Thread: Are there any validations to these claims made by Blackmagic Design?

Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 47
  1. #11  
    Senior Member jake blackstone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,904
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Holland View Post
    BRAW is a good move by BMD because it allows for them to take the reigns over their own codec ecosystem without some of the issues above so future development can happen and they have reason to invest resources in it. It's just really pure the true definition of RAW and that's my only quibble.
    I actually disagree a bit, even though much of what I'm going to say is pure conjecture. Nevertheless, here it goes. Pretty much all BMD cameras can record Prores and until recently, Cimema DNG was used for RAW recording. As it was correctly pointed out, Cinema DNG has some quality issues and it's kinda EOL. So, BMD had a decision to make what codec to use for RAW recording in their new cameras. They could just use Prores RAW and call it a day. It would have been easy to do and it would have been much cheaper to let Apple to do all development heavy lifting and just pay a small license fee. Instead they decided to develop a brand new codec in-house at probably some considerable cost, which is still and always ongoing, if they want to stay relative in the camera market. Partial debayer in camera also requires some extra hardware and it's too not free, resulting in camera price increase. On the other hand, Apple can easily afford to spend a considerable amount of money, including attempts to overturn Red's IP. Not only Apple can afford to do that, but they can easily bear the cost, if you consider Apple will be spreading the development costs for Prores RAW over millions of future iPhones. Now that Red successfully defended it's compressed RAW patent, it looks like Red will be very happy from Apple licensing payments. So, why then BMD decided to develop BRAW? Well, despite outward appearances, Resolve on Windows and Linux (except for a few Linux installations with the special dongle) still can't write Prores because, unlike with scores of other software manufacturers, Apple consistently refuses to license it to BMD. Even more interesting, to my knowledge, Resolve is the only color grading platform, that doesn't support ProresRAW... still. All other platforms already do. So, it seems, BMD had no choice but to develop their own RAW codec, as ProresRAW isn't available on Resolve...
    Jake Blackstone
    Colorist
    Los Angeles
    MOD Color Web Site
    Demo Reel
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    1,779
    It took BMD 3 years to develop BRAW and it was already 2 years in development before Apple announced ProResRAW in april 2018.
    I still haven't seen ProResRAW implemented in high end camera's like RED, ARRI, Canon, Sony or Panasonic and till today it's only implemented in some prosumer models with an external Atomos recorder.(afaik)

    Z-CAM is still developing ZRAW and Kinefinity is still promising KineRAW2.0.

    ProRes is a defacto standard, ProResRAW isn't and it wouldn't surprise me if BRAW is more widely used than ProResRAW at the moment, those pocket camera's are pretty good value for money.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Hollywood, USA
    Posts
    6,347
    Quote Originally Posted by jake blackstone View Post
    I actually disagree a bit, even though much of what I'm going to say is pure conjecture. Nevertheless, here it goes. Pretty much all BMD cameras can record Prores and until recently, Cinema DNG was used for RAW recording. As it was correctly pointed out, Cinema DNG has some quality issues and it's kinda EOL. So, BMD had a decision to make what codec to use for RAW recording in their new cameras. They could just use Prores RAW and call it a day. It would have been easy to do and it would have been much cheaper to let Apple to do all development heavy lifting and just pay a small license fee.
    Actually, if you watch last year's NAB speech by Grant Petty, he says they felt it was "more efficient" (which I think means "more cost-effective") just to develop their own codec instead of paying anybody the per-camera royalty for any of the competing Raw formats. He has had some harsh things to say about ProRes Raw, which is interesting.

    I never have gotten a clear answer as to why they dropped CinemaDNG Raw, but I have to say BM Raw is not that bad to work with. And the other story is why Apple will not grant BMD a license to render ProRes under Windows. I have been told that money alone is not the biggest issue -- clearly, Adobe was able to do it, and yet they compete (heavily) with FCPX and other Apple products.
    marc wielage, csi • colorist/post consultant • daVinci Resolve Certified Trainer
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Senior Member jake blackstone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,904
    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
    Grant Petty has had some harsh things to say about ProRes Raw, which is interesting.
    Wow, color me shocked Grant isn't a fan of ProresRAW
    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
    And the other story is why Apple will not grant BMD a license to render ProRes under Windows. I have been told that money alone is not the biggest issue -- clearly, Adobe was able to do it, and yet they compete (heavily) with FCPX and other Apple products.
    No, it never was about the money, as Prores license is completely FREE to all comers, except BMD. It's all about BMD stepping on Apple's toes left and right. It's bad enough Resolve competes directly with FCPX. BMD directly rips FCPX lock stock and barrel as a SECOND editor in Resolve and now they trying to directly compete with with Apple ProresRAW codec. Apple has long memory and can be very vindictive. nVidia is a good example and in comparison, BMD is just a small pimple on nVidia's ass. What are the chances of Canon, Nikon, ARRI and other camera manufacturers choosing ProresRAW for their cameras vs the same companies choosing BRAW?
    I rest my case...
    Jake Blackstone
    Colorist
    Los Angeles
    MOD Color Web Site
    Demo Reel
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    1,779
    Yes, when Apple dropped NVidia as prefered supplier for the GPU's in 2013 NVidia's stock price was at ~ $15, today it's $250. Not to bad.
    Not many companies earn money when selling to Apple (Qualcomm being the exception).
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    4,049
    Quote Originally Posted by jake blackstone View Post
    Wow, color me shocked Grant isn't a fan of ProresRAW

    No, it never was about the money, as Prores license is completely FREE to all comers, except BMD. It's all about BMD stepping on Apple's toes left and right. It's bad enough Resolve competes directly with FCPX. BMD directly rips FCPX lock stock and barrel as a SECOND editor in Resolve and now they trying to directly compete with with Apple ProresRAW codec. Apple has long memory and can be very vindictive. nVidia is a good example and in comparison, BMD is just a small pimple on nVidia's ass. What are the chances of Canon, Nikon, ARRI and other camera manufacturers choosing ProresRAW for their cameras vs the same companies choosing BRAW?
    I rest my case...
    Prores playback may be free on all platforms. But writing Prores is not for non-apple platforms. It is built in to OSX, everybody else has to negotiate a license. Apple is opening up full licensing a bit more than they used to, but it is far from universal.

    I prefer Cineform. Lightworks has implemented Cineform support for internal proxy workflow and/or DI mastering. I normally transcode everything to Cineform masters for editing.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    Senior Member jake blackstone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,904
    Quote Originally Posted by Misha Engel View Post
    Yes, when Apple dropped NVidia as prefered supplier for the GPU's in 2013 NVidia's stock price was at ~ $15, today it's $250. Not to bad.
    Not many companies earn money when selling to Apple (Qualcomm being the exception).
    And AMD's price at the time was $3.50, today it's $52. What's your point?
    Jake Blackstone
    Colorist
    Los Angeles
    MOD Color Web Site
    Demo Reel
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    Senior Member jake blackstone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,904
    Quote Originally Posted by David Rasberry View Post
    Prores playback may be free on all platforms. But writing Prores is not for non-apple platforms. It is built in to OSX, everybody else has to negotiate a license. Apple is opening up full licensing a bit more than they used to, but it is far from universal.

    I prefer Cineform. Lightworks has implemented Cineform support for internal proxy workflow and/or DI mastering. I normally transcode everything to Cineform masters for editing.
    The license to write Prores on any platform to all software manufacturers is also free.
    And, yes, it's up to Apple to decide whom they license Prores to. Pretty much all software companies, who asked to be able to write Prores got it, with a lone exception of BMD.
    Jake Blackstone
    Colorist
    Los Angeles
    MOD Color Web Site
    Demo Reel
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #19  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    4,049
    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
    Actually, if you watch last year's NAB speech by Grant Petty, he says they felt it was "more efficient" (which I think means "more cost-effective") just to develop their own codec instead of paying anybody the per-camera royalty for any of the competing Raw formats. He has had some harsh things to say about ProRes Raw, which is interesting.

    I never have gotten a clear answer as to why they dropped CinemaDNG Raw, but I have to say BM Raw is not that bad to work with. And the other story is why Apple will not grant BMD a license to render ProRes under Windows. I have been told that money alone is not the biggest issue -- clearly, Adobe was able to do it, and yet they compete (heavily) with FCPX and other Apple products.
    Uncompressed CDNG is not a practical editorial codec. It is much better to treat it as a negative and transcode to DI masters for editing.
    The lighter raw codecs are much more NLE friendly.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #20  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    1,779
    Quote Originally Posted by jake blackstone View Post
    And AMD's price at the time was $3.50, today it's $52. What's your point?
    AMD earned their money and current stockprice with PC and Server CPU's, not with selling GPU's to Apple.
    NVidia makes it earnings with the GPU's in the gaming, server and AI business.

    When you want to earn some money on Apple be a monopolist like Qualcomm, no other company gets a descent price for their products/services while selling to Apple or using Apple standards.
    Apple is in the game for earning all the money.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts