Blackmagic RAW

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

rick.lang

  • Posts: 9564
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:41 pm
  • Location: Victoria BC Canada

Blackmagic RAW

PostThu Sep 27, 2018 3:32 pm

Victor, raw on a Blackmagic Camera is, and has always been, full sensor or a crop of the full sensor unlike ProRes that may downscale in camera from the full sensor or be a cropped window if you want that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by rick.lang on Sat Sep 29, 2018 3:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
Rick Lang
Offline

Victor Blondel

  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 11:44 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostThu Sep 27, 2018 3:54 pm

rick.lang wrote:Victor, raw is, and has always been, full sensor or a crop of the full sensor unlike ProRes that may downscale in camera from the full sensor or be a cropped window if you want that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I knew it was like this on RED cameras, but didn't know it had to be like this for all cameras.
(Nothing's impossible ?)

so Zak, with that difference of bitrate,
how come when using my 250GB SSD, the Ursa is displaying
179min left in 1080pAPR422HQ,
and
108min left in 4,6K BRAW Q5
?
------
Victor Blondel
www.victorblondel.fr
Offline

Zak Ray

  • Posts: 96
  • Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2014 8:11 pm

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostThu Sep 27, 2018 4:21 pm

Q0 and Q5 are highly variable because the estimate is constantly changing based on the footage you're shooting. I used the Cameras + Formats app for my estimate, which uses the same bitrate as 12:1 for it's Q5 calculations (as recommended by BMD).

So perhaps 12:1 would be a better talking point for the conversation.
Ursa Mini 4.6K / Nvidia GTX-1080 / Intel i7-6850K / 32GB RAM
Offline

Chris Gosling

  • Posts: 48
  • Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 4:56 pm

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostThu Sep 27, 2018 4:25 pm

Victor,

When using Q0 or Q5 remember they are variable bitrates so the initial time remaining is not a true indication. This number changes once you start filming, try shooting a few minutes of something using Q5 and see how it affects your record time.

Think of it like the distance left calculations in your car - drive 45mph and you can last 600 miles - drive 75mph and you can last 450.
Offline

Denny Smith

  • Posts: 9494
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 4:19 pm
  • Location: USA, Northern Calif.

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostThu Sep 27, 2018 6:00 pm

The crop from full gate 4K DCS at 17:9 (about 18.8mm x 10mm) to UHD 16:9, at about 17.8mmx10mm, the only loss is a slight reduction in AOV and lowering the resolution to its native UHD, from full 4K. In ProRes, the entire sensor may be used to downres the recording, but your aspect ratio for UHD or HD is going to change to 16:9.
Cheers
Denny Smith
SHA Productions
Offline

Victor Blondel

  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 11:44 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostThu Sep 27, 2018 7:48 pm

Chris Gosling wrote:Victor,

When using Q0 or Q5 remember they are variable bitrates so the initial time remaining is not a true indication. This number changes once you start filming, try shooting a few minutes of something using Q5 and see how it affects your record time.

Think of it like the distance left calculations in your car - drive 45mph and you can last 600 miles - drive 75mph and you can last 450.


I understand that clearly.

But I shot a few seconds of a still scene with no mouvement at all, and still, the raw file was heavier than the prores file. So I can't really assume that my Q5 files are going to be lighter than my prores files, can I ?
------
Victor Blondel
www.victorblondel.fr
Offline

Chris Gosling

  • Posts: 48
  • Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 4:56 pm

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostThu Sep 27, 2018 8:31 pm

Victor,

I found that I needed to record for at least 10 seconds if not more for it to kick in.

Maybe try a 1 minute clip and see if that helps.
Offline

Zak Ray

  • Posts: 96
  • Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2014 8:11 pm

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostThu Sep 27, 2018 9:19 pm

Also consider 12:1 rather than Q5.
Ursa Mini 4.6K / Nvidia GTX-1080 / Intel i7-6850K / 32GB RAM
Offline
User avatar

timbutt2

  • Posts: 1032
  • Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 10:32 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostFri Sep 28, 2018 1:40 am

Zak Ray wrote:Also consider 12:1 rather than Q5.

Honestly, after shooting CinemaDNG 4:1 for so long I'm fine with using Blackmagic RAW 8:1 for serious projects based on the quality I've been seeing from various test videos. Where DNG 4:1 at 4.6K 16x9 would get 30 minutes on a 256 GB card you'd be stuck at 2 hours for 1TB. Using Cameras+Formats I've discovered that even if you shoot 1TB per day you'd get 4 hrs and 45 minutes worth of footage for BRAW 8:1. That means all you need is 4 256GB cards in your camera bag. It also is 2 hours and 45 minutes more footage in the same amount of hard drive space.

