BRAW and SD cards

Given the insane (and awesome) announcement of BRAW (though I hope they call it B-RAW.. for obvious reasons and not BRAW!!)... and the various compression capabilities (12:1, 81, Q0/5, etc).. I suspect this will be a while to confirm.. but will the BM4K Pocket (and maybe even original BMPCC) be able to record 4K (and HD respectively) to SD cards now.. and not require the USB-C option to SSD? I still prefer that.. but my concern is the potentially flimsy/breakable USB-C connector on the camera. I wish BM had built some sort of locking plug with an adaptor to USB-C because like HDMI, USB-C plugs are just not nearly rugged enough. I will definitely be looking for a cage with clamp options for USB-C (and HDMI OUT), but still would have preferred they put a more rugged locking option with an adapter.

Anyway.. very very excited for this announcement... totally unexpected.. and hoping it will be able to record to the SD card in this format! Now all they need is some auto backup option to ensure you dont lose your video footage.. that doesnt require the overly priced CFAST cards!

No info on recording to SD cards, if it will, the SD card will be UHS-II, not the older UHS-I cards used in the original Pocket Camera. The new B-Raw will not work on the original Pocket Camera, this Camera is EOL (RIP)!

As for using SD UHS II cards for B-Raw, given the cost of a 128GB SD UHS-II card, a CFast card is just a few dollars more, come in larger sizes and are faster. Why mess around with the smaller, fragile SD card, when the cost per MB is so close.
Cheers

I would agree that it has to be the fastest SD cards for sure. Especially if it is 4K. That will be impressive if it works!! I thought Grant said eventually the BMPCC? It is only HD footage after all, cant imagine that the BRAW code is any more processor intensive than the CinameDNG.. or maybe it is? Maybe there would be an option to replace the CinemaDNG for BRAW on that one.

Justin, I doubt there will be any more firmware additions ormchanges to the old Pocket camera, which has been discontinued.
Cheers

Given the price compared to storage size and performance, I figure many people are going to end up with external drives anyways. Connection issues are a concern, but if someone is not already making cages/holders with cable clamps on both the camera and the drive they will be within weeks.

From test I did the braw files are smaller than proress 422. So can't see why SD will not work, even UHS-I cards should work at 12:1 and Q5.

Tested using older SanDisk Extreme Pro SD cards. 95MB/s. Same as I used in BMPCC.

Recorded 4.6K at 8:1, 12:1, Q0 & Q5 no problem what so ever.

Chris

No info on recording to SD cards, if it will, the SD card will be UHS-II, not the older UHS-I cards used in the original Pocket Camera.

It'll absolutely work on UHS-I SD cards. At 30 fps 4.6K, we're talking bitrates of 27-78 MB/s for Q5, 68MB/s at 8:1, 46 MB/s at 12:1. My three UHS-I Sandisk Extreme Pros can write at about 81 MB/s for the entire length of the card.

Hell at 4K DCI, you can record at 12:1 60 fps and it'll only require about 64 MB/s.

Interesting, seems a higher compression than DNG Raw, closer to ProRes 4.2.2... Thanks for the tests, breathes new life into the older SD UHSI 95 MPS cards.
Cheers

Sure I’m going to test recording to the new Wise SDXC UHS II 128GB Card that is rated V130. I’ll look forward to seeing at what point it drops frames. Will certainly handle BRAW 5:1 but will it take Q0 for simpler scenes? The rated Write speed is up to 250MB/s, so with BRAW Q0 VBR it just might manage it. That will be amazing. Amazing seems to be my favourite word today.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow.. I had no idea the UHS2 cards were so expensive.. I cant find a comparison but they seem on par with CFast 2 prices! The largest being only 128GB.. that isnt going to give you much 4K RAW footage that is for sure! Not even sure with the new format if you wanted the Q0 quality (which if I am reading right will be the absolute best quality) how many minutes.. or heck maybe even seconds a 128GB will afford you.

Speaking of Q0/5.. are all these formats lossy? I would have thought anything RAW was lossless compression.. but then if that were the case then no need to have multiple quality options. So I hope that Q0 is a lossless option?

So I hope that Q0 is a lossless option?

Nope. The only way that a codec can promise a consistent bitrate or a consistent range of bitrates is if it's lossy. In this case, it's considered visually lossless.

if you want to shoot completely lossless then you need to shoot lossless CDNG which has enormous files.

So I hope that Q0 is a lossless option?

Nope. The only way that a codec can promise a consistent bitrate or a consistent range of bitrates is if it's lossy. In this case, it's considered visually lossless.

if you want to shoot completely lossless then you need to shoot lossless CDNG which has enormous files.

And if what Grant Petty reported from the beta shooters is true, then it is almost entirely visually lossless even at 12:1 compression - which is AMAZING.

Visually lossless is an important concept. It means that most people viewing a motion picture at a respectable distance should not be aware that information has been discarded. It remains to be seen what Q5 will be like compared to Q0, but my guess is the fact that Q0 exists means that’s the option you want if you’re putting your best foot forward and you’ll be hard pressed to find it lacking 99.99% of the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

12:1 has to throw quite a lot. It still may be fine for many projects, but for "safety" something like 5:1 would be better choice. Q5 is actually more interesting choice as it delivers bitrates from above 8:1 to way below 12:1. I think you can call it 12:1, but with ability to go much higher if needed (at around 8:1), so at the end it's better choice than strict 12:1. It will also reduce bitrate for easy frames.
One has to really be careful with storage for Q0 option. If it gets hit with noisy footage bitrate can jump way above 200MB/sec, so people should keep it in mind.
It would be also nice to get Q3 mode to go between 2 others and maybe be the best choice for most projects.

Wow.. I had no idea the UHS2 cards were so expensive.. I cant find a comparison but they seem on par with CFast 2 prices! The largest being only 128GB.. that isnt going to give you much 4K RAW footage that is for sure!

You might be surprised. Compression these days is VERY advanced.

Speaking of Q0/5.. are all these formats lossy? I would have thought anything RAW was lossless compression.. but then if that were the case then no need to have multiple quality options. So I hope that Q0 is a lossless option?

Probably not, that's what the cDNG option is for. Not all raw is lossless, and in fact lossless raw is a bit of a rarity due to its file size.

That said, even light compression applied to raw saves quite a bit more space than the same compression algorithm would for full raster data, and with less loss. And with less noisy sensors, the codec efficiency goes up, since there's less bogus detail that the codec tries to protect.

but my guess is the fact that Q0 exists means that’s the option you want if you’re putting your best foot forward and you’ll be hard pressed to find it lacking 99.99% of the time.

My guess is that Q5 will do most of the time, and Q0 is for when you need to be able to pull detailed keys for green screen and that sort of thing, as a general guide.

Speaking of Q0/5.. are all these formats lossy? I would have thought anything RAW was lossless compression.. but then if that were the case then no need to have multiple quality options. So I hope that Q0 is a lossless option?

There is really no need for lossless RAW. Q0 is good enough, even if not lossless. The loss is so low that in reality it'll make no difference against lossless/uncompressed. 3:1 is good spot for high-end quality recording. Q0 is even better.
Sony F65 also uses around 3:1 (or 6:1) compression. Q0 should not be a problem, even for most demanding projects.

I suspect most people wouldnt even notice Q5 or 12:1 vs Q0.. me included. Something about pulling the absolute best just makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside though. I suspect also.. that with this announcement that the BM4K is going to be in that much more demand!