Blackmagic RAW for BMMCC?
Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2018 1:54 am
Will Blackmagic Micro Cinema Camera have BRAW support in future?
https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/
https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=79272
Wayne Steven wrote:Well, presumably maybe they will have to replace cdng on all the cameras.
michaeldhead wrote:First: it's unlikely that the older cameras (pre-Ursa Mini) have the hardware to handle the Blackmagic raw processing. Definitely not enough cooling in the OG Pocket to run at 50 fps.
George Leon wrote:I think you're wrong there, de-bayering is already in the cams for the non-RAW formats, so the partial-debayer (whatever they exactly do for BRAW) should be less work than that.
michaeldhead wrote:George Leon wrote:And a Windows 3 computer can run Anthem at full resolution.
George Leon wrote:michaeldhead wrote:First: it's unlikely that the older cameras (pre-Ursa Mini) have the hardware to handle the Blackmagic raw processing. Definitely not enough cooling in the OG Pocket to run at 50 fps.
I think you're wrong there, de-bayering is already in the cams for the non-RAW formats, so the partial-debayer (whatever they exactly do for BRAW) should be less work than that.
The rest is typical RAW format storage, except writing a continuous file is more efficient than individual DNGs (which also each need their own header/metadata). So speaking as a programmer, I see no technical reason why BRAW couldn't be implemented on older cams. It's really a question of priority. As they're still selling the BMMCC for example, it's likely that the patent claim would affect it too. You may be right about discontinued models though.
michaeldhead wrote:George Leon wrote:And a Windows 3 computer can run Anthem at full resolution.
Dmitry Shijan wrote:I am not a tech specialist but i hear that FPGA is one of the most complicated things ever possible.
The main problem is -> more different cameras -> more different firmware updates -> more months to coding.
So my guess BM just don't interested to update cameras that are no longer manufactured.
George Leon wrote:You don't seem to understand how this works technically. A RAW format takes less processing power than a non-RAW format, as those need far more processing (including a full debayer). There is compression going on in both types, and recent DNG capable cams (like the BMMCC) already implement an optional form of RAW compression.
This isn't about camera processing power, it's about software development resources.
lee4ever wrote:Please deal with FPGA technology.
There are heigh speed cameras that work with the same FPGA chip as older Blackmagic cameras.
michaeldhead wrote:I'm pretty sure I fully understand that partial in-camera demosaicing takes more processing power than simple raw acquisition.
George Leon wrote:michaeldhead wrote:George Leon wrote:And a Windows 3 computer can run Anthem at full resolution.
You don't seem to understand how this works technically. A RAW format takes less processing power than a non-RAW format, as those need far more processing (including a full debayer). There is compression going on in both types, and recent DNG capable cams (like the BMMCC) already implement an optional form of RAW compression.
This isn't about camera processing power, it's about software development resources.
Wayne Steven wrote:[
Don't bother arguing with Michael George, he is one of the handful.
.
Wayne Steven wrote:I haven't been able to find the Bayer recording patent covered on Wikipedia yet (in order to get a better idea if there is need to replace cdng on the BMCC etc). It's like it should he there, but has been removed.
Dmitry Shijan wrote:So i just watched this video and it seems that dumb RED patent is related to only at least 2K cameras. So BMMCC cameras could easy have DNG and BRAW at same time. Wonder why there are no any firmware updates yet.