Shooting BRAW 12:1 4.6K 16x9 is even more insane! Cameras+Formats shows 1TB is 26 hours worth of footage! For the most part you can get 8 hours 24 minutes worth of footage at 1920x1080 ProRes 444. So, that means you can shoot 4.6K BRAW 12:1 and get more footage than HD ProRes 444!

This means that if I know I don't need anything more than HD I would still shoot BRAW 12:1 at 4.6K. As long as the sharpness is good enough then I'm fine. Overall, I'm probably never going to shoot UHD ProRes ever again.

All I need is for the original URSA Mini 4.6K to get Blackmagic RAW. I'm sold on the format.
"Movies are not watched. They are an encounter with a life's experience not your own." - Tim Buttner (timbutt2)

Cameras: URSA Mini 4.6K EF & Cinema Camera 2.5K EF
Computers: iMac 5K (Late 2015) & MacBook Pro Retina 15.4in (Early 2013)
Offline
User avatar

rick.lang

  • Posts: 9564
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:41 pm
  • Location: Victoria BC Canada

Blackmagic RAW

PostFri Sep 28, 2018 3:15 am

Very apropos, Timbutt. I’ve only recently started shooting ProRes 444 2K instead of CDNG raw 3:1, so the difference is very significant to me when I have the option of using BRAW 4.6K 2.4:1 all the time at a higher compression that still offers what I need for clients that ask for 1080p deliverables. No worries, eh?

Well, one worry: need to have BRAW on the Mini 4.6K camera.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Rick Lang
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1265
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostFri Sep 28, 2018 2:34 pm

rick.lang wrote:Victor, raw is, and has always been, full sensor or a crop of the full sensor unlike ProRes that may downscale in camera from the full sensor or be a cropped window if you want that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Sony has sensors with a Quarter resolution Bayer pattern, each of the Bayer pixels consists of 4 pixels of that colour. I think each subpixel also forms a Bayer like group with surrounding subpixels.
Offline

Zak Ray

  • Posts: 96
  • Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2014 8:11 pm

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostFri Sep 28, 2018 2:53 pm

I wonder if BMD cameras will ever offer proxy recording. Especially with BRAW being unsupported by every major NLE except Resolve, would be great to be able to record ProRes Proxy at the same time. Though I'm sure battery life would take a significant hit...

In particular I'm thinking about Premiere and how it STILL doesn't support the compressed raw flavors, years after BMD added them. Here's hoping they don't repeat that with BRAW.
Ursa Mini 4.6K / Nvidia GTX-1080 / Intel i7-6850K / 32GB RAM
Offline

Andrew Kolakowski

  • Posts: 4350
  • Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:20 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostFri Sep 28, 2018 3:51 pm

I would not count for compressed DNG support in Premiere. This is most likely dead now.
BM RAW will come for sure.
Offline

michaeldhead

  • Posts: 293
  • Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 5:41 pm

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostFri Sep 28, 2018 4:14 pm

Zak Ray wrote:Especially with BRAW being unsupported by every major NLE except Resolve,


It came out just over a week ago. Coding takes time, even with the SDK that BMD is giving away for free.


Zak Ray wrote:In particular I'm thinking about Premiere and how it STILL doesn't support the compressed raw flavors, years after BMD added them. Here's hoping they don't repeat that with BRAW.


I'm pretty sure an SDK for compressed raw was not released.

The SDK for Braw is already out. For free.
Michael D Head
www.michaeldhead.com
producer/writer/director/DP
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1265
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostFri Sep 28, 2018 4:15 pm

DNG is a stills standard used on cameras and phones, how come premier would at least be set up to take in stills? If you can do that, you might aswell do the video version?
Offline
User avatar

Rakesh Malik

  • Posts: 2297
  • Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:01 am
  • Location: Tacoma, WA

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostFri Sep 28, 2018 5:47 pm

Zak Ray wrote:Generally I agree with this sentiment, and it's one of the reasons I don't like shooting on Red cameras-- in order to shoot the full S35 area, you're shooting at a huge 7.5K resolution.


And this is why companies like Red and Black Magic offer options like on-board ProRes and DNxHD.
Rakesh Malik
Cinematographer, photographer, adventurer, martial artist
http://WinterLight.studio
System:
HP Spectre x360 Kaby Lake-R w/ 1080Ti eGPU in RazerCore
Offline

Zak Ray

  • Posts: 96
  • Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2014 8:11 pm

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostFri Sep 28, 2018 6:03 pm

Rakesh Malik wrote:And this is why companies like Red and Black Magic offer options like on-board ProRes and DNxHD.


Sure, but then you're not shooting raw, which (at least as far as the marketing dept is concerned) the "whole point" of shooting on a Red.

That said, the Gemini sensor is 5K at S35, which is a nice in-between.
Ursa Mini 4.6K / Nvidia GTX-1080 / Intel i7-6850K / 32GB RAM
Offline

Mark Grgurev

  • Posts: 158
  • Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 7:22 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostFri Sep 28, 2018 9:59 pm

michaeldhead wrote:I'm pretty sure an SDK for compressed raw was not released.


It didn't need to be. According to Wikipedia, Blackmagic's compressed CDNGs use "a 12-bit Huffman Coding by patching jpeg-9a for 12-bit support" so most of the code needed to support it would already be in any NLE that support Motion Jpeg or Jpeg. An NLE would just need to enable 12-bit support in their Jpeg code.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CinemaDNG

Wayne Steven wrote:Sony has sensors with a Quarter resolution Bayer pattern, each of the Bayer pixels consists of 4 pixels of that colour. I think each subpixel also forms a Bayer like group with surrounding subpixels.


Quarter resolution Bayer pattern doesn't really make much sense. Are you talking about their Quad-bayer thing? That just means that each color in a Bayer quartet, by-itself, has 4 photosites but they're not completely independent. This is literally only used so that half of the pixels in sub-pixel can be set to half-integration and the other half to full so that they can do an HDR mode.

Separate from that, they also support a binned readout mode where the data from 4 Bayer quartets can be averaged into one Bayer quartet. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any reason that this couldn't done after the sensor readout. Though to a RAW purest, doing it during readout would still qualify it as RAW while doing it afterwards wouldn't lol
Offline
User avatar

Rakesh Malik

  • Posts: 2297
  • Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:01 am
  • Location: Tacoma, WA

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostSat Sep 29, 2018 12:56 am

Zak Ray wrote:Sure, but then you're not shooting raw, which (at least as far as the marketing dept is concerned) the "whole point" of shooting on a Red.


If that were the case, then why do you think that Red added ProRes and DNxHR options to its cameras? They're there because customers asked for those options. The same is true for BMD; BMD cameras are designed for shooting in raw, but there are a lot of times when raw is simply overkill.

It's for those times that Red developed IPP2, and why Black Magic continues to evolve its own color science. It's to get a better image right out of the camera, while still giving you the option of using raw when the occasion warrants it.
Rakesh Malik
Cinematographer, photographer, adventurer, martial artist
http://WinterLight.studio
System:
HP Spectre x360 Kaby Lake-R w/ 1080Ti eGPU in RazerCore
Offline
User avatar

rick.lang

  • Posts: 9564
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:41 pm
  • Location: Victoria BC Canada

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostSat Sep 29, 2018 3:47 am

Wayne, I corrected my post re raw windows to refer to BMD cameras.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Rick Lang
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1265
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostSat Sep 29, 2018 8:29 am

Mark Grgurev wrote:
michaeldhead wrote:I'm pretty sure an SDK for compressed raw was not released.


It didn't need to be. According to Wikipedia, Blackmagic's compressed CDNGs use "a 12-bit Huffman Coding by patching jpeg-9a for 12-bit support" so most of the code needed to support it would already be in any NLE that support Motion Jpeg or Jpeg. An NLE would just need to enable 12-bit support in their Jpeg code.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CinemaDNG

Wayne Steven wrote:Sony has sensors with a Quarter resolution Bayer pattern, each of the Bayer pixels consists of 4 pixels of that colour. I think each subpixel also forms a Bayer like group with surrounding subpixels.


Quarter resolution Bayer pattern doesn't really make much sense. Are you talking about their Quad-bayer thing? That just means that each color in a Bayer quartet, by-itself, has 4 photosites but they're not completely independent. This is literally only used so that half of the pixels in sub-pixel can be set to half-integration and the other half to full so that they can do an HDR mode.

Separate from that, they also support a binned readout mode where the data from 4 Bayer quartets can be averaged into one Bayer quartet. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any reason that this couldn't done after the sensor readout. Though to a RAW purest, doing it during readout would still qualify it as RAW while doing it afterwards wouldn't lol


Yes, I left out the hdr thing, as it was about how a lower resolution Bayer pattern could be done. I wonder, if you left out the hdr pixel thing, how effective it would de-mosaic for quality? I imagine there might be a quality drop, but fur my aims, that's not too bad if it's slight.
Offline

Gavin_c_clark

  • Posts: 176
  • Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 3:51 pm

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostSat Sep 29, 2018 9:22 am

Wow. I had a little bit of time to play about with braw this morning.

