- Posts: 405
- Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2013 4:06 am
The ProRes codec leverages the power of the fcpx/MacOS/CPU to give fcpx huge bandwidth advantages over other NLEs when using optimized media. That's the whole reason ProRes exists in the first place, and this is why we transcode other codecs into optimized ProRes media to work faster in fcpx.
It stands to reason that ProRes RAW delivers the same ProRes formatting advantages on fcpx.
If that is so, then it also stands to reason that fcpx could transcode BRAW into ProRes RAW. Neither is actual RAW anyway, being compressed formats etc, but both retain Raw-like abilities to change ISO, WB etc.
So if the fcpx answer is to transcode BRAW into ProRes Raw, then there is no threat to ProRes RAW, in fact it becomes an extra justification for its existence. They do not have be competitors in the fcpx workflow, but coexist.
And given that people with blackmagic cameras already have Resolve free, doing something like this is probably a better way to make inroads with BM customers to stay with fcpx, so it probably helps Apple more than it hurts Apple.
It stands to reason that ProRes RAW delivers the same ProRes formatting advantages on fcpx.
If that is so, then it also stands to reason that fcpx could transcode BRAW into ProRes RAW. Neither is actual RAW anyway, being compressed formats etc, but both retain Raw-like abilities to change ISO, WB etc.
So if the fcpx answer is to transcode BRAW into ProRes Raw, then there is no threat to ProRes RAW, in fact it becomes an extra justification for its existence. They do not have be competitors in the fcpx workflow, but coexist.
And given that people with blackmagic cameras already have Resolve free, doing something like this is probably a better way to make inroads with BM customers to stay with fcpx, so it probably helps Apple more than it hurts Apple.
Kyle Gordon
Professional Singer/Composer/Producer and Director/Editor/Colorist
Professional Singer/Composer/Producer and Director/Editor/Colorist