ProRes for Win10

Hi, is it possible to have in next Davinci 16 update prores codec for win10?

It has been asked forever by many DaVinci users. There must be a reason Apple is not releasing it for BM, more so as they recently did with Adobe. I wouldn't be surprised if there is some kind of agreement between Adobe and Apple to make this possible. Unfortunately.

Yes, the core code is there, it is not a software issue. It is a license issue.

For that matter,
What kinds of problems can one encounter when delivering ffmpeg prores?

In my country there are none but when I need international deliveries I don’t dare using unofficial codecs.

For that matter,
What kinds of problems can one encounter when delivering ffmpeg prores?

In my country there are none but when I need international deliveries I don’t dare using unofficial codecs.

Hello,
ON PC read : C:\Program Files\Blackmagic Design\DaVinci Resolve\Documents\License.rtf

Other OS : There is the equivalent in another directory

So how come Fusion standalone is licensed to output Prores? Is this capability going to be revoked in future versions of Fusion?

@iddos: I built Prores deliverables with ffmpeg for international screenings and they didn't get rejected.

Fusion isn't an NLE competitor and its render settings for ProRes are very limited (limited audio settings and metadata for instance). I assume that made it easier to license.

Fusion isn't an NLE competitor and its render settings for ProRes are very limited (limited audio settings and metadata for instance). I assume that made it easier to license.

I hear ya. I always knew Adobe Premiere is no competition to FCP...

Or maybe it’s the easy setup for batch processing that would make DR more attractive for ProRes output.

Can ffmpeg, or VirtualDub, or HandBrake, or similar tool encode to ProRes on Windows PC?

Yes

Thanks, Misha.
Which one of them is recommended for both transcoding quality and ease of use?

Thanks, Misha.
Which one of them is recommended for both transcoding quality and ease of use?

I would use FFmpeg command line for maximum flexibility.

For instance:

ffmpeg -i source.mov -c:v prores_ks -profile:v 3 -c:a pcm_s16le destination.mov

For transcoding all mp4 files in a folder you can create a .bat file with for instance:

FOR /F "tokens=*" %%G IN ('dir /b *.mp4') DO ffmpeg -i "%%G" -c:v prores_ks -profile:v 3 "T_%%~nG.mov"

The possibilities are limitless.

There is a downside to encoding to prores using FFmpeg, it is single-threaded but you could create multiple FFmpeg processes to do multiple files in parallel.

For transcoding on Windows I would use a DNxHx variant.

Hybrid by Selur sure does take advantage of all CPU cores with ffmpeg Prores encoder.

Hybrid by Selur sure does take advantage of all CPU cores with ffmpeg Prores encoder.

ProRes encoding is implemented single threaded in FFmpeg, but perhaps Hybrid parallelizes multiple file conversions?

Hybrid by Selur sure does take advantage of all CPU cores with ffmpeg Prores encoder.

ProRes encoding is implemented single threaded in FFmpeg, but perhaps Hybrid parallelizes multiple file conversions?

I do single file conversion exclusively...perhaps it frame-serves to more than one instance of the encoder and consolidates the frames after encoding. All I can say is that all threads are saturated.

Hybrid by Selur sure does take advantage of all CPU cores with ffmpeg Prores encoder.

ProRes encoding is implemented single threaded in FFmpeg, but perhaps Hybrid parallelizes multiple file conversions?

I do single file conversion exclusively...perhaps it frame-serves to more than one instance of the encoder and consolidates the frames after encoding. All I can say is that all threads are saturated.

Hmm, I just did a test with the command line FFmpeg, PorRes encoding seems to work in parallel now.

There have been few changes into the code, including multithreading, proper 12bit support for 444 modes and alpha channel support. There is still lack for proper bitrate restrictions as per Apple profiles, but this is not that important. Code is still not polished, but I have not ever seen (or read about) a single file which would not decode properly with reference decoder. This means syntax is correct.

In order to simulate official encoder you need bit more complex command than this most simple one.

Now that Adobe Media Encoder includes a legit licensed Prores encoder, why risk FFMPEG at all?
I seen other discussions that FFMPEG maybe able to get the job done, but since it is essentially a reverse engineering of the Prores codec and it is just a best guess at how it works, that it can be risky especially in cases in which your file needs to pass QC.

Cineform and DNx are every bit as good as ProRes. The latter has the advantage of being available in the superior MXF container, rather than the outdated and buggy MOV container.

Cineform and DNx are every bit as good as ProRes. The latter has the advantage of being available in the superior MXF container, rather than the outdated and buggy MOV container.

Hi Jim
I personally agree with you, but all our costumers asking for Prores. So it doesn't matter which is the better codec or wich is the better container. We have to deliver what the customer is asking for.

Best regards

Harald

Cineform and DNx are every bit as good as ProRes. The latter has the advantage of being available in the superior MXF container, rather than the outdated and buggy MOV container.

Hi Jim
I personally agree with you, but all our costumers asking for Prores. So it doesn't matter which is the better codec or wich is the better container. We have to deliver what the customer is asking for.

Best regards

Harald

Exactly, it's their way or the highway.

Anyway, if you have a DR dongle, you could use fusion connection clip or just render a master that you can load into fusion and build a legitimate prores file if there are grumpy clients out there .

Sent from my GM 5 Plus d using Tapatalk

Cineform and DNx are every bit as good as ProRes. The latter has the advantage of being available in the superior MXF container, rather than the outdated and buggy MOV container.

Hi Jim
I personally agree with you, but all our costumers asking for Prores. So it doesn't matter which is the better codec or wich is the better container. We have to deliver what the customer is asking for.

Best regards

Harald

Exactly, it's their way or the highway.

Anyway, if you have a DR dongle, you could use fusion connection clip or just render a master that you can load into fusion and build a legitimate prores file if there are grumpy clients out there .

Sent from my GM 5 Plus d using Tapatalk

Just keep a Mac Mini or iMac on hand and install Compressor on it... It's just an extra $50.

I think ProRes licenses have more to do with selling Macs than selling Final Cut Pro X

Cineform and DNx are every bit as good as ProRes. The latter has the advantage of being available in the superior MXF container, rather than the outdated and buggy MOV container.

MOV is not buggy and it's very versatile container. MXF is very complex. There is ProRes in MXF as well, so container is not an argument. You can also pack ProRes to Matroska, AVI also if you want.
There is tiny advantage of ProRes as I have not seen a single case where there would be a problem with decoding ProRes, but it does happen with DNxHD/R or Cineform. Those stricter requirements enforced by Apple do help with reliability.

...We have to deliver what the customer is asking for.

Best regards

Harald

Well- this is the main problem. I hardly ever can choose what to deliver. In 90% cases I'm told and in 75% cases it's ProRes if master is required at high-quality. You can't escape from ProRes, it's too late. There were tries. I think Disney use to say that they don't accept ProRes, but it ended nowhere.
There are more and more software on PC with encoding, so it's getting better. Next one should be Resolve. Edius 9.4 is released and it supports ProRes export now as well.

I would use FFmpeg command line for maximum flexibility.
…

Thanks, Cary.
I’m unfamiliar with the various commands for ffmpeg, so I’m looking for a good GUI for ffmpeg, or another software which has a GUI.
Since I may need ProRes only rarely, It doesn’t seem to worth my while learning it.

I’m unfamiliar with the various commands for ffmpeg

You may find ffmprovisr useful.

You may find ffmprovisr useful.

Thanks, Reynaud.
The site you linked is really helpful with ffmpeg commands, yet, I’m still looking for a good GUI.

You may find ffmprovisr useful.

Thanks, Reynaud.
The site you linked is really helpful with ffmpeg commands, yet, I’m still looking for a good GUI.