I shot a few clips at iso 1600, and a couple of shots about three stops under just to see how the noise looks...

This stuff is amazing. My hats off to the team at blackmagic. ISO 1600 is absolutely an option, even with a touch of under exposure.

And the beauty- it edits amazingly well. In an hd timeline I can have four simulataneous, full 4.6k streams, running with a basic correction and opacity at 50, all at 24fps with that little green dot running... all straight off the card over usb 3.0 on my three year old MacBook Pro whilst feeding a mini monitor - I cannot wait to see how the Titan handles this on Monday.

Going to do some further digging next week because I have a rare week off between jobs. But I am stunned. Well done blackmagic
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1265
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostSat Sep 29, 2018 12:26 pm

I'm getting more unsettled about the pocket 4k. Ever since it was revealed there has been constant little things. What we see here, is what a mobile phone should get able to do in BRaw with 15 stops.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1265
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostSat Sep 29, 2018 12:27 pm

But there are other ways to do things with similar quality. There is even finally an 8k small sensor out (Nokia had enough resolution years ago). Older forms of the technology used in the Alexa should be out of patent soon. I've got an old camera that may have it, nice, more similar to the image style of the original pocket (but over 16 stops single exposure, but pretty noisy). Plenty of alternatives to use. But you go look at most mobile phones, and they are built to defeat good video, "pro" mode for stills (not that good) switch over to video, kiss useful controls goodbye, dumb, dumb, dumb.

So, I suppose I'm saying, apart from putting together a phone camera development team myself, BM could make a $20 camera app that does 12:1 (and Resolve Mini $40, on Android, use the Linux code with machine code sections, through a Linux translation layer/hypervisor, which basically handels just BRaw, ProRes etc and consumer codecsm. For tablets/Phablets). Then anybody could try it on a certified phone model. (Please note: wifi ac and usb3 are preferred recording avenues for better performance, to bypass the android filesystem).
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1265
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostSat Sep 29, 2018 2:48 pm

I'm going say something pretty radical that might answer the BRaw 3:1 low detail quality, that it might not exist. I forgot about it when I was sick, and presumably it's already done. But, these test frames they are not on screen grabs are they, have you tried rendering out the frames uncompressed to see if they have more detail?

I say the above, because one way of speeding up editing and colouring etc, is to use a lower quality proxy data So, it is possible that things get done in lower quality live, and then produced correctly latter/in background.

Mark Grgurev wrote:
Oyvind Fiksdal wrote:I for one will use BRAW as a sub to Prores, not DNG.


Same here. I love that BRAW is an option but if I were going to decide between 3:1 BRAW and 4:1 CDNG, I'd go with CDNG.

Here's another example that illustrates the difference in detail between the codecs.

Image

Sure there's more false color in the CDNG but look at that shirt detail.
Offline

Mark Grgurev

  • Posts: 158
  • Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 7:22 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostSat Sep 29, 2018 4:52 pm

Wayne Steven wrote:I'm going say something pretty radical that might answer the BRaw 3:1 low detail quality, that it might not exist. I forgot about it when I was sick, and presumably it's already done. But, these test frames they are not on screen grabs are they, have you tried rendering out the frames uncompressed to see if they have more detail?

I say the above, because one way of speeding up editing and colouring etc, is to use a lower quality proxy data So, it is possible that things get done in lower quality live, and then produced correctly latter/in background.


Those are screenshots but they definitely aren't from proxy files. Also I didn't take them, I just got downloaded them from somebody else.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1265
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostSun Sep 30, 2018 2:23 am

I didn't mean proxy files. But I'm talking about proxy display data to manipulate things faster for real time editing. If that was the case (say if it's all 12:1+ display version) here, I would set it up to complete full render when pause was hit, so people could Barrie down on what they were looking at. If it was that way, it might mean you need a certain amount processing power before lowest compression will display at original quality. I'll try posting a link over to another thread where there is a guy testing the image. I mean, BRaw is a real selling point for me, if it renders at least as good as CDNG 4:1, with the retail. The detail in the cloth is great in CDNG, and it is something I might use in certain shots, to frame what is to make it stand out. So texture is important. To make an image live and breath
Offline

giuseppeflandoli

  • Posts: 20
  • Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 3:18 am
  • Location: guayaquil
  • Real Name: Pablo Giuseppe Flandoli B

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostMon Oct 01, 2018 12:23 am

Victor Blondel wrote:Just tested Blackmagic RAW on my Ursa Mini Pro...

really disappointed when I discovered that anything lower that 4,6K is cropped. Even if I understand the idea of using the whole sensor, I thought a reinterpolation would have been possible

I was really enjoying the idea that this Blackmagic RAW could make RAW affordable and usable for people like me : documentary shooters who shoots A LOT of footage.

But even if the bitrate is equivalent to prores, I'd never shoot in 4,6K for a full documentary as it would take too much space...even 4K is too cropped, don't even mention HD


You cannot downres a RAW file without data loss, so if you could, it would not be called RAW. Use 444 XQ if you want high data levels on a lower res file.
Cinematógrafo
www.giuseppeflandoli.com
Mail: info@giuseppeflandoli.com
Cel: (+593) 98.963.3933
Offline

Denny Smith

  • Posts: 9494
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 4:19 pm
  • Location: USA, Northern Calif.

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostMon Oct 01, 2018 12:49 am

Raw my it’s a tire is a 1:1 pixel representation of the image, so 4.6K is full gate, 4K slightly smaller, but still a S35 area, UHD smaller yet, close to STD 35mm, and HD would be slightly less than a S16 size crop.
You also have a 2K crop with is slightly larger than S16 and will downres nicely to HD in Resolve for delivery. To get a full gate 4.6 sensor area, in UHD or HD, yiu need to shoot in ProRes, not Raw, or even BRaw, which is still a Raw file.

With BRaw, you get much smaller file sizes, so why not shoot in full gate 4.6K to get the most from your camera, in BRaw, then downres it to what ever you want in post using a Resolve.
Cheers
Last edited by Denny Smith on Mon Oct 01, 2018 1:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
Denny Smith
SHA Productions
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1265
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostMon Oct 01, 2018 1:45 am

You actually can do it, but risk loosing a bit of accuracy. I proposed something years back as a way to save data that guess towards the this (I'm not going get into it). But you debayer to accurate 4:4:4 sample, you then down res to another 4:4:4, then you produce a Bayer pattern to compress from that. Obviously a convoluted way of doing it in camera, and maybe not desirable for various cameras hardware processing limitations.
Offline
User avatar

carlomacchiavello

  • Posts: 443
  • Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 6:04 pm
  • Location: italy

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostMon Oct 01, 2018 8:14 pm

i ask to a friend to play a bit with braw and a fixed pattern texture.
i see many test but i prefer to see with my eyes the result.
I saw that against a CDNG 3:1 you can see a bit smoothed dectails, but nothing of real problems.
Only noise smoothed and most of dectails are recovered with a bit of contrast (1.41) and less exposure (-0.42). you can see the difference in 200% pixel peeping, but when you try to see on 100% it's hard to see difference between 3:1 braw vs 3:1 cdng, but also Q0 vs cdng 3:1.
like you can see in these pictures if you can see at 100%
here on 100% is difficult to see big difference between small dectails
Senza titolo 6.jpeg
Senza titolo 6.jpeg (474.14 KiB) Viewed 2675 times

here on 200% you can see difference, but you never see so big and enlarged picture
Senza titolo 12.jpeg
Senza titolo 12.jpeg (559.17 KiB) Viewed 2675 times

naturally this is 1:1 pixel peeping, when you master it for 4k movie theather or uhd for tv you cannot see difference, and if you are so pixel peeper sick... try to do the same with red compression you could hae many surprises.

to me the real difference is the different pattern on noise on light shadow, with compression of braw and prores i see bigger noise size and less sharp noise grain. I prefer fine noise from Cdnd 3:1, but only if you need to master 4k, if you master 2k or fhd is excellent in every different compression, all disappear during compression.
if you work on prores you have the same compression on noise, then with braw you can have more compression and more room to edit color, highlights, etc.

you can download picture from
here http://www.macchiavello.com/servizio/blogs/pixelpeeper_100.zip
and here http://www.macchiavello.com/servizio/blogs/pixelpeeper_200.zip
Offline
User avatar

timbutt2

  • Posts: 1032
  • Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 10:32 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostTue Oct 02, 2018 1:12 am

The only "pixel peeping" applicable to anything that matters for my judgement is cropped sensor at 1080 HD. I've shot both CinemaDNG and ProRes at that setting and would say that as long as Blackmagic RAW holds up under that circumstance, then its passible to a general audience.

I will say that I would love more than anything if Blackmagic RAW enables 120 fps at 4.6K for the next 4.6K Sensor that may possibly also be Dual ISO. By now most of the industry has settled on 4K enough to stay within that resolution. 4.6K Version 2 Sensor could possibly be built to handle those higher frame rates and have that dual ISO to get the best low-light option. Then cropped sensor may be higher at 240 fps, but I wouldn't use that as much because I still barely use 120 fps without consideration that the action must dictate 5X slow-motion.

Yet, the key is that Blackmagic RAW enables the camera team to develop these cameras as they need to. Meanwhile, I'll remind you, Blackmagic's DaVinci Resolve team keeps improving the program. Before long they'll be one of the few "camera manufacturers" that also has a world-class editor, visual effects compositor, audio mixing platform, and color grading tools to seamlessly fit together for the whole production pipeline.

Blackmagic Design is an innovative company. Now that Resolve is where it is I can only imagine how much better the communication will become with the cameras through the Camera Control app that connects via Bluetooth. Imagine that timecode could be generated perfectly enough that all the audio and video is logged into a metadata file readable by Resolve using the Sidecar file. I hope Blackmagic also acquires a company that handles audio recorders for on-set. Imagine how perfect it would be to have Blackmagic Audio Recorders that sync perfectly through Bluetooth with the Blackmagic Cinema Cameras.

Either way, shoot 1920x1080 at 120 fps at each codec (BRAW, CDNG, PR) and compare without zooming in any more on the footage in the computer. Does it hold up across all three flavors? Then Blackmagic RAW is in business to take the next hardware technology where it needs to go.
"Movies are not watched. They are an encounter with a life's experience not your own." - Tim Buttner (timbutt2)

Cameras: URSA Mini 4.6K EF & Cinema Camera 2.5K EF
Computers: iMac 5K (Late 2015) & MacBook Pro Retina 15.4in (Early 2013)
Offline

Oyvind Fiksdal

  • Posts: 60
  • Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2017 7:12 pm

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostTue Oct 02, 2018 11:19 am

Some arm pinching.

Maybe some of you remember the first official Red short “Crossing the line” recorded with the original RED one camera on an early build Redcode RAW?

They posted 4k frame grabs at reduser.net at that time (2007), so everyone could pixel peep. However, Jim and the crew did not get the respond they were looking for. The critic was harsh. I for one thought it looked like upscale 1080p with bad noise reduction going on (pastel look). Most of us didn’t have a 4k monitor at the time and was forced to look at it cropped at 100%. However, downscaled to 1080p and it looked great! Many believed that was the road… Shoot 4k and downscale to 1080p/2k and get a much sharper Full HD/digital cinema image. Redcode RAW have matured over time and have become much better ofcourse.

Thing is. BRAW si just released, and beside being miles better than the first release of the redcode RAW it can also record true 4k with almost no visible loss of quality in 12:1 compression, and you can record on a single SD card for hours in RAW, And you can edit multi camera work on a small laptop in REALTIME without proxy. You cannot do that on any other RAW codec today that I know of. We don’t need to wait for a “BMrocket” coming out... that’s for sure. So I’m thinking… how will this codec mature?

I have maybe criticized the codec for some soft issues. And still stand by that. However, I will look at it as a digital OLPF filter and live with that ;)

This is also something to reflect on (from 2010):
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1265
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostTue Oct 02, 2018 12:08 pm

The CDGN version looks more real, without pixel peeping, on a phone in portrait mode with the landscape picture taking up 2/3rds the width (small). In testing they found people responded more to contrast than resolution.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1265
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostTue Oct 02, 2018 12:16 pm

The early red sensor image was horible to me. They put a plugin guy in charge of colour science and the colour science in my under $100 pocket video camera I liked better. The next X versions until the dragon, I DID NOT LIKE (my old pocket camera still nice). We have these guys around in this part of the industry, and when you talk to them, you realise they are not the geniuses so many fans say they are. In a regular industry they get somebody that knows the stuff already, or can follow a description of whar to do, or a sensor manufacturer' s colour configuration data, and get it done in less than 6 months, not 10x that.

In reality, you could probably make a tool on a phone that auto grades everything to a cinematic use, and just select like between a handful of them, with further tools to fine-tune the look etc, quick, minutes. This could be done with BRaw, it could be done in camera. Hook the camera up to a hotel tv through HDMI or chrome cast, or to a phone, and run the auto grade using wireless mouse/keyboard/phone.
Offline
User avatar

carlomacchiavello

  • Posts: 443
  • Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 6:04 pm
  • Location: italy

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostTue Oct 02, 2018 12:33 pm

Oyvind Fiksdal wrote:You cannot do that on any other RAW codec today that I know of.

you can from 2005 with cineform raw, but ... unfortunately cineform raw is dead from 2013, gopro kill it be cause they decide that people not need raw videos, need bad action cam heavely compressed video :shock: :shock:
cineform raw offert you direct recording (kineinfinity, si2k, cinerecorder), converting from every raw (video and photo) to cineform raw, realtime active metadata to manage lut, color correction, stereoscopic alignment (it allow to manage dual video stream in the same file), direct support on every software that use system codec on win and mac, and more.... but this is only for the past and for who like me have old pro license.
Offline

Oyvind Fiksdal

  • Posts: 60
  • Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2017 7:12 pm

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostTue Oct 02, 2018 1:59 pm

carlomacchiavello wrote:cineform raw offert you direct recording (kineinfinity, si2k, cinerecorder), converting from every raw (video and photo) to cineform raw, realtime active metadata to manage lut, color correction, stereoscopic alignment (it allow to manage dual video stream in the same file)


Yes, I miss the cineform era. Was a bit worried back then, when gopro took over. As turned out to be an actual disaster. Luckily, we now got BRAW as a living breathing substitute.
Offline
User avatar

carlomacchiavello

  • Posts: 443
  • Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 6:04 pm
  • Location: italy

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostTue Oct 02, 2018 2:15 pm

Oyvind Fiksdal wrote:
carlomacchiavello wrote:cineform raw offert you direct recording (kineinfinity, si2k, cinerecorder), converting from every raw (video and photo) to cineform raw, realtime active metadata to manage lut, color correction, stereoscopic alignment (it allow to manage dual video stream in the same file)


Yes, I miss the cineform era. Was a bit worried back then, when gopro took over. As turned out to be an actual disaster. Luckily, we now got BRAW as a living breathing substitute.


the sidecar file is near RedCode idea then cineform database, but could be the start of new Era. i have many hope in braw, be cause is hosted from a big house like Blackmagic, not from a small developer like Newman, which did miracle at time of cineform.
my secret hope is that bmd hire Newman to add active metadata and many more feature on braw and resolve.
Offline

Uli Plank

  • Posts: 3700
  • Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:48 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostTue Oct 02, 2018 5:51 pm

Well, that guy at Red was not just a “plug-in guy”, not even a programmer, but a physicist who specialized in optics. Looking at where Red is now and he still being with them, he must have done a few things right.
And at the time Arri just has a D20/21 with really crappy low-light sensitivity, which was not much more than a nice try aka prototype. And Sony with all their experienced specialists couldn’t do more than advertising a 2/3 sensor camera as good enough for cinema, for which they asked a quarter million.

Red actually was the BM of that time and did some serious ass-kicking. Now it’s BM kicking!

And, BTW, if you want a decent picture from the Sony cameras with pixel binning, you need to change the OLPF on location. So, better think twice what you’re asking for.
Resolve Studio and Fusion Studio
iMac 2017 Radeon Pro 580 8 GB VRAM and 32 GB RAM
Offline
User avatar

rick.lang

  • Posts: 9564
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:41 pm
  • Location: Victoria BC Canada

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostTue Oct 02, 2018 8:51 pm

Uli Plank wrote:... Red actually was the BM of that time and did some serious ass-kicking. Now it’s BM kicking!


“Skate to where the puck is going.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Rick Lang
Offline

WonSeokChoi

  • Posts: 26
  • Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2017 11:55 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostWed Oct 03, 2018 9:32 am

Just downloaded the update and RAW player, but I am trying to import the files into Resolve15, but I can't find them in there?

Is there a workflow manual somewhere?
Offline
User avatar

Robert Niessner

  • Posts: 1767
  • Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:51 am
  • Location: Graz, Austria

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostWed Oct 03, 2018 10:54 am

WonSeokChoi wrote:Just downloaded the update and RAW player, but I am trying to import the files into Resolve15, but I can't find them in there?

Is there a workflow manual somewhere?


Have you updated Resolve to version 15.1?
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

WonSeokChoi

  • Posts: 26
  • Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2017 11:55 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostWed Oct 03, 2018 1:06 pm

Nope, did it now. Thanks
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1265
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostWed Oct 03, 2018 2:12 pm

Oyvind Fiksdal wrote:
carlomacchiavello wrote:cineform raw offert you direct recording (kineinfinity, si2k, cinerecorder), converting from every raw (video and photo) to cineform raw, realtime active metadata to manage lut, color correction, stereoscopic alignment (it allow to manage dual video stream in the same file)


Yes, I miss the cineform era. Was a bit worried back then, when gopro took over. As turned out to be an actual disaster. Luckily, we now got BRAW as a living breathing substitute.


Well, they have produced a standardised codec based on it, so it's not really done. The GoPro now uses it for stills (but I do to know if the 7 dues more, they only just started out their own ASIC design).
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1265
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostWed Oct 03, 2018 2:21 pm

carlomacchiavello wrote:
Oyvind Fiksdal wrote:
carlomacchiavello wrote:cineform raw offert you direct recording (kineinfinity, si2k, cinerecorder), converting from every raw (video and photo) to cineform raw, realtime active metadata to manage lut, color correction, stereoscopic alignment (it allow to manage dual video stream in the same file)


Yes, I miss the cineform era. Was a bit worried back then, when gopro took over. As turned out to be an actual disaster. Luckily, we now got BRAW as a living breathing substitute.


the sidecar file is near RedCode idea then cineform database, but could be the start of new Era. i have many hope in braw, be cause is hosted from a big house like Blackmagic, not from a small developer like Newman, which did miracle at time of cineform.
my secret hope is that bmd hire Newman to add active metadata and many more feature on braw and resolve.


I doubt GoPro wants to release him. Besides Red is probably a licensee, and Kineinfinity was using it, so just buy a Red camera. I got respect for Newman, but a lot of this stuff is not a team effort, with whatever done in the background.

You can use cineform raw apparently with a $20 license.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1265
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostWed Oct 03, 2018 2:49 pm

Uli Plank wrote:Well, that guy at Red was not just a “plug-in guy”, not even a programmer, but a physicist who specialized in optics. Looking at where Red is now and he still being with them, he must have done a few things right.
And at the time Arri just has a D20/21 with really crappy low-light sensitivity, which was not much more than a nice try aka prototype. And Sony with all their experienced specialists couldn’t do more than advertising a 2/3 sensor camera as good enough for cinema, for which they asked a quarter million.

Red actually was the BM of that time and did some serious ass-kicking. Now it’s BM kicking!


If they followed the recommendation for $5000-$10000, they would be, rather than just the camera spec somebody recommended. The price didn't come down enough, and went up and up, with some nice discounts on old stock on the way.

Now, which guy are you referring too. The guy I am I definitely read came from designing plugins fur some software. A scientist or not, I don't know. One of my freinds is a top engineer, international, manages a big company and probably still reckons I'm the smartest person he knows, and I read a lot of dumb science in the the scientific journals, and scientists have similar average IQ. So what does it prove, I like the colour science of my little ambarella video camera more than the original 4k. From the moment I saw the sample video, it was ok (and likely using a sensor from the manufacturer of the 4k, unless that was Kodak (which might explain a few things), unlike stuff I've seen from a certain action camera. Actually, I wonder how it would compare to ProRes on the Pocket 4k without grading? A number of cheap cameras in the mid 2000's onwards had neutral colour. Dumb colour in cheap cameras is deliberate or not smart.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1265
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostWed Oct 03, 2018 2:55 pm

You do know about the Sony cruss licensing agreement with Aptina, about the last time I heard about the the law suite against Sony. Aptina, Kodak etc technology is under one sensor company now. Red has a foundary oven on the floor of some company, and I think I suspect where, given the dilaritues I see in performance of Sony and Red sensors during the cross licensing period.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1265
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostWed Oct 03, 2018 2:59 pm

Sony is working on some advanced technology not suitable to Bayer but suitable to multi layered colour filtering technology or monochrome. But this hasn't been put forwards. I imagine they might have held off and it is coming. Holographic filming. Red is trying multipoint 3D.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1265
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostSat Oct 06, 2018 11:06 am

Mark Grgurev wrote:
Oyvind Fiksdal wrote:I for one will use BRAW as a sub to Prores, not DNG.


Same here. I love that BRAW is an option but if I were going to decide between 3:1 BRAW and 4:1 CDNG, I'd go with CDNG.

Here's another example that illustrates the difference in detail between the codecs.

Image

Sure there's more false color in the CDNG but look at that shirt detail.


We are seeing nearly the opposite of what is described in the following interview:


Something is up.
Offline
User avatar

Jamie LeJeune

  • Posts: 956
  • Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 4:33 am
  • Location: San Francisco

Re: Blackmagic RAW

PostSun Oct 07, 2018 8:34 pm

What do you mean it's the opposite? It's not.
In that example image we are seeing exactly what BMD intended for BRAW, it's a better cleaner debayer.

Look at the word "color" in the color checker video chart on the left. In BRAW the text for color is clean and white as it is in reality. In the cDNG shot the text isn't white and instead it's full of colored aliasing. That's bad and it's not actual sharpness.

The BRAW is better. There is nothing wrong.

false detail in cDNG.png
false detail in cDNG.png (505.63 KiB) Viewed 3231 times
www.cinedocs.com
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4601572/
PreviousNext

Return to Cinematography

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests