video? What did you find?

ProRes444 is better than 3:1 DNG and ProRes444 XQ (which is about 4:5:1) is way better. This is comparing by eye against uncompressed RAW.
You can do it yourself. Use dcraw to convert DNG RAW into TIFF RAW (so it becomes "normal" TIFF) and then it's easy to simulate compressing with any codec.
There are some imperfection in this comparison and this is still not ProRes RAW. You would need to record DNG uncompressed and ProRes RAW with Atomos at the same time and then we could measure it precisely.

Everything that I've seen has shown all previous standards of ProRes have standard bitrates per specific resolutions and framerate. Sure Apple can add more but my point is that Apple has to create that new version of it and license it out in order for camera manufacturers to use it. That isn't the case with compressed CDNG as is the case with Kinefinity's cameras. Not once has BMD shipped a camera with 7:1 compressed cDNG but Kinefinity implemented it in their cameras and they played back in Resolve immediately.


This is about the same with ProRes. Different modes are just different target bitrates but engine is exactly the same so ProRes decoding works on any mode. You can create 2:1 ProRes with ffmpeg and this will decode by any ProRes decoder as well. I don't think you need to license per profile.

Of course it's a different form of compression. Why does that matter? I'm pretty sure most effects houses prefer to shoot lossless codecs over compressed ones any day. Sure, you can't use any tricks but no body is really asking it to. It's all the benefit of uncompressed data but at a smaller file size. It's great to have that option and PRR doesn't provide it.


Problem with lossless is that compression is at about 2:1 most (less in reality) and some frames can be even as low as 1:3:1, so in terms of storage speeds you still have to guarantee speeds like for uncompressed. 3:1 lossy is good compromise even for high-end shooting as long as codec is decent. Sony F65 uses 3:1 as far as I understand as best setting.
Offline
User avatar

RealSting

  • Posts: 22
  • Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 9:16 am
  • Real Name: Jay Ryde

BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostSat May 19, 2018 9:49 am

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:
Mark Grgurev wrote:I'm curious to see how they compare in that regard. How did you do your simulation? I'm assuming ProRes 4444 HQ on a monochromatic video? What did you find?

ProRes444 is better than 3:1 DNG and ProRes444 XQ (which is about 4:5:1) is way better. This is comparing by eye against uncompressed RAW.
You can do it yourself. Use dcraw to convert DNG RAW into TIFF RAW (so it becomes "normal" TIFF) and then it's easy to simulate compressing with any codec.
There are some imperfection in this comparison and this is still not ProRes RAW. You would need to record DNG uncompressed and ProRes RAW with Atomos at the same time and then we could measure it precisely.

Everything that I've seen has shown all previous standards of ProRes have standard bitrates per specific resolutions and framerate. Sure Apple can add more but my point is that Apple has to create that new version of it and license it out in order for camera manufacturers to use it. That isn't the case with compressed CDNG as is the case with Kinefinity's cameras. Not once has BMD shipped a camera with 7:1 compressed cDNG but Kinefinity implemented it in their cameras and they played back in Resolve immediately.


This is about the same with ProRes. Different modes are just different target bitrates but engine is exactly the same so ProRes decoding works on any mode. You can create 2:1 ProRes with ffmpeg and this will decode by any ProRes decoder as well. I don't think you need to license per profile.

Of course it's a different form of compression. Why does that matter? I'm pretty sure most effects houses prefer to shoot lossless codecs over compressed ones any day. Sure, you can't use any tricks but no body is really asking it to. It's all the benefit of uncompressed data but at a smaller file size. It's great to have that option and PRR doesn't provide it.


Problem with lossless is that compression is at about 2:1 most (less in reality) and some frames can be even as low as 1:3:1, so in terms of storage speeds you still have to guarantee speeds like for uncompressed. 3:1 lossy is good compromise even for high-end shooting as long as codec is decent. Sony F65 uses 3:1 as far as I understand as best setting.


I used a £300 X920 panasonic camcorder.. 4:2:0, H.264 - compressed to ****! Artefacted to Hell.. about as flexible to edit as being in a straightjacket whilst having a gun to my head.. But the edit just won me £42k Production project! So please please.. stop with all this macho techy ****.. my OP was kindly answered by the good people here and I thank you for that

If we must persist .. Could we talk about the incredibly rare topic of actual filmmaking instead?!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 782
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostSat May 19, 2018 10:31 am

An issue with ProRes Raw, that's not an issue with the pockets bit depth, is it's bit depth. Dolby uses 12 bits for hdr delivery, to make it look acceptable, Red etc is using 16 bits pro. Personally, I want to use 2 bits+ over the delivery for post. But ProRes raw doesn't reach up that far. So, BM has an advantage using an alternative to ProRes Raw, until ProRes expands bit depth. ProRes Raw seems to fit the TV market best.

Personally, with hardware the way it is, I prefer ProRes to wavelets. So, ProRes Raw has good potential.
Offline

Uli Plank

  • Posts: 3076
  • Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:48 am

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostSat May 19, 2018 11:04 am

Well, I'm not sure the whole internal chain is 16 bit with Red. They never clearly answered any question in that direction…

And, if Dolby wants 12 bits for HDR delivery that would mean that your home TV has to offer a lot more nits than today. Remember: 1600 nits is only about two stops more than todays average HDTV flat, which has around 300-400 and is happy with 8 bit. So, for TV 12 bit might be enough overhead for grading.

Nobody can afford the Dolby monitors with all those nits beyond 2K (or the energy bill coming with that).
Resolve Studio and Fusion Studio
iMac 2017 Radeon Pro 580 8 GB VRAM and 32 GB RAM
Offline
User avatar

Rakesh Malik

  • Posts: 2014
  • Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:01 am
  • Location: Tacoma, WA

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostSat May 19, 2018 3:49 pm

Red's system is 16-bit linear through post, as is Sony's. I'm not sure that was the case with the Mysterium-X, but that was quite a while ago.

The only real advantage that ProResRaw offers over CinemaDNG is in playback overhead.

And in reality most VFX folks work with compressed raw; a lot favor Red cameras for that because of the 16-bit recording as well as the resolution, and they mostly recommend 5:1. I think BMD's 4:1 would satisfy the VFX folks. While "only" 12-bit, it's log encoded, so no slouch on detail.

AFAIK BMD is planning ProResRaw support for Resolve, though I'm not sure when. I suspect that if there's enough demand that BMD will start supporting it in the cameras.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Rakesh Malik
Cinematographer, photographer, adventurer, martial artist
http://WinterLight.studio
System:
HP Spectre x360 Kaby Lake-R w/ 1080Ti eGPU in RazerCore
Offline

Andrew Kolakowski

  • Posts: 3935
  • Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:20 am

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostSat May 19, 2018 7:34 pm

They record into 16bit, but I would be surprised if there is real 16bit worth of data there.
Offline

Uli Plank

  • Posts: 3076
  • Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:48 am

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostSat May 19, 2018 10:05 pm

That's what I was referring to, just what happens in the camera before recording?
Don't get me wrong, I like Red, we have three of their cameras.

But don't equal 5:1 compression from Red (which is wavelet) to 5:1 or 4:1 in DNG. Higher compression ratios in wavelet are just softening the image. I've actually seen DoPs using that fact in a pinch when they wanted some softening and had no diffusion at hand.
Resolve Studio and Fusion Studio
iMac 2017 Radeon Pro 580 8 GB VRAM and 32 GB RAM
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 782
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostSun May 20, 2018 2:21 am

From what I read, somewhere, somebody was saying that they use 14 bit ADC going into 16 bits (ADC data is not all that is going on down there).

Normal 8 bit grading is aimed at 50-100 nits. TV HDR does 10 bits, and Dolby did testing to come up with 12 bits and 10,000 nits. But 12 bits recording was thought premium for post work on 8 bits deliveries, 10 bits less so. That's 4 bits over padding, which would be 14 bits for 10 bit delivery, 16 bits for 12 bit delivery, plus if their is any expansion in the padding numbers, it could even be up to 18 bits and 15/16 bits for 10 bits. So, 14 bits seems like a good compromise. 12 bits is probably going be OK to do 10 bits, but silky fine for 8 bit work. 10 bits OK for 8 bit, but a strain on 10 bits.

Of course, it could all be a bit better than that, you would have to ask a group of different industry researchers who did testing to be certain. But to be certain, our eyes adopt to 30-40 stop range, and ultimate cameras may have to go to 30-40 linear bits and stops for computational photography.
Offline

Uli Plank

  • Posts: 3076
  • Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:48 am

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostSun May 20, 2018 5:30 am

Our eyes can adapt to about 30 stops, right. BUT:

– Adapting from dark to light takes 1-3 seconds.
– Adapting from light to dark can take up to 20 minutes.
– Our eyes are scanning the scene, constantly adapting and our brain creates an illusion of that scene.

When have you ever been blinded by an image of the sun in cinema?
We'd need to set up a small fusion reactor do reproduce that experience, I'm afraid ;-)
Resolve Studio and Fusion Studio
iMac 2017 Radeon Pro 580 8 GB VRAM and 32 GB RAM
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 782
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostSun May 20, 2018 9:09 am

Yep. I think it is 30 stops with one sort of vision, 20 stops with night but, both overlap by 10 stops, where the messo vision is. But maybe it was 30 stops overall. The point being, maxining out the range gives you a chance to render what the eye can see at any brightness range, and pick and choose in post. I'm happy with the 16.5 which is supposed to be what your eyes can concentrate in a scene, but more is better to play around with professionally.
Offline

Andrew Kolakowski

  • Posts: 3935
  • Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:20 am

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostSun May 20, 2018 4:57 pm

RealSting wrote:
I used a £300 X920 panasonic camcorder.. 4:2:0, H.264 - compressed to ****! Artefacted to Hell.. about as flexible to edit as being in a straightjacket whilst having a gun to my head.. But the edit just won me £42k Production project! So please please.. stop with all this macho techy ****.. my OP was kindly answered by the good people here and I thank you for that

If we must persist .. Could we talk about the incredibly rare topic of actual filmmaking instead?!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


You asked techy question, you getting techy answers :)
It's easy to talk about tech things as they are mainly based on facts.
Cinematography is an art and not so easy to "discuss".
Offline

Savannah Miller

  • Posts: 153
  • Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 1:02 pm

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostMon May 21, 2018 12:02 am

I work in the VFX industry and I prefer Alexa. Even Prores 1080p 4:4:4 which 95% of shows shoot on is more than enough. And when they do slow motion and it's 4:2:2 HQ, even that material is surprisingly robust even when doing green screen keying. You obviously need to know what you're doing to make it work, but it's very doable.
Offline

Leon Benzakein

  • Posts: 770
  • Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 3:40 pm

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostMon May 21, 2018 1:56 am

Allow me to interject this information into this discussion to see where your imaginations will take you.
From the BMD website.

Expansion Port
High speed USB-C connection
for direct external recording!
The Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K features an innovative high speed USB-C Expansion Port. USB-C is fast, flexible and even provides power, so it’s quickly becoming standard on all modern computers and devices. The massive bandwidth of USB-C makes it possible to connect external accessories such as flash drives and SSDs for significantly longer recording times. This can be important when shooting high quality lossless 12-bit RAW or even high frame rate 60 frame per second 4K. Best of all, when you’re done shooting you can use the same drive for editing and post production!

Now if Atomos had a USB-C I/O on their recorders??????????
Television: Lighting/Cameraman, O.B. Camera Operator, Grip, Lamp Operator
Film: Grip, Lamp Operator
Theater: Lighting Designer, Light board Operator, Stage Electrician, Stage Management
Offline
User avatar

Robert Niessner

  • Posts: 1496
  • Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:51 am
  • Location: Graz, Austria

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostMon May 21, 2018 6:59 am

Leon Benzakein wrote:Now if Atomos had a USB-C I/O on their recorders??????????


So what?
With the BMPCC 4K you do not need an Atomos recorder to record RAW DNG externally - you can just use cheap external SSDs. The whole Atomos recorder thing is for workflows where this was not possible because the camera was just sending a data stream but could not write to an external drive.
Robert Niessner
LAUFBILDkommission
Graz / Austria
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Blackmagic Camera Blog (German):
http://laufbildkommission.wordpress.com

Read the blog in English via Google Translate:
http://tinyurl.com/pjf6a3m
Offline

Leon Benzakein

  • Posts: 770
  • Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 3:40 pm

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostMon May 21, 2018 2:45 pm

Robert Niessner wrote:So what?



Some of the conversation has been about recording ProRes Raw and raw being supported only over SDI.

I am pointing out that Raw is also supported over USB-C and if it was possible to tap that feed to a recorder that records ProRes Raw.

Did you get out of the wrong side of the bed this morning?
Television: Lighting/Cameraman, O.B. Camera Operator, Grip, Lamp Operator
Film: Grip, Lamp Operator
Theater: Lighting Designer, Light board Operator, Stage Electrician, Stage Management
Offline
User avatar

Robert Niessner

  • Posts: 1496
  • Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:51 am
  • Location: Graz, Austria

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostMon May 21, 2018 3:46 pm

Leon Benzakein wrote:
Robert Niessner wrote:So what?

Did you get out of the wrong side of the bed this morning?


So sorry Leon if this came over in a grudgy way. It was not meant to - just typed in a hurry and should have re-read it ;)


Leon Benzakein wrote:Some of the conversation has been about recording ProRes Raw and raw being supported only over SDI.

I am pointing out that Raw is also supported over USB-C and if it was possible to tap that feed to a recorder that records ProRes Raw.


Yes I got what you meant. But for that the camera would have to output a compatible data stream. As far as I can see Atomos is not able to convert a cDNG RAW stream into ProRes RAW. The camera must send this so they can grab the stream.
So if BMD decides to support ProRes RAW you won't need Atomos - and if they didn't, Atomos can't help either.
Robert Niessner
LAUFBILDkommission
Graz / Austria
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Blackmagic Camera Blog (German):
http://laufbildkommission.wordpress.com

Read the blog in English via Google Translate:
http://tinyurl.com/pjf6a3m
Offline

Leon Benzakein

  • Posts: 770
  • Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 3:40 pm

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostMon May 21, 2018 4:52 pm

Robert Niessner wrote:But for that the camera would have to output a compatible data stream. As far as I can see Atomos is not able to convert a cDNG RAW stream into ProRes RAW. The camera must send this so they can grab the stream.
So if BMD decides to support ProRes RAW you won't need Atomos - and if they didn't, Atomos can't help either.


All very true.

Just thinking way out of the box.
Something that BMD seem to be very good at.
Television: Lighting/Cameraman, O.B. Camera Operator, Grip, Lamp Operator
Film: Grip, Lamp Operator
Theater: Lighting Designer, Light board Operator, Stage Electrician, Stage Management
Offline

Andrew Kolakowski

  • Posts: 3935
  • Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:20 am

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostMon May 21, 2018 6:08 pm

Robert Niessner wrote:
Yes I got what you meant. But for that the camera would have to output a compatible data stream. As far as I can see Atomos is not able to convert a cDNG RAW stream into ProRes RAW. The camera must send this so they can grab the stream.
So if BMD decides to support ProRes RAW you won't need Atomos - and if they didn't, Atomos can't help either.


Not really. Once you get RAW out of camera (which is tricky part as every camera does it differently) you can record it into whatever you want. There isn't any strict need for SDI. Anything will work- SDI, HDMI, USB C etc. as long as there is enough bandwidth. Atomos can encode any RAW to ProRes RAW (regardless how they get it out of camera). The only thing which could stop them are possible licensing restrictions.

If Atomos is not limited by licensing restrictions they can convert DNG RAW into ProRes RAW. If Apple ever releases SDK for PC/OSX you also will be able to do it, like it can be done with Cineform RAW.

RAW is nothing special- it's just some video data. Once you receive and understand it then you can compressed with anything DNG RAW , ProRes RAW, Cineform RAW or even to any of the "standard" codecs. You can for example compress RAW into DNxHR. If you write an app which allows for manual interpretation that this DNxHR file is carrying RAW (which needs to be debayered etc.) it will work the same as "special" RAW codecs. RAW is simple monochromatic data with some metadata. Any codec can in theory carry it, including h264.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 782
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostTue May 22, 2018 8:35 am

There was a guy years ago that did a conversion that directly tapped a panasonic camera's three chip raw and recorded it. I'm tempted by that.
Offline
User avatar

Robert Niessner

  • Posts: 1496
  • Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:51 am
  • Location: Graz, Austria

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostTue May 22, 2018 9:27 am

Wayne Steven wrote:There was a guy years ago that did a conversion that directly tapped a panasonic camera's three chip raw and recorded it. I'm tempted by that.


I remember that guy. It was a DVX100 he hacked to directly grab the data from the sensor.
Robert Niessner
LAUFBILDkommission
Graz / Austria
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Blackmagic Camera Blog (German):
http://laufbildkommission.wordpress.com

Read the blog in English via Google Translate:
http://tinyurl.com/pjf6a3m
Offline

Mark Grgurev

  • Posts: 59
  • Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 7:22 am

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostTue May 22, 2018 9:39 am

Wayne Steven wrote:There was a guy years ago that did a conversion that directly tapped a panasonic camera's three chip raw and recorded it. I'm tempted by that.


You're thinking of Juan Pertierra and that was about 14 years ago lol I know because I was involved in the thread and I like to take credit for pointing out to him that there was some pixel shift which is what allowed the Andromeda to get a faux 720p out of the DVX100 :-P
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 782
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostTue May 22, 2018 8:39 pm

Mark Grgurev wrote:
Wayne Steven wrote:There was a guy years ago that did a conversion that directly tapped a panasonic camera's three chip raw and recorded it. I'm tempted by that.


You're thinking of Juan Pertierra and that was about 14 years ago lol I know because I was involved in the thread and I like to take credit for pointing out to him that there was some pixel shift which is what allowed the Andromeda to get a faux 720p out of the DVX100 :-P


Yeah, thanks for that pixel shifting Mark. Good one.
Offline
User avatar

RealSting

  • Posts: 22
  • Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 9:16 am
  • Real Name: Jay Ryde

Re: BMPCC 4K HDMI RAW output

PostFri May 25, 2018 12:20 pm

Leon Benzakein wrote:
Robert Niessner wrote:So what?



Some of the conversation has been about recording ProRes Raw and raw being supported only over SDI.

I am pointing out that Raw is also supported over USB-C and if it was possible to tap that feed to a recorder that records ProRes Raw.

Did you get out of the wrong side of the bed this morning?


LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Return to Cinematography

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests