Support for ProRes Raw

Yuck, since your fanboy attitude towards BMD doesn't allow rational thinking my hope for BMD either providing open APIs so that Apple could develop free plugins like they do for Adobe or actually catching up with other NLEs implementing the decoder themselves is somehow unreal?

Well, thank you for proving me right yet again.

How come Premiere supports encoding ProRes on Windows then?

Read my previous reply.

How come Apple develops their own ProRes RAW plugin for Premiere?

Where Resolve's ProRes and/or ProResRaw support is concerned, that's completely irrelevant.

Yea, whatever. Adobe provides an API which Apple and many other companies - BMD included - use for developing in- and export plugins. BMD doesn't do that but Apple, who themself even provides a ProRes RAW plugin for Premiere is to blame?

BMD has done more than that. Braw is open to any camera manufacturer or nle company that wants it.
But probably they don't want to get on apples bad side.


Ricardo Marty

BMD has done more than that. Braw is open to any camera manufacturer or nle company that wants it.
But probably they don't want to get on apples bad side.


Ricardo Marty

And here we see the down side to proprietary codecs from companies that are notoriously finicky about licensing...

There is no encoder of braw available anywhere to be seen. What is a camera manufacturer going to do with braw decoder? Turn camera into a media player with lens for playing back footage from some other manufacturers camera?

Not having prores raw etc in Resolve is as much Apples doing as it is BMDs doing if someone decides not to use Resolve. It has been said time and again by people who develop software that has prores encoders that Apple does not sell prores encoder, it is free to use IF license is followed. What the license says is another story but it is not that Apple does not want to give or it cost much etc which seems to be the backbone of excuses on why Resolve on Win doesn't do prores or why there is no prores raw support. Resolve is just about the last major software on win that doesn't do prores.

There is no encoder of braw available anywhere to be seen. What is a camera manufacturer going to do with braw decoder?

That's a pretty nonsensical question. BMD has been pretty open about braw; in addition to making the SDK for decoding it available freely, BMD has also expressed a willingness to work with camera manufacturers to integrate braw encoding into their cameras, and at least a couple of manufacturers are working with BMD to enable braw recording on the new Video Assist models.

Not having prores raw etc in Resolve is as much Apples doing as it is BMDs doing if someone decides not to use Resolve.

If BMD is unable to get a license for it, then how is it BMD's fault?

Neither Apple nor Adobe want to actually HELP Black Magic. Their NLEs would just get steamrolled. And without FCPx, what would be the selling point for a high end mac?

Think about it... it costs a lot less to deny Black Magic a ProResRaw license than it does to put the R&D effort into competing with Black Magic and the legion of x86 systems out there that have newer, faster hardware.

That's not exactly a new strategy for Apple...

So Apple is actively denying BMD the prores license although BMD is willing to comply with it? What is the source of this claim besides "thinking about it" and "it looks like it"?

There is no encoder of braw available anywhere to be seen. What is a camera manufacturer going to do with braw decoder?

That's a pretty nonsensical question. BMD has been pretty open about braw; in addition to making the SDK for decoding it available freely, BMD has also expressed a willingness to work with camera manufacturers to integrate braw encoding into their cameras, and at least a couple of manufacturers are working with BMD to enable braw recording on the new Video Assist models.

Apple has been pretty open about prores, in addition to making sdk for decoding available freely, Apple has expressed willingness to work with camera manufacturers to integrate prores encoding to cameras etc. So either BMD is "doing Apple" in their own act or vice versa.

Sony FX9 will support ProRes RAW soon
https://www.atomos.com/press-releases/a ... pxwfx9-raw

They literally developed the ProRes RAW plugin for Premiere by themselves, but go on.
https://support.apple.com/kb/DL2033?locale=en_US

It's BMD who doesn't seem to support it because reasons.

I was under the impression that Adobe has licensed the ProRes family for all of it's products. If apple made ProRes free and open I could see your point, but as long as they are restricting it's implementation through licensing and certification I try to avoid it as much as I can.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT200321#proresraw

Most tools which have ProRes official encoder have it for free. Apple doesn't really charge any fees, but you have to meet certain requirements. ProRes RAW encoding most likely is not free, but ProRes RAW decoding and "normal" ProRes encoding/decoding is.

BMD has done more than that. Braw is open to any camera manufacturer or nle company that wants it.
But probably they don't want to get on apples bad side.


Ricardo Marty

Since when BM is giving away BRAW encoder/rights to use it for free to camera/recorders manufactures? BM's free decoder SDK has nothing to do with it. Also format is not open, as there is no source code. It's closed formant with just provided SDK for decoding. Exactly the same as eg. RED. Providing decoding SDK for new format is a must (if you want format to be supported by "others") for any new format, so BM has done nothing special at all.

BMD has also expressed a willingness to work with camera manufacturers to integrate braw encoding into their cameras, and at least a couple of manufacturers are working with BMD to enable braw recording on the new Video Assist models.

Sorry, but working with other companies to provide support for BRAW over HDMI to record using BM device is something totally different than giving BRAW code (at no fees), so camera manufacture can implement internal recording.
These 2 things are actually day and night.

Here's a vote from me for Apple ProRes RAW support in DaVinci Resolve. More and more cameras are able to export a raw stream to Atomos for ProRes RAW recording.

The Sony FX9 will gain support for Apple ProRes RAW this year: https://indieshooter.com/atomos-brings-raw-recording-to-the-sony-pxw-fx9/

Most tools which have ProRes official encoder have it for free. Apple doesn't really charge any fees, but you have to meet certain requirements. ProRes RAW encoding most likely is not free, but ProRes RAW decoding and "normal" ProRes encoding/decoding is.

The couple of developers that I have talked with about this have told me that apple does charge, but if you have different info I would love to hear it. I kind of figured this is why the ProRes encode option in linux only ever came with the advanced panel dongle.

Also wasn't part of the problem with RAW in general that RED has fairly restrictive patents over it? The Atmos CEO has gone on record to say that they are paying licencing fees to RED in order to have the ability to use RAW (specifically ProRes RAW) in their products. One of the main reasons that BM developed BM RAW was to try an circumvent the RED patents. I have linked the youtube interview with the Atmos dude below.

I really hope to get the ability to work with ProRes Raw in Resolve! Came a long way to end up with Resolve and love it.
I am using the Z6 / Ninja V setup and I am very curious what ProRes Raw could deliver if there would be a powerful software to work on it.


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk Pro

That patent thing is another can of worms, in case of braw it is circumvented by simply making it not raw by that definition.

The couple of developers that I have talked with about this have told me that apple does charge, but if you have different info I would love to hear it. I kind of figured this is why the ProRes encode option in linux only ever came with the advanced panel dongle.

Have your developers actually made a product with licensed ProRes or just repeat internet 'myths' like 99% of other forums? If they know Apple is charging then give us a rough figure which they've been quoted.
My info is checked. It may not mean 100% products got it for free. It definitely means that Apple is not charging everyone or charging some crazy money, though. Stop assuming that ProRes was added only to expensive products because Apple was charging crazy money for licensing. This is pure speculation, nothing else. Apple use to license ProRes only to products running on Windows Server and this was a strategic decision. This restriction was removed and now any respected/serious company with proven background can license ProRes (assuming they accept Apple's licensing terms). I know that companies had issues getting ProRes license many years ago (5 years and more), but in recent years this has changed and it's way easier to get it if you really want it.

That patent thing is another can of worms, in case of braw it is circumvented by simply making it not raw by that definition.

i would say unraw

Isn't red and apple in court over raw?

Ricardo Marty

Not anymore, case rejected by court, so RED patent is still in power.

Not anymore, case rejected by court, so RED patent is still in power.

So prores raw is not raw anymore?

Ricardo Marty

I was thinking of getting an S1H to do ProRes Raw, but I'll just stick with the S1 I guess. I'm not fussed enough to go jumping through hoops to use it TBH. After all, it feels silly to shoot raw, then have to transcode it all into a 10-bit to use it in Reolve.

I really hope they can sort this out between them. Since Red won their court case, I don't expect to see many other compressed raw codecs gaining popularity.

ProRes Raw is already winning the BMD/Apple Raw war, and BMD need to get it into Resolve ASAP whatever it takes, or there will be people switching NLE just to use this format.

Not anymore, case rejected by court, so RED patent is still in power.

So prores raw is not raw anymore?

Ricardo Marty

Why not?
RED patent is not a problem for Apple/Atomos as they pay them fee.
Apple wanted invalidate this patent (so they don't have to pay any fees), but they failed.

Not anymore, case rejected by court, so RED patent is still in power.

So prores raw is not raw anymore?

Ricardo Marty

Why not?
RED patent is not a problem for Apple/Atomos as they pay them fee.
Apple wanted invalidate this patent (so they don't have to pay any fees), but they failed.

So maybe we can say that there are two additional reasons why bmd won't pick up Prores raw? Because they would be paying Apple and Red fees because and bmd skirted around the patent and provided a great codec and its free for them and for all.

Thanks
Richard Cardona

If BM wanted to use it in their cameras then yes- it would require paying fees.
Adding ProRes RAW decoder to Resolve costs nothing (except development) and this is purely strategic/business decision. Having ProResRAW support weakens somehow BRAW format, not having it may be bad for Resolve as well.

so today zcam offered prores raw for their cameras.
owning a F6 and an atomos ninjav i am waiting june now for ninja update to enjoy prores raw.

but what are the options if i want to use resolve ? i will need to transcode but with what ? into what quality ?

https://www.cinema5d.com/atomos-announc ... e2-camera/

You can convert to whatever you want. Do rough color correction and export to intermediate codec- ProRes, DNxHR, etc.

You can convert to whatever you want. Do rough color correction and export to intermediate codec- ProRes, DNxHR, etc.

sure i can convert, but i doubt so many encoders support prores raw

Not many, just few including eg. Assimilate Scratch which is now free for few months and has ProRes export on PC. You have to deal with it

Not many, just few including eg. Assimilate Scratch which is now free for few months and has ProRes export on PC. You have to deal with it

Well, not to beat a dead horse, but Premiere now offers full support (Mac & Windows) for ProRes Raw, but I would rather paint a house with my own blood rather than choosing Premiere over of Resolve for color grading or FCPX for editing (an exaggeration, but you know). But as Andrew has correctly stated (imo):

Adding ProRes RAW decoder to Resolve costs nothing (except development) and this is purely strategic/business decision. Having ProResRAW support weakens somehow BRAW format, not having it may be bad for Resolve as well.

At what point do we reach the tipping point toward support in Resolve? The answer surely can't be never, can it? How is having support for this codec a bad thing? If you don't like/hate the codec, no one is going to force you to use it.

Thanks and be safe.

All down to strategic/political decisions, nothing more.

BMD has done more than that. Braw is open to any camera manufacturer or nle company that wants it.
But probably they don't want to get on apples bad side.


Ricardo Marty

And here we see the down side to proprietary codecs from companies that are notoriously finicky about licensing...

I doubt Apple is targeting companies that license BRAW, as that would be a clear anti-trust violation, and I'm pretty sure they'd be snitched on with the quickness - just like Google with Android.

NLEs not implementing BRAW support has to do with BRAW's market penetration/position and the fact that implementing this means they have to support any users who run into issues using that CODEC. The resources needed to devote to that isn't worth the gains from implementing it. It doesn't make economic sense for them to implement it, right now.

ProRes RAW is a different ballgame, and puts more pressure on those developers because FCPX is a more competitive solution to software like Premiere Pro or Edius Pro (widely used in some other markets) for editorial than is DaVinci Resolve (which is still predominantly used for Color Grading).

I don't undestand where these conspiracy theories come from.

Could it also be that BMD doesn't want to implement ProRes RAW becasue they want you to buy their own cameras and use BRAW, instead?

P.S. I'm pretty sure Edius has ProRes (Import/Export), ProRes RAW, and BRAW support on Windows.

Could it also be that BMD doesn't want to implement ProRes RAW becasue they want you to buy their own cameras and use BRAW, instead?

Um.... Yeah. Basically go back and read all of Andrew's posts in this thread. As much as some people may want to deny it, this is exactly what it is.

In the meantime, the codec works in Premiere (and almost everything else that matters, except Resolve that is), but I prefer Resolve for color grading. Plus, we cannot use BM cameras or Braw for a variety of reasons, so there's that. So Premiere it is then (for now at least).

more and more cameras are getting proresraw and resolve is the only serious editing software that doesn't support it.
i guess it can not last any much longer

Apple wants the world to use prores raw so that braw is low on their list. I don't blame them. So if you want to use braw use another nle.

Ricardo Marty

How about everyone leave the speculation to the stock markets?

more and more cameras are getting proresraw

The only one listed on the Apple web site is the Zenmuse X7. Are there more which Apple isn't bragging about?

more and more cameras are getting proresraw

The only one listed on the Apple web site is the Zenmuse X7. Are there more which Apple isn't bragging about?

for prores raw
there are far more cameras

fuji gfx100
zcam all cameras
panasonic s1h , varicam lt and eva1
canon C300 Mark II
Canon C500
Sony FS700
Sony FS5
Sony FS7/FS7 II
sigma fp

and maybe more

maybe apple is only considerng the one recording internaly but i think the eva 1 does it too

maybe apple is only considerng the one recording internaly

That's how I understood it as well.

But to my thinking, that's what counts when you list ProRes RAW models.

So I see only one model, not many.

Again
Prores raw when will be developed like raw will be interesting codec, at today that also under fcpx is only exposure wb managed, is a waste of space.
You cannot manage debayering, that mean you cannot have advantage against a prores 12bit, but you have disadvantage of no full compatibility on a lots of software. No one camera that record prores raw take advantage of prores, from full metadata to lut included (arri do that with prores), to many other things.
Actually is another poor codec on game.

Prores is payed from user?
Braw is payed from user?

Same answer, yes and no.
Some cameras record in camera, some other with external recorders.
But until I not see developing control for raw I not think is so interesting codec.
Is the same for cineform, the father of all these codecs, when was bought from GoPro and was killed removing all control and active metadata it was transformed in a poor Di codec like others, no advantage to use against other.

Why I not found fcpx forum full of request to support braw?
Braw addition to software is free of charge, prores and prores raw reading is not free, Blackmagic Design must pay royalty to apple also for decoding and must be approved (apple not allow to developer that declare support of their product without their approvation of code).
I must do devil advocate, but sometimes someone must do him.
If someone think different, well please develop a resolve plugin to import and manage proresraw and sell it, I’m curious to know how many minutes can stay on market before apple advocate contact him/her.
Develop it, seems there is a lots of people that want buy it.


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

https://www.newsshooter.com/2020/03/31/apple-prores-raw-playback-on-windows-now-available/

Even Premiere has support for Prores Raw now.
Really considering going back to Premiere for editing at least since Resolve is getting slower and less reliable with each update.

Only under windows initially and now only after years. With what control? Wb? Exposure?
Ti me a good raw implementation under Adobe is red and braw where you have more control under tab, other implementation like Sony, arri, and today proresraw are not a real raw advantage. If I put proresraw or prores 12 I can obtain the same result


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

i agree that proresraw does act like a real raw in post so far, wonder why apple doesn't unleash it as it could be like raw in post.

i agree that proresraw does act like a real raw in post so far, wonder why apple doesn't unleash it as it could be like raw in post.

like many other pro more skilled than me can told, a 12bit prores, or 12bit proresraw without raw control allow us to do exactly the same thing, the quality and quantity of infos are so high that i could do all.
the difference should be a light weight on raw (no debayered should allow a better compression data), and when apple decide to unleash all raw controll a better developing of file also in next future.

But at today i prefer that first Apple develop all that part of codec, than later the adoption from all software. Or like Red, Arri, Zcam, Sony, develop their software to load prores raw, develop all infos, then later export a classic prores.

I like and love any flavor or raw that allow me to develop better my picture, more raw, more options to do better.

i agree that proresraw does act like a real raw in post so far, wonder why apple doesn't unleash it as it could be like raw in post.

https://www.newsshooter.com/2020/07/18/ ... rores-raw/

helloooooo bmd...

The compressor is part of Final Cut, right? I am not a Mac-user, so please accept such a (may be) stupid question.
Is there any other possibilty to transcode ProRes Raw into something Resolve can handle?

So the work-around is to transcode ProRes RAW to ProRes 4444. ProRes RAW is 12 bits, and ProRes 4444 is 12 image bits, so it is a good fit, and it runs well in Resolve. The simple and painless way to do this is to import all the clips into Compressor and bulk export them to ProRes 4444.

Compressor is the media encoding program by Apple that runs on Mac. It is a companion to Final Cut Pro X. I was hopeful when Premier Pro added ProRes RAW that their companion Adobe Media Encoder would be able to transcode ProRes RAW to ProRes 4444. I've tried this, both with the Windows and Mac versions, and unfortunately it won't make a clean and useable transcoded copy. It does the transcoding, but severely crushes the whites and I was not able to recover them. For now Compressor is the only program I know that does a clean transcode from ProRes RAW to ProRes 4444 that works well in Resolve. I heard, but don't remember where, that Atomos may plan to offer a transcoder for this; it would be a good thing for Resolve users.

https://www.newsshooter.com/2020/07/18/assimilate-scratch-adds-iso-gain-wb-and-tint-controls-for-prores-raw/

helloooooo bmd...

Ups. Assimilate has put so many youtubers into bit of misery. Are they still hosting their big, bold full of lie "ProRes RAW is not RAW at all" videos
Can't wait to see new wave of videos saying "ProRes RAW is actually RAW"

+1 Hoping for support for Prores RAW

https://www.newsshooter.com/2020/07/18/assimilate-scratch-adds-iso-gain-wb-and-tint-controls-for-prores-raw/

helloooooo bmd...

Ups. Assimilate has put so many youtubers into bit of misery. Are they still hosting their big, bold full of lie "ProRes RAW is not RAW at all" videos
Can't wait to see new wave of videos saying "ProRes RAW is actually RAW"

Yep, and the Facebook Pocket4k/6k crowd also still believes it. Whoever came up with that lie did a great job for the competition.

It's not necessarily deliberate lie, but more of a spreading crap based on not having enough understanding/knowledge. Youtubers are masters in this.

Youtubers are masters in this.

I remember watching a recent video on a certain Aussie Monitor/Recorder manufacturer's YouTube channel where they sponsored a YouTuber who was talking about HLG and spouting all sorts of gibberish

There were even people thanking him for enlightening them

I propose that BMD talks to Atomos to get ProRes RAW in Resolve and BRAW in the Ninja line.

Why wont apple make fcpx run on. Windows?

Ricardo Marty

Due to the same reason why BM doesn't want to support ProRes RAW (owning own RAW format).

A pro res raw license costs money a bear doesn't. The new ios is a controlled e
nvironment and no pluging is accepted without apples permission which maybe include some some cash.


Ricardo Marty