Braw on sony cinema cameras annonced plus more

https://www.youtube.com/live/A7AIeDofqA ... -U2NXLIEsa



at 33.01

Ric

So the image quality of the Pyxis was not good enough so they tweaked it that why there a delay. I thought the Pyxis has the same IQ as the BMCC6K? Will they also tweak the IQ of the BMCC6K now to match the Pyxis?

https://www.youtube.com/live/A7AIeDofqAo?si=56ie5n-U2NXLIEsa



at 33.01

Ric

Ok on high end Sony camera, fx6-fx9… but good thing


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

WTH!

I just sold my FX6 and got an Ursa 12k OLPF. I was using ProRes Raw with Ninja but I had to convert that to CDNG to get it in to Resolve. The Ursa image is way better in my opinion, there's something about the motion cadence of the sensor that makes the FX6 have a 'video' look to me. Some people say it's a myth but I don't know...

I guess giving more people access to BRAW gets more people using Resolve.

https://www.youtube.com/live/A7AIeDofqAo?si=56ie5n-U2NXLIEsa



at 33.01

Ric

Ok on high end Sony camera, fx6-fx9… but good thing


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

I don't think the FX9 can output RAW from SDI or HDMI, it needs an add on module. It should be for A7Siii, FX3 and FX6. Essentially all the same camera, in different bodies.

So the image quality of the Pyxis was not good enough so they tweaked it that why there a delay. I thought the Pyxis has the same IQ as the BMCC6K? Will they also tweak the IQ of the BMCC6K now to match the Pyxis?

Very very curious about that as well.

Different resolutions / recording options as well !

So the image quality of the Pyxis was not good enough so they tweaked it that why there a delay. I thought the Pyxis has the same IQ as the BMCC6K? Will they also tweak the IQ of the BMCC6K now to match the Pyxis?

Very very curious about that as well.

Different resolutions / recording options as well !

The BMCC6K's image is more than sufficient for delivery. They could just release of software update if that's the case...

Noted in the video above that the Immersive camera will probably use two separate 12K sensors to generate two 8K videos that DaVinci Resolve will manage as one deliverable file for the Apple Vision Pro left and right eye views.

So the image quality of the Pyxis was not good enough so they tweaked it that why there a delay. I thought the Pyxis has the same IQ as the BMCC6K? Will they also tweak the IQ of the BMCC6K now to match the Pyxis?

The video above clarifies the tweaking was at the level of the Pyxis hardware, not a simple software change, so the tweak will not apply to the BMCC6K. Yes the sensor in the two cameras are the same, but the Pyxis hardware reading the sensor to feed the image processor appears to have changed.

Cinema camera 6k has a ton of horizontal banding at the second gain stage (I own the camera and really like it but I would never go over 1250 iso). Maybe that was caused by some interference and they managed to fix it.

Sean, do you think you might discuss this with BMD Support as that sounds like 3200 ISO is unusable?

I mean, unusable depends on your tolerance for asymmetric noise and/or your need to capture that particular shot. Furthermore, What are Blackmagic gonna do about it? They're obviously aware of the issue, it's not like they haven't used the camera themselves.

https://www.youtube.com/live/A7AIeDofqAo?si=56ie5n-U2NXLIEsa



at 33.01

Ric

Ok on high end Sony camera, fx6-fx9… but good thing


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

No, it will be for the FX9 and FX6 initially, but then the FX3 as well. That's what the BM rep said in the video. But Sony only wants it for the Cinema Line cameras, so not the Alpha range.

This would be great because I know many people who don't like ProResRAW with the Atomos Recorders on Sony Cams because you can't import the footage into Resolve. This would definitely be the shot fired across the bow of ProResRAW. I have a feeling we'll never see ProResRAW support in Resolve with this development. So this could be the death to ProResRAW as people will choose BRAW over it.

Why is it great for one less acquisition format to exist? Do you own Blackmagic stock?

Why is it great for one less acquisition format to exist? Do you own Blackmagic stock?

Because it is an acquisition format that is not importable to Resolve due to licensing restrictions, Resolve being a de facto post processing solution for many, if not most professionals. Why doesn’t Apple make it open if they want more acquisition format to be generally available is the better question. I know, I know. Mo Money!

Why doesn’t Apple make it open if they want more acquisition format to be generally available is the better question.

Are you really so sure about that? We've seen multiple vendors implement internal ProRes RAW recording in their cameras, which is more than we can say for BRAW. There is significant support for ProRes RAW in some heavy hitter software, including Adobe, Avid, and Pomfort's products. I have a difficult time believing that Apple is going out of their way to make implementing the ProRes RAW SDK difficult when there are meaningful ways in which ProRes RAW arguably enjoys as much support as BRAW does...

If I had to get on my speculating hat—which is all any of us are capable of doing if we're being honest with ourselves—I would chalk up the lack of ProRes RAW support in Resolve to the bad blood between BMD and Atomos. I cannot imagine Apple being the sticking point considering how cozy Apple and BMD have been with DaVinci Resolve on MacOS and iOS, the BMD Camera iOS app, and the new Vision Pro compatible URSA Cine Immersive.

Shame too. Perhaps a hot take, but in every head to head I have seen between ProRes RAW and BRAW I have always preferred ProRes RAW...

What's the TL;DR here? I'm not gonna watch a 100 minute video ( ) to get it.

We’ll soon we’ll have AI that can transcribe the video and present a textual summary that perhaps will even be able to insert at the beginning with edited video.

I would chalk up the lack of ProRes RAW support in Resolve to the bad blood between BMD and Atomos. I cannot imagine Apple being the sticking point considering how cozy Apple and BMD have been with DaVinci Resolve on MacOS and iOS, the BMD Camera iOS app, and the new Vision Pro ...

Well if this is the case, if I were BMD and barring no additional licensing cost from Apple, I would add ProRes RAW support to my camera line and take so,e of those market share from Atomos selling recorders with ProRes RAW to BMD camera owners and prospective buyers. That’s how I would give a sour taste to Atomos. again, we are all speculating why.

We’ll soon we’ll have AI that can transcribe the video and present a textual summary that perhaps will even be able to insert at the beginning with edited video.

Its kindof here:

Ric Marty

What's the TL;DR here? I'm not gonna watch a 100 minute video ( ) to get it.

Holy cow, then I watched the part. The title should read “from” Sony cams, not “on”. Basically the Video Assist will now record raw from a Sony, something Atomos has been doing for 3-4 years already.

Good Luck

What's the TL;DR here? I'm not gonna watch a 100 minute video ( ) to get it.

Holy cow, then I watched the part. The title should read “from” Sony cams, not “on”. Basically the Video Assist will now record raw from a Sony, something Atomos has been doing for 3-4 years already.

Good Luck

Apple has an agreement with Atomos for PRraw That probably precludes BMD, So BMDS is not going to make any decision that will only favor its competition

Now, Sony will get braw. So this means that Sony wants the non prraw customers. With Sony, BMD has most camera manufacturers except canon. This says a lot about Braw. And Apple doesn't feel soar because BMD is building a camera for them.

Also could be that BMD and Sony made some agreement. Could it be AF for sensor technology?


Ric Marty

We’ll soon we’ll have AI that can transcribe the video and present a textual summary that perhaps will even be able to insert at the beginning with edited video.

Its kindof here:

Ric Marty

How about more of going to be like this… and perhaps generate the videos and insert it with edited videos.

How about more of going to be like this… and perhaps generate and insert the videos with edited videos?

[/quote]

It's not the same thing The Google project is not about making movies. But all said the future looks bleak for many who do content.

Many jobs both below and above the line will disappear or change.. I think it's a matter of time until content will be initiated by one person and curated by others, each one sitting on a desk with a computer, anywhere.
Cameras might become a thing of the past. The DP will sit on front of a computer screen to decide the lens and shot. So will the director and the actors might be relegated to movenets. The trade jobs will probably disappear to be substituted by a designers using CAD or 3d software and a draftsman...

It will take time for the people to get accustomed but it will surely happen, and then there will only be theatre and events until the holodeck is developed. So Rick Lang and maybe I will probably still have a job at least for a little while.


Ric Marty

I know what Google NotebookLM is and have been using it since beta. I know it’s not the same thing but my point was that the advancement in AI can and will be in the future generate videos out of a script, well beyond just a storyboard that it is capable of doing today.

Why doesn’t Apple make it open if they want more acquisition format to be generally available is the better question.

Are you really so sure about that? We've seen multiple vendors implement internal ProRes RAW recording in their cameras, which is more than we can say for BRAW. There is significant support for ProRes RAW in some heavy hitter software, including Adobe, Avid, and Pomfort's products. I have a difficult time believing that Apple is going out of their way to make implementing the ProRes RAW SDK difficult when there are meaningful ways in which ProRes RAW arguably enjoys as much support as BRAW does...

If I had to get on my speculating hat—which is all any of us are capable of doing if we're being honest with ourselves—I would chalk up the lack of ProRes RAW support in Resolve to the bad blood between BMD and Atomos. I cannot imagine Apple being the sticking point considering how cozy Apple and BMD have been with DaVinci Resolve on MacOS and iOS, the BMD Camera iOS app, and the new Vision Pro compatible URSA Cine Immersive.

Shame too. Perhaps a hot take, but in every head to head I have seen between ProRes RAW and BRAW I have always preferred ProRes RAW...

ATOMOS is most certainly the reason. BMD worked with the Apple for the Blackmagic Vision 3D camera. Ironic that ProResRaw dies off due to Atomos.

I would chalk up the lack of ProRes RAW support in Resolve to the bad blood between BMD and Atomos. I cannot imagine Apple being the sticking point considering how cozy Apple and BMD have been with DaVinci Resolve on MacOS and iOS, the BMD Camera iOS app, and the new Vision Pro ...

Well if this is the case, if I were BMD and barring no additional licensing cost from Apple, I would add ProRes RAW support to my camera line and take so,e of those market share from Atomos selling recorders with ProRes RAW to BMD camera owners and prospective buyers. That’s how I would give a sour taste to Atomos. again, we are all speculating why.

That makes ZERO sense. Resolve adding ProResRaw their cameras and software helps Atomos. Atomos previously stole trade secrets from BMD. Atomos was founded by ex-BMD employees while they still worked for BMD.

I know what Google NotebookLM is and have been using it since beta. I know it’s not the same thing but my point was that the advancement in AI can and will be in the future generate videos out of a script, well beyond just a storyboard that it is capable of doing today.

So now we can generate a script in IA Make a storyboard in Katalist, and then create the content using VIDU, Kling, LUMA, Midjourney or something else. Have it curated and then distribute it first to streaming media. All of this is probably done with much less money, headaches, and contract issues.


Ric Marty

I would chalk up the lack of ProRes RAW support in Resolve to the bad blood between BMD and Atomos. I cannot imagine Apple being the sticking point considering how cozy Apple and BMD have been with DaVinci Resolve on MacOS and iOS, the BMD Camera iOS app, and the new Vision Pro ...

Well if this is the case, if I were BMD and barring no additional licensing cost from Apple, I would add ProRes RAW support to my camera line and take so,e of those market share from Atomos selling recorders with ProRes RAW to BMD camera owners and prospective buyers. That’s how I would give a sour taste to Atomos. again, we are all speculating why.

That makes ZERO sense. Resolve adding ProResRaw their cameras and software helps Atomos. Atomos previously stole trade secrets from BMD. Atomos was founded by ex-BMD employees while they still worked for BMD.

Atomos has the rights to PRraw if Resolve opened to PRraw it would create sales for Atomos and not the V.A. nor its cameras and would hurt Braw, Countourleft the Odessyee because it could not have PRraw, CDNG or Braw. BMD is not stupid.


Ric Marty

Basically the Video Assist will now record raw from a Sony

OK. That's good news!

I don’t give a crap with their politics and business problems. I just want to have all the options for free. At the end, whatever is available I’ll take it. - BRAW, PRRaw, all of the above.

I don’t give a crap with their politics and business problems...

I don’t believe you, Ellory. I’m sure you hold trust, ethics, and morality in high regard, as do most, if not all, of us here.

Atomos has the rights to PRraw if Resolve opened to PRraw it would create sales for Atomos and not the V.A. nor its cameras and would hurt Braw, Countourleft the Odessyee because it could not have PRraw, CDNG or Braw. BMD is not stupid.


Ric Marty

As far as I know, Apple has developed, designed and defined the specs for ProRES RAW and owns all intellectual rights to the format.

Atomos may own the “rights” to the procedure “external transfer via hdmi” of ProRES RAW to external recorder, if even that.

Looking at the most recent crop of new cameras (Lumix GH7 is a good example), the need for using Atomos will become far less prevalent, if - like on Lumix GH7 - ProRES RAW can be done internally (onto internal CFExpress media or direct to external SSD).

The recent firmware upgrade to the weird gizmo “Ninja Phone” (to support 4k ProRES 422 recorded on iPhone 15 Pro and later) could indicate, that Atomos is feverishly looking for new vistas of income in the not too far future.

IF the future looks like supporting internal RAW recording (Canon, Nikon/Red and Lumix) even external BRAW recorders may become an acquired taste.

This leaves only the BlackMagic/Apple squabble to be solved in one way or other of (seemingly) “personal issues” between the two companies, opening up a more relaxed attitude towards new camera internal RAW recording formats.

I for one will not invest in future gear, that requires external RAW recording, whether BRAW or ProRES RAW or any other RAW format. I am invested in Canon and Panasonic gear, so… the need for a third camera manufacturer in my gear selection is limited.

IF Panasonic and/or Canon would offer direct BRAW internal recording (CFExpress or SSD), that would ease my life, but will they?

Regards

Looking at the most recent crop of new cameras (Lumix GH7 is a good example), the need for using Atomos will become far less prevalent, if - like on Lumix GH7 - ProRES RAW can be done internally (onto internal CFExpress media or direct to external SSD).

IF the future looks like supporting internal RAW recording (Canon, Nikon/Red and Lumix) even external BRAW recorders may become an acquired taste.

The times they are a changin as always. Is even ProRes Raw going to be a thing down the line? Nikon have had internal raw in their top and now mid-range hybrids since they made the bold step of taking on and subsequently taking over RED. However, they introduced their own raw codec, NRAW, in addition to ProRes Raw in these cameras. This has not only made external raw recording somewhat redundant in these cameras but it has also made internal ProRes Raw redundant for a couple of reasons. Firstly, NRAW is a much more space-efficient codec than ProRes Raw and secondily, NRAW is available in 8K whereas ProRes Raw maxes out at 4K or 5.4K and has more limited frame rate options (depending on the camera).

Nikon have not continued to enable these cameras with the ability to record ProRes Raw or BRAW externally (pity about the BRAW in fact as it is an even slimmer coded than NRAW). It seems likely that this trend will continue with other camera companies introducing internal raw with Nikon now owning the patents (not something I follow in any detail).

In any case, my Atomos Ninja V is now almost unused. I’m keeping it in case I want it as an external monitor as I am my BMVA which is capable of recording BRAW from the same cameras. They can also be used as backup when recording ProRes or H.265 internally.

I don’t give a crap with their politics and business problems...

I don’t believe you, Ellory. I’m sure you hold trust, ethics, and morality in high regard, as do most, if not all, of us here.