Why not give Hybrid a try since it was already mentioned, yes?

http://freeware.satria.de/SmartFFmpeg/index.php?lang=EN

is quite simple GUI for ffmpeg. Not sure if current version has good presets for ProRes though. Most those GUIs don't have good presets unfortunately.

Convert v6 from HDCinematics can use ffmpeg to give you Prores and is a nice gui, cheap too. https://hdcinematics.com/wnorton/2017/10/16/v6-intro/

You do need to install ffmpeg yourself, it's a licensing issue and his way to get around that issue.

Why pay for ffmpeg?
It’s open source and all. Even if it’s wrapped in GUI.

I highly recommend learning the command line it’s not hard and as mentioned here, the possibility’s are limitless.

I highly recommend learning the command line it’s not hard and as mentioned here, the possibility’s are limitless.

That is the right thing to do, you have the most flexibility and control this way.

Also, there are now FFmpeg builds that have built-in Vapoursynth support. Vapoursynth allows you to do advanced filtering and processing of your video.

While I see the flexibility of ffmpeg, I also see it as a waste of space (disk) and time (mine). Time is money.

I rather press [export prores] from the resolve directly.

I will buy another license myself if that is what it takes.

I know for me, I do a lot of video for playback at events. The production company always wants Prores and I never really understood why until I started to become more involved backstage in these things.
Turns out that the big dog and almost the only real professional option for video playback is software called Playback Pro, which is only available on Mac. And apparently it does an absolutely dreadful job in decoding H.264....but will playback Prores flawlessly. I'm assuming because these companies are limping along using 5+ year old macs that have no hardware accelerated h.264 decode.
There aren't really any PC equivalent software in that space at least not any that the event production companies are willing to take a chance on that offers the same features as Playback Pro.
So we used to provide high bitrate H.264 files to the production company and let them do any necessary transcoding.
Now at least with the new versions of Media Encoder I can output a DNXHD/HR from the NLE or Resolve and then transcode to Prores in Media Encoder.
Still, I wouldn't mind paying more to get direct Prores encoding straight out of Resolve. I think Apple really isn't interested in the video space anymore or even desktops for that matter. They make more revenue off tablets and phones to really bother investing in the desktop space which they have already started to lose in favor of cheaper more powerful PC's
So I don't understand why Apple persists in their crazy licensing deals for prores encoding on PC. Adobe figured something out so perhaps that is the beginning of Apple starting to let up a bit.

While I see the flexibility of ffmpeg, I also see it as a waste of space (disk) and time (mine). Time is money.

I rather press [export prores] from the resolve directly.

I will buy another license myself if that is what it takes.

Sure if you can run it with resolve.
But ffmpeg is much more than a prores builder in windows.
Just last month I had to provide a hap codec deliveries. Resolve can’t decode it for playback even.

So I don't understand why Apple persists in their crazy licensing deals for prores encoding on PC.

Because protectionism and proprietary only software is their company philosophy.

The US supreme court just ruled against one of their 'only at Apple' practices allowing buyers to sue them.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/13/supreme ... -case.html

The site you linked is really helpful with ffmpeg commands, yet, I’m still looking for a good GUI.

VirtualDub2:

https://sourceforge.net/p/vdfiltermod/wiki/Home/

The integrated ProRes encoder uses FFMPEG. You can set different quality levels (correlates with qscale parameter). Default is Quality Level 4. In my tests, Quality Level 12 correlates with command-line FFMPEG ProRes at default setting.

Unfortunately few other parameters are not set, eg. color tag. I will write to developer, so maybe with next release he can improve built-in ProRe presets.
It all depends if you want just a ProRes file or trying to simulate Apple official profile HQ, etc. (eg. because you deliver to some broadcaster or bigger client).

...
So I don't understand why Apple persists in their crazy licensing deals for prores encoding on PC. Adobe figured something out so perhaps that is the beginning of Apple starting to let up a bit.

I thought Adobe will be the last one as they have huge market share.
Now its not only Adobe but few other companies, so it's definitely time for BM as well (at least in paid version).

Because protectionism and proprietary only software is their company philosophy.

True. It gives them something to hold on to while their ship is sinking.
I've seen a number of other companies, for example Sony, who think that they can come up with what they think is the next greatest thing make it proprietary and think they are going to rule that area as it becomes some standard thing that no one can live without... Memory Stick, SXS, etc... have never been widely adopted and people opt for more common open formats even if they don't offer the same feature set.

I thought Adobe will be the last one as they have huge market share.

You would have thought. My assumption is that Apple knows that their relevance in the NLE space is limited. So many post houses got soured on FCP X. That they switched over to Premiere. Most were probably already using a number of apps from Adobe already (After Effects, Photoshop, Illustrator, Acrobat, etc...) that it probably didn't take much to convince their superiors that switching was a good idea.
Apple basically gave Adobe a huge amount of market share practically overnight.
So perhaps licensing to Adobe made sense to Apple to keep them relevant in the video space.

Does the Linux version of Resolve support proper Prores? I thought it at least had the option of ffmpeg Prores, not sure if all the proper flags are set. At least Linux would be a way to get this, especially if using network attached storage so you could just VNC into your Linux machine and tell it to export your project while you move on to another project (yes it would require another Resolve license).

Also, this seems to be a gray area, but it looks like you can run OSX on a virtual machine. You'll need to look it up and try it to see if it still works because it is not officially supported on any VM and requires some hacks. VBox seems pretty easy and I may give it a try just for fun. Then the same dongle that you already own might be seen through the VM to activate Resolve Studio so you can output Prores. It will of course be slower being a VM, but might be another possible way.

Yes I agree, ultimately it would be best to have Prores support built into Resolve. It's all about licensing and money though.

The Linux version that comes with the big panels supports Prores output. The regular Linux version that will run with Mac/Windows dongle does not. Prores export is not something that's Linux intrinsic. It's just a software licensing thing.

Also, this seems to be a gray area, but it looks like you can run OSX on a virtual machine. You'll need to look it up and try it to see if it still works because it is not officially supported on any VM and requires some hacks. VBox seems pretty easy and I may give it a try just for fun. Then the same dongle that you already own might be seen through the VM to activate Resolve Studio so you can output Prores. It will of course be slower being a VM, but might be another possible way.

Yes I agree, ultimately it would be best to have Prores support built into Resolve. It's all about licensing and money though.

Not a grey area, this violates Apple's license for the software.

Does the Linux version of Resolve support proper Prores?

Advanced Resolve Linux does support official Apple ProRes. The full comparison of Resolve versions is at this link:

https://documents.blackmagicdesign.com/ ... arison.pdf

Apple has their reasons for licensing or not licensing ProRes to some Windows and Linux software. I don't think it's just a question of money, but that's certainly part of it. It's not Blackmagic's decision in this case.

Unfortunately few other parameters are not set, eg. color tag. I will write to developer, so maybe with next release he can improve built-in ProRe presets.
It all depends if you want just a ProRes file or trying to simulate Apple official profile HQ, etc. (eg. because you deliver to some broadcaster or bigger client).

Better presets for ProRes are coming to Vbub2.

We have to deliver what the customer is asking for.

I have in the past had to tell customers I couldn't deliver what they were asking for. I've never had a problem convincing them to accept an alternative.

Because it was small company?
Bigger companies have list of accepted formats and they will about never accept anything "custom".

We have to deliver what the customer is asking for.

I have in the past had to tell customers I couldn't deliver what they were asking for. I've never had a problem convincing them to accept an alternative.

I’m sorry, you don’t convince a network or any broadcaster of the format they “should” need.
You deliver exactly what they ask for.

Beside, I try not to tell costumers “I can’t” in general.