Blackmagic Forum

Hello all!

I'm making this post under the advisement of a Blackmagic Design technical support representative. Our post-facility is currently doing dailies on a major studio/network production (to remain un-named for client privacy, of course), and this week, we were delivered our first-ever batch of footage filmed using ProRes RAW on the DJI Inspire 2.

To our knowledge, the only way to process this footage (as of early August 2018) in any capacity is by using Final Cut Pro X 10.4.3 on Mac OS High Sierra, which is what we did (RAW to Log Conversion at DJI D-Log, transcoded to an established, universally supported ProRes variant). According to the DI house on this project, these transcodes will effectively be considered the "master" files for finishing purposes, not the original camera source files, as they themselves have no other way of working with the source material.

I would not categorize this as an ideal workflow, to say the least. We ended up more than doubling our media ingest for these cards, and still had to re-process them using our dailies software for metadata, second-system audio sync and DNxHD/DAX rendering. Not to mention that working within FCP X is in itself...not entirely conducive to an efficient dailies workflow, or at least one that works well for us.

I suppose the purpose of this post is to let the BMD Resolve developers know that there are major studio productions that are beginning to shoot with ProRes RAW, and that as this format increases in popularity (as I'm sure it will, because the relative size compared to other metadata-controllable RAW formats is indeed incredibly small), it will become critically necessary for software such as (perhaps especially) Resolve to support ProRes RAW on both a dailies and finishing level. It would please me to no end to be able to by-pass FCP X in this regard.

Thanks all! Would love to hear from other productions that have seen ProRes RAW being filmed - from what we can glean from our network of partner houses/vendors, this is one of the first (if not THE first) major studio production to use it.

I agree it should be supported, but why in the world did they shoot ProRes RAW? It doesn't work on just about anything yet...

Apparently Adobe is working on it:

https://adobe-video.uservoice.com/forum ... er_page=20

but there may be some deals which prevent companies from implementation (if true than better to forget about it and work on eg. Cineform RAW).

Just speculating but I’d expect support for ProRes raw to be available in Resolve 15.x shortly after the six month exclusive license expires which is coming up in another month or so I believe. BMD may already have defined all the features of the release candidate for Resolve 15.0, but I’m thinking 15.1 will include ProRes raw in the fourth quarter.

Sorry that’s likely too late for your project but I hope your extra effort until then is at least financially rewarding for the hoops you had to jump through.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

6 months of preventing what? All NLEs etc to add support for ProRes RAW, so there is actually a good reason to use it in camera?
Great idea Apple/Atomos stopping support in area which has nothing to do with creation of ProRes RAW (which I assume Atomos had some interest to be exclusive).

Up-front talks/development with NLE providers is exactly what you want when you try to introduce new codec. Well done Apple and rest to do everything to actually stop it This is not very good way to promote FCP X either.

Kind of reminds me of the days when the anti-establishment rebel anarchists at RED wouldn't let anyone get at their R3DCode container. Seems quaint, somehow.

jPo, CSI

I can’t comment on the rationale for the exclusive period, but six months goes by in the blink of an eye. In October I believe ProRes raw will begin to appear, perhaps two months away.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is there any news on this?

Well, now that they have their own compressed RAW, I doubt they are in any hurry to implement ProRes RAW.

My understanding was that the 6 month exclusive thing only pertained to Atomos for RECORDING ProRes raw in an on-cmaera recorder - like, in other words, other monitor recorders couldn't add it until after 6 months. I didn't read that as no NLE's could support it... Wasn't it always available to be licensed?

No idea, but Resolve just needs to decode not record. Very different thing.
I'm worried that before ProRes RAW and BM RAW we had no standard and now we have 2 standards, which means we still don't have standard + we are actually in worse situation than before

Andrew Kolakowski wrote: I'm worried that before ProRes RAW and BM RAW we had no standard and now we have 2 standards, which means we still don't have standard + we are actually in worse situation than before

This. Wouldn't it be nice if BM supported ProRes Raw and Apple/FCP X supported BRAW so that users can decide which one to use? Instead each might not support the other for obvious reasons, which sucks.

I really hope BM supports ProRres Raw at some point (in camera and in Resolve), but it looks like that ain't gonna happen: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=79893

Yes, definitely, but problem is that world is more complex and all because of $.

soooo ahemmmm... those clips i just recorded 5 min ago as a test with a FS7+raw output at 200fps and our brand new atomos sumo 19" ill just have to stick em up my ...disk! (working on win10 with resolve studio 15) ... **mad world song in the background**

Stop&Play wrote:soooo ahemmmm... those clips i just recorded 5 min ago as a test with a FS7+raw output at 200fps and our brand new atomos sumo 19" ill just have to stick em up my ...disk! (working on win10 with resolve studio 15) ... **mad world song in the background**

The new apple stuff only works on apple hardware/software.
Blame apple and the companies who collaborate with them, not companies who at least try to be open...

MishaEngel wrote:

Stop&Play wrote:soooo ahemmmm... those clips i just recorded 5 min ago as a test with a FS7+raw output at 200fps and our brand new atomos sumo 19" ill just have to stick em up my ...disk! (working on win10 with resolve studio 15) ... **mad world song in the background**

The new apple stuff only works on apple hardware/software.
Blame apple and the companies who collaborate with them, not companies who at least try to be open...

nono, im not blaming BM... of course this is apple's way of dealing with the profesional world as always, thats why i sent FCP to hell

MishaEngel wrote:

Stop&Play wrote:The new apple stuff only works on apple hardware/software.Blame apple and the companies who collaborate with them, not companies who at least try to be open...

Apple is not stopping BM from licensing/implementing ProRes Raw at this point in time. The exclusive time period/licensing with Atomos is over. Premiere is going to support it. BRAW is probably the reason why there is no ProRes Raw support in Resolve (both companies are probably playing this game, both are wrong to do it). This dick move is kinda expected from Apple at this point, but BM is better than this.

And OP's points are still valid. (1) I would rather avoid FCP X whenever possible, and (2) As more production companies/users start to use ProRes Raw the more it makes sense for BM to add support for it in Resolve.

For those that don't like ProRes Raw and would never use it I don't see how adding support for it in Resolve affects you in any way. You can still use/not use whatever you want.

I'm throwing my hat in the ring for ProRes Raw in DR.

December 2019 and you record in pro res raw from a few selected cameras only from atomos recorder or dji hiend drone with expansive license.
Implemented in few or nothing pro software to develop raw...
You cannot transcode other raw to proresraw (cineform raw could did it in 2005).
Seems it's quite expansive and not diffuse standard. May be it's not interesting codec? Not enough advantage against cost or performance.
We in future will see, to me will be interesting if i can transcode bayer matrix of other raw to proresraw, or for me.is a waste of time. A good raw codec is tailored on a sensors of x cameras, with good option like denoiser and more like redcode, the agility and quality like braw, thr metadata and multidevelop option like arriraw.

Inviato dal mio E6653 utilizzando Tapatalk

License costs are due to RED crappy patent, not because Apple/Atomos wanted it to be an expensive codec.
Don't be fulled by BM marketing about BRAW

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:License costs are due to RED crappy patent, not because Apple/Atomos wanted it to be an expensive codec.
Don't be fulled by BM marketing about BRAW

uhm. i'm not sure... Prores raw was announced late 2017 to pro, diffused to wide public early 2018 before the red hurricane loyal against raw compressed.
many other brand not change their policy or price, see sigma with cdng raw compressed and not, see sonyraw, and more, see Canon rawlite from c200.
apple had so much money from mobile market (98% of actual revenue) that not need to apply more tax on prores raw implementation to grab more money, but instead they need that prores raw was spread as much as possible if they want to sell license.
At today canon is big, but apple is richer, how many photo cameras selled every years against how many iphone and tablet selled every years?

RED patent been here for years (10+).
Everyone who tries to do compressed RAW needs to pay it or find some workarounds (like BM did).
RED been in court with Sony over it, recently Apple tried to invalidate RED patent but unfortunately failed.

Do you know figures? How much you have to pay Apple/Atomos to license ProRes RAW?
I don't think Apple cares much about ProRes RAW (their income from licensing ProRes RAW is just nothing compared to their other services). It was more Atomos who pushed it.

Canon is poor company compared to Apple when it comes to money. They are in different league.

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:RED patent been here for years (10+).
Everyone who tries to do compressed RAW needs to pay it or find some workarounds (like BM did).
RED been in court with Sony over it, recently Apple tried to invalidate RED patent but unfortunately failed.

Do you know figures? How much you have to pay Apple/Atomos to license ProRes RAW?
I don't think Apple cares much about ProRes RAW (their income from licensing ProRes RAW is just nothing compared to their other services). It was more Atomos who pushed it.
Canon is poor company compared to Apple when it comes to money. They are in different league.

if are 10 years, why every producer did its own raw compressed and only in the last 12-15 months seems to be a problem? or they changed the licensing cost?
antitrust in usa where is?
anyway, obviously we know only a small part of story, and we see only the small part of iceberg, the truth is that we wait to see more raw implemeted in every software.

It was always an issue due to RED patent and it will be until patent expires (another few years).
I would only guess that if not Red patent we would already have many RAW compressed formats (instead we have just few and all of them had some story behind them with RED name in it).

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:It was always an issue due to RED patent and it will be until patent expires (another few years).
I would only guess that if not Red patent we would already have many RAW compressed formats (instead we have just few and all of them had some story behind them with RED name in it).

It's only valid in the USA at a compression ratio of atleast 6:1.
Kinefinity(cDNG) is selling it's camera world wide with the exception of the USA.
CanonRAWLite has less compression than 6:1
Sony and RED have an agreement.
ProResRAW HQ (which is less than 6:1 compressed) doesn't violate the RED patent, ProResRAW does, which they want to use for the lower-end high volume business.

Exactly. You can work around it, but its still a pain.