Braw on sony cinema cameras annonced plus more

So PRR wasn’t ready for prime time in 2018, how is that salient in the closing months of 2024? BM cameras weren’t exactly user friendly in the early days either, it took 2 years before in-camera formatting and audio meters were added. Like wine, many products improve over time.

At least PRR is offered as an internal camera option, PRR also has roughly twice the number of cams that can record PRR externally vs Braw. I’d prefer internal Braw for file size and Resolve compatibility but that hasn’t happened yet for obvious reasons.

Good Luck

Is this full support with highlight recovery etc. like with the S5 Mk II or partial support like with the S5 and S1?

Sorry if someone has already answered.

So we are really talking a year and a bit, not years, here. Pedantic or what but here goes .

I don’t see how you get to that number.

PRR was launched in 2018. Supported by Apple FCP first and a number of launch camera partners.

Manual WB controls were available in other platforms when ProRes RAW launched. Scratch by Assimilate for example was very quick to add support for the codec with full controls.

JB

So we are really talking a year and a bit, not years, here. Pedantic or what but here goes .

I don’t see how you get to that number.

PRR was launched in 2018. Supported by Apple FCP first and a number of launch camera partners.

Manual WB controls were available in other platforms when ProRes RAW launched. Scratch by Assimilate for example was very quick to add support for the codec with full controls.

JB

OK. I’ll defer to your far greater knowledge. I am probably under a misapprehension derived from Atomos marketing as they started to introduce more mirrorless hybrids to the Ninja ProRes Raw capability in 2020.

BRAW has proven to be a superior codec to PRR in terms of features and performance anyway.

Tbh I don’t disagree with a lot of what you’re saying but what I will say is that PRR seems to be retaining notably more detail than BRAW in every head to head I’ve seen so far. Even on BMD cameras, BRAW has always felt so much softer than DNG ever did. I understand that there are reasons why that is, and I still feel like BRAW is a net positive transition, but I wish that the image quality was just that little bit better.

If that was a camera without an OLPF shooting DNG, it’ll contain a lot of false detail (aliasing), suggesting more resolution than there really is.

BRAW has proven to be a superior codec to PRR in terms of features and performance anyway.

Tbh I don’t disagree with a lot of what you’re saying but what I will say is that PRR seems to be retaining notably more detail than BRAW in every head to head I’ve seen so far. Even on BMD cameras, BRAW has always felt so much softer than DNG ever did. I understand that there are reasons why that is, and I still feel like BRAW is a net positive transition, but I wish that the image quality was just that little bit better.

I’m not sure what to say.

I never shoot with external recorders or camera that can even record PRR so I have no way to compare. I’ve not really shot PRR either.

I can usually pick a BRAW shot on a timeline with Alexa raw shots because they tend be the ones that are sharper than the Alexa (shooting the same lenses)

Can you be more specific about what you mean when you say the image should be better? Like really specific?

JB

Can you be more specific about what you mean when you say the image should be better? Like really specific?

Perhaps I wasn't as clear as I could have been: In like for like scenarios, my experience has been that BRAW just doesn't render fine detail as clearly as other raw codecs. Wether it is BRAW vs DNG in a BMD body, or BRAW vs ProRes RAW on something like the S1H, I consistently feel like BRAW images are softer. Granted, some of that was absolutely more edge contrast because of a far coarser debayer—which I noticed a lot with my own BRAW vs DNG testing—but it was still plain to see for me that I could make out details like fine text or foliage more clearly with other codecs.

Honestly, as capture resolutions climb past 4K I doubt that this will be a significant issue. A ≥6K BRAW image looks immaculate at regular viewing distances on a Christie projector, LED wall, or an LG OLED. Still, I really like to get up close and personal with codecs when I have the opportunity so this kind of stuff doesn't go unnoticed.

Can you be more specific about what you mean when you say the image should be better? Like really specific?

Perhaps I wasn't as clear as I could have been: In like for like scenarios, my experience has been that BRAW just doesn't render fine detail as clearly as other raw codecs. Wether it is BRAW vs DNG in a BMD body, or BRAW vs ProRes RAW on something like the S1H, I consistently feel like BRAW images are softer. Granted, some of that was absolutely more edge contrast because of a far coarser debayer—which I noticed a lot with my own BRAW vs DNG testing—but it was still plain to see for me that I could make out details like fine text or foliage more clearly with other codecs.

Honestly, as capture resolutions climb past 4K I doubt that this will be a significant issue. A ≥6K BRAW image looks immaculate at regular viewing distances on a Christie projector, LED wall, or an LG OLED. Still, I really like to get up close and personal with codecs when I have the opportunity so this kind of stuff doesn't go unnoticed.

You're supposed to use sharpen in camera or in post.

Can you be more specific about what you mean when you say the image should be better? Like really specific?

Perhaps I wasn't as clear as I could have been: In like for like scenarios, my experience has been that BRAW just doesn't render fine detail as clearly as other raw codecs. Wether it is BRAW vs DNG in a BMD body, or BRAW vs ProRes RAW on something like the S1H, I consistently feel like BRAW images are softer. Granted, some of that was absolutely more edge contrast because of a far coarser debayer—which I noticed a lot with my own BRAW vs DNG testing—but it was still plain to see for me that I could make out details like fine text or foliage more clearly with other codecs.

Honestly, as capture resolutions climb past 4K I doubt that this will be a significant issue. A ≥6K BRAW image looks immaculate at regular viewing distances on a Christie projector, LED wall, or an LG OLED. Still, I really like to get up close and personal with codecs when I have the opportunity so this kind of stuff doesn't go unnoticed.

You're supposed to use sharpen in camera or in post.

That does NOT exclude differences in (for lack of other words) differences in "fidelity" between the two formats, when recorded - typically externally - from the same camera in the same light and identical scene.

The original files, may lead to differences in initial treatment

That does NOT exclude differences in (for lack of other words) differences in "fidelity" between the two formats, when recorded - typically externally - from the same camera in the same light and identical scene.

The original files, may lead to differences in initial treatment

Acuity is the word you’re looking for. Does BRAW do a bit of in-camera denoising during the partial debayer which might account for differences in perceived sharpness?

Probably, yes.
Before we got an OLPF for ours and still had the choice, DNG always looked a bit sharper than BRAW. An early version of BRAW seemed to have quite a bit of denoising, but they seem to have reduced the amount in later versions.

BRAW has proven to be a superior codec to PRR in terms of features and performance anyway. PRR in FCP couldn’t even do a manual Kelvin WB till a little while ago.

Yeah I don't even care for Prores raw, I would love the day when every camera offers BRAW as internal recording option or at least external recording like Sony did. I only have to sometimes deal with prores raw because of clients but my preference is braw.

I only have to sometimes deal with prores raw because of clients but my preference is braw.

Ain’t that the truth. I would love to just use braw but clients, particularly those who wants their materials handed to them right after the shoot, prefer that we give it to them as in-camera ProRes. This is also why a certain number of URSA 4.6K G2 owners want a firmware update with in-camera Gen 5 color science so we can have a better story from providing ProRes in Gen 4 CS. Unfortunately, it has been in deft ears even thou the UMPG2 is well alive and selling (I can only assume well received too) as the only BlackMagic camera that hasn’t been obsolete like all others when newer model comes along.

How many clients want ProRes RAW handed to them after the shoot?
ProRes is no problem, apart from asking for color science 5. Nobody is asking for ProRes RAW out of an Arri either.

Folks aren't exactly clamoring for ARRIRAW either. I could see Prores Raw as a happy middle ground between XQ and ARRIRAW however.

Good Luck

I'm working on a project that looks likes it's going to dovetail into this other person's doc. When I told them I was heading down south to do these interviews, he asked me to shoot in S-LOG3 @23.98. I told him I could shoot BRAW at 23.98 and he just said that BRAW will be a great format for editing in Davinci. No fuss, no muss. Thankfully.

How many clients want ProRes RAW handed to them after the shoot?
ProRes is no problem, apart from asking for color science 5. Nobody is asking for ProRes RAW out of an Arri either.

That’s correct Uli. Clients who wants Prores will either ask for 442HD to 4444 but in my case, none for PRRaw. However when I’m filming with a UMP46G2 as my A cam and a Pocket 6K as a B Cam, clients quickly realize that the difference in color science between cam A and B due to the differences in CS generation. Hence I would really like to ask BMD to come out with a firmware for the UMP46G2 even with only…. Only one additional functionality- color science Gen 5.

I haven’t shot ProRes for 5 years.

It was true a lot of shows required ProRes. Not anymore.

Raw has become normalised.

The show I just finished wanted ProRes 4k masters but shot Arri Raw and BRAW of course

JB

I haven’t shot ProRes for 5 years.

It was true a lot of shows required ProRes. Not anymore.

Raw has become normalised.

The show I just finished wanted ProRes 4k masters but shot Arri Raw and BRAW of course

JB

John, not disagreeing with you however you’re on a different league and big production level so I can understand. For me, working with small indie filmmakers and some Asian production companies, the majority, in fact all, who requested that I hand over the cards at the end of each shoot requires that it be shot in 4K ProRes 422HQ or ProRes 422. I would be very happy to shoot BRAW or other RAW variants and then do the transcoding to ProRes in Post but that is not an option. In fact, in the NDA of the production agreement, it states that all media, sources, blah.. shall be turned over to the company at the end of each shooting day. Also, the company that requires this provides their own media cards, which is a good thing so I don’t have to provide it. Although there are times that the cards they provided have had issues because they were not fast enough so that’s a big disadvantage and frustrating. I would love to just have RAW normalized regardless of production levels.