Honestly Rick, it’s a fact that regardless on how much trust, or even any consideration of ethics or morality there is, which I do hold to some degree of regards, won’t do anything to how the company is and will be run, their policies and politics, and the business issues they have to face with their competitors. All I am saying is regardless their feuds, my preference as a customer is for them to figure it out how to give me (us) better options. If all they can give me is Braw because that’s all they can do, fine. If they can give me ProRes Raw, however they duke it out with Atomos or Apple, or whomever, that’s good too. If they can give both, great. It doesn’t affect me how they do it unless it’s not to my interest (I.e. increased in license cost).

… my preference as a customer is for them to figure it out how to give me (us) better options...

No argument there. Thanks for the additional comments.

Anything expanding options will be welcome.

Regards

I don’t give a crap with their politics and business problems...

I don’t believe you, Ellory. I’m sure you hold trust, ethics, and morality in high regard, as do most, if not all, of us here.

Honestly Rick, it’s a fact that regardless on how much trust, or even any consideration of ethics or morality there is, which I do hold to some degree of regards, won’t do anything to how the company is and will be run, their policies and politics, and the business issues they have to face with their competitors. All I am saying is regardless their feuds, my preference as a customer is for them to figure it out how to give me (us) better options. If all they can give me is Braw because that’s all they can do, fine. If they can give me ProRes Raw, however they duke it out with Atomos or Apple, or whomever, that’s good too. If they can give both, great. It doesn’t affect me how they do it unless it’s not to my interest (I.e. increased in license cost).

I agree. It's holding the industry back in a way. The fact that such a widely used software for color grading doesn't support prores raw. It's also true that the customer couldn't care less what their bad blood is with Atomos or whomever. It's got nothing to do with the customers. We want flexibility and options or extended format support. And prores raw is only going to be implemented in more cameras. GH7 is just the beginning.

Why doesn’t Apple make it open if they want more acquisition format to be generally available is the better question.

Are you really so sure about that? We've seen multiple vendors implement internal ProRes RAW recording in their cameras, which is more than we can say for BRAW. There is significant support for ProRes RAW in some heavy hitter software, including Adobe, Avid, and Pomfort's products. I have a difficult time believing that Apple is going out of their way to make implementing the ProRes RAW SDK difficult when there are meaningful ways in which ProRes RAW arguably enjoys as much support as BRAW does...

If I had to get on my speculating hat—which is all any of us are capable of doing if we're being honest with ourselves—I would chalk up the lack of ProRes RAW support in Resolve to the bad blood between BMD and Atomos. I cannot imagine Apple being the sticking point considering how cozy Apple and BMD have been with DaVinci Resolve on MacOS and iOS, the BMD Camera iOS app, and the new Vision Pro compatible URSA Cine Immersive.

Shame too. Perhaps a hot take, but in every head to head I have seen between ProRes RAW and BRAW I have always preferred ProRes RAW...

ATOMOS is most certainly the reason. BMD worked with the Apple for the Blackmagic Vision 3D camera. Ironic that ProResRaw dies off due to Atomos.

How is prores raw 'dead' or 'dying', can you explain? It's being implemented in new cameras.

I agree. It's holding the industry back in a way. The fact that such a widely used software for color grading doesn't support prores raw. It's also true that the customer couldn't care less what their bad blood is with Atomos or whomever. It's got nothing to do with the customers. We want flexibility and options or extended format support. And prores raw is only going to be implemented in more cameras. GH7 is just the beginning.

How is prores raw 'dead' or 'dying', can you explain? It's being implemented in new cameras.

No industry expert here but Nikon were the first to implement ProRes Raw internal recording with the Z9 in mid-2022, followed by the Z8 in 2023 and the Z6III in 2024. At the same time they introduced their own internal raw format NRAW which is just as wonderful as ProRes Raw but with the benefit of being a far more space-efficient codec among other things. Equivalent ProRes Raw files are at least four times larger than NRAW. Since then many if not most Nikon video shooters have dropped ProRes Raw for NRAW. There is little benefit and several advantages including space and the fact that Resolve is one of the few programs that can decode NRAW.

Now you might say that is irrelevant: Nikon are only a minor player in the video and cinema camera industry. However that is changing rapidly especially since they took over RED. One must wonder what will happen with other camera manufacturers introducing internal raw recording in their mid and high end hybrid cameras. Patent issues aside, will they follow in Nikon’s footsteps and introduce their own similarly more efficient raw formats plus or minus ProRes Raw. A more space-efficient codec would certainly have a marketing benefit in the extremely competitive hybrid market.

In other words, will more efficient internal compressed raw formats leave ProRes Raw behind?

Apple are a large and diverse company.

Apple love Blackmagic. Witness how often they use Resolve in major product launches when they want to showcase how fast their M series hardware is. They have BMD custom building a very unique vr camera platform for them.

In the giant massive company that is Apple thatove Blackmagic there’s a small division that is fighting for survival… the team that make FCP.

They also look after ProRes.

And they don’t like BMD. Because Resolve.

So they did a deal with BMDs direct competition, (a company that has a long track record by the way of fraudulent and deception behaviour and bad corporate governance*) to make a raw version of ProRes.

Except they forgot that RED control the IP for in-camera RAW recording. So after calling this company an exclusive launch partner they started to realise no one would make a camera that did PRR internally.

Then Apple decided AFTER launching this botched codec they would then have to try and test the IP. And they lost.

So now Apple realise they had a lame codec that could only be used on external recorders. Which suited their launch partner just fine. That was the situation for nearly 5 years.

Then Nikon decided to make their own infringing raw codec, possibly as a tactic to either challenge or warm up a sale to Nikon. Red sues them. Then suddenly decides not to for no apparent reason until it drops that Nikon now own them.

So. Apple largely love BMD. It’s just that one small team that don’t because Resolve is putting them out of business. Or really already have.

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.

JB

*
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail ... 750c6a768d

https://petapixel.com/2022/09/09/former ... ies-fraud/

https://www.afr.com/rear-window/directo ... 004-p5bn3y

https://www.afr.com/technology/asic-for ... 414-p5d0l6

@mickspixels Nikon is a proprietary format, that may not appeal to every production house.

Currently we have two “generally” (non-proprietary) formats available - ProRES and BRAW (where the term non-proprietary for BRAW may require “stretching” the term a bit).

I see no option for internal BRAW recording on any current hardware outside BlackMagic cameras.

I see a lot of proprietary RAW internal formats (could become just as messy as in photography) with various degrees of editor support, maintained more or less successful by the manufacturer (plugins, recoding/transcoding/conversion steps etc).

Intermediary formats often (typically?) being some kind of selection of the ubiquitous ProRES formats (422 to 4444), but loosing the ProRes RAW benefits (ISO and to some degree white balance adjustment) etc. in the process.

I use 12-bit 5.9k ProRES RAW (HQ) regularly for planned (!!) - not run-and-gun - material, and editing in DaVinci Resolve Studio quickly becomes messy, if - for one reason or other - you decide to “fine tune” the recoded ProRES 4444 material from the original ProRES RAW base material. Or even replace parts.

I usually end up doing the brunt (if not all) of the editing in FCPX - where I easily can “change” a base ISO decision or slightly nudge the white balance on one or more clips, if it serves a purpose, without affecting the project as a whole.

In the cases, where I need better Audio control (typically, when needing to have multi-language options baked into one render and/or some selectable stereo, binaural or “surround” options too), I complete “divisions” into “closed” 4444 ProRES parts and the main audio work then takes place in Fairlight in Resolve Studio for final render.

It’s messy, and God save me from someone demanding, recut or even retakes of original ProRES RAW material has to be done. That’s often a whole new level of messy.

BRAW is not on my radar, since none of my use cases involve Blackmagic Cameras. None of my gear supports BRAW (as anything but external monitor/recording) and personally, I’m not entirely convinced, that BRAW is the end all be all of “RAW”, when ProRES RAW is beginning to be adopted for internal recordings (especially important, where any semblance of “run and gun” is involvolvex).

Currently I see ProRES RAW as the best, open and more or less universally supported RAW format (hardware or software), with the proviso, that one, single hardware manufacturer refuses to support ProRES RAW in any form (only ProRES 4444 and lower) in their otherwise very competent Resolve Studio Editor.

Is it a coincidence, that said hardware manufacturer prefers the proprietary BRAW format?

Kind of like “Apple for years trying to limit messaging to exclusively the Apple App proprietary format”. If Apple can be (forcibly) “persuaded” by solid “arguments” (or threats of significant fines) to “linger up”, and allow the “unwashed format” into their sacred, walled garden, maybe it’s also time for the Grandees of Blackmagic to “linger up” and see sense in “opening up” the “hallowed grounds” of Resolve Studio for the “ugly duckling” (?) ProRES RAW.

And really: Why not?

Regards

@mickspixels Nikon is a proprietary format, that may not appeal to every production house.

Currently we have two “generally” (non-proprietary) formats available - ProRES and BRAW (where the term non-proprietary for BRAW may require “stretching” the term a bit).

In actual fact, NRAW is licensed from a company called Tico so while it is proprietary to Nikon, we shall see if other companies begin to license something similar (or license BRAW as Sony are doing). Who knows what is happening behind the scenes?

ProRes Raw is heavy, moreover in a full frame camera at 8K - the file sizes would be enormous. As I said, I have barely used ProRes Raw since I got a Nikon camera capable of shooting NRAW internally, partly because of the huge difference in file sizes as well as the fact that Nikon have made ProRes Raw available only up to 4K whereas NRAW is available in 8K. Before that I was using a Ninja V with a Nikon Z6 but no more. As we have said above, why lug around a Nnja when just to record raw video when you don't have to?

Apple are a large and diverse company.

In the giant massive company that is Apple thatove Blackmagic there’s a small division that is fighting for survival… the team that make FCP.

They also look after ProRes.

So. Apple largely love BMD. It’s just that one small team that don’t because Resolve is putting them out of business. Or really already have.

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.

JB

Wheeeze - getting there perhaps but I don't think FCP is quite on life support just yet. On the postitive side, the FCP guys seem to have been putting a lot of effort into the iPad version.

I just got an iPad Pro recently for ease of carrying when moving about and have been playing with the FCP and Resolve versions. While Resolve seems to have been ported wholesale (with big sections of the desktop version carved out but apparently still accessible) and not too much thought given to specialising the UI for iPad, the FCP version is very neat with a lot of effort going into making it easy to use on iPad. Far fewer grading features for sure but just enough to get by with the sort of stuff one is likely to be doing on the move.

And it can decode ProRes Raw with WB control (from Nikons at least). As far as I know, the sluggishness in providing raw controls in FCP was down to the camera companies providing the necesssary info. Nikons had these controls from mid-2021. Others moved more slowly.

Nikons had these controls from mid-2021. Others moved more slowly.

Err PRR was introduced in 2018.

There was no way to manually type in WB in raw for YEARS. It’s naive to think it requires camera side support. The whole tenant of a raw workflow is to be able to adjust WB.

We’ve never seen any raw shooting camera of any raw codec in resolve not be able to do this from being first supported. And resolve supports many raw formats from many companies.

The FCP team dropped the ball partnering with an outside vendor on their codec, clearly not thinking it though and then taking years to support the most basic and expected raw controls.

JB

Does anyone know what codecs will be supported on the immersive camera that is being built to feed video to the Apple Vision family?

Every new BMD cinema camera 6K and up seems to offer only BRAW. Is BRAW (and the lack of ProRes and ProRes raw) holding back wider adoption of new BMD cameras shooting 6K and up? If the answer is “no” then BRAW may gradually grow as an internal codec which is the whole point of this thread.

I still shoot CinemaDNG on the URSA Mini 4.6K along with BRAW 4K so I understand the benefits of using other codecs but I also understand the pain of having to manage very large files in post compared to BRAW. I used to shoot ProRes 12bit, but no longer. Why would I unless a client demanded it. My project archives generated by DaVinci Resolve are still ProRes 444 but not my camera capture.

So what about Sony X-OCN Why doesn't Sony use a lighter version on their cameras?


Rica Marty

Does anyone know what codecs will be supported on the immersive camera that is being built to feed video to the Apple Vision family?

Every new BMD cinema camera 6K and up seems to offer only BRAW. Is BRAW (and the lack of ProRes and ProRes raw) holding back wider adoption of new BMD cameras shooting 6K and up? If the answer is “no” then BRAW may gradually grow as an internal codec which is the whole point of this thread.

I still shoot CinemaDNG on the URSA Mini 4.6K along with BRAW 4K so I understand the benefits of using other codecs but I also understand the pain of having to manage very large files in post compared to BRAW. I used to shoot ProRes 12bit, but no longer. Why would I unless a client demanded it. My project archives generated by DaVinci Resolve are still ProRes 444 but not my camera capture.

I miss having DNG from my old URSA Mini 4.6K, my G2 does not have DNG.
Sadly because I would like to have both BRAW and DNG as a choice.
But I fully understand the reason for the change of course.
Thankfully my Big monster URSA 4k v2 and pocket 4k still are able to shoot DNG.

Then about Prores, one thing for me for fast turnaround is being able to chose between BRAW and Prores.
That is a must for me because there are often times that after shooting I need to deliver Prores and no time for converting.
Hopefully soon more and more editors will accept Braw, that would at least make my life easier, until then I need Prores

Nikons had these controls from mid-2021. Others moved more slowly.

Err PRR was introduced in 2018.

There was no way to manually type in WB in raw for YEARS. It’s naive to think it requires camera side support. The whole tenant of a raw workflow is to be able to adjust WB.

We’ve never seen any raw shooting camera of any raw codec in resolve not be able to do this from being first supported. And resolve supports many raw formats from many companies.

The FCP team dropped the ball partnering with an outside vendor on their codec, clearly not thinking it though and then taking years to support the most basic and expected raw controls.

JB

I guess you’re right and I should not believe what I read on forums or wherever it was I read that about FCP introducing raw controls. However, there is something that doesn’t quite add up if you’ll bear with me. I have a reasonable recollection of the history of ProRes Raw on the Ninja V and the development of FCP at that time, mainly because that was my introduction to shooting video (I’m a photographer).

Back in early 2020 as the world was shutting down with the pandemic, I decided to teach myself video and I was hit by the marketing by Nikon and Atomos in relation to ProRes Raw. So already being a Nikon owner and in possession of the right camera gear, I jumped in the deep end. At that time, if I recall correctly, Nikon were the first to produce cameras, Z6 and Z7, that could send raw video by HDMI to the Ninja, so late 2019 or early 2020 is probably the baseline. ProRes Raw was released in 2018 but it wasn’t in use as far as I know until late 2019 for hybrid mirrorless cameras and the Ninja V.

So the ProRes Raw footage I shot in 2020 could not be adjusted in raw settings (WB, Exposure, ISO) in FCP just as you say - pointless. Then by Jan 21, an update to FCP enabled those raw adjustments from Nikon cameras. Great except the numbers were wrong - it was not getting or reading the camera metadata properly: the WB and ISO values were way out.

Finally in March 21, they got it right: all three parameters were exposed for adjustment and correct for Nikon cameras. Now the thing that doesn’t add up for me if this was all on the FCP side is that it was and still isn’t possible to perform raw adjustments on the earlier footage shot in 2020 and the Jan 21 footage still shows the wrong metadata. This suggests to me, and forgive me if it’s naive, that the error was on either the Ninja or camera side. Otherwise the updated FCP should be able to read the metadata correctly.

In addition, as far as I know, other cameras (Panasonic and Sony) exposed less ProRes Raw metadata and were more restricted in terms of what parameters could be adjusted. This is the stuff I was reading about from frustrated users at the time and it may still be the case for some cameras? Again this suggests that some of the issues at least were or are on the camera/Ninja side.

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