Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Cineform as a Tiered Partner

Videodisc said:
Jared

I like you and respect you as I like and respect Red. But you have just summed up the work flow problems for many present and future owners. I know they will improve and I deeply hope NAB will offer new options.
Click to expand...

We don't hide that fact.... Just like we didn't hide the fact our beta cameras had issues. But people have made it work.

We are just beginning remember. REDCINE is still in BETA, and soon there will be more tools, from the big guys and the little guys.

I remember back in the day when I got my first DVX... there was no 24pa workflow, only one application half-supported it for 6 months and it was a bit of a pain in the ass. But boy was it worth the trouble. Same thing with the HVX and the P2 workflow when it came out.

There is a decision that has to be made.. a) you either release a camera with enough tools to get the job done one way or another, or b) hold releasing the camera until all the tools are out of Beta and All the NLE's and platforms adopted the workflow.

We left that choice up to the customer.. which is the way it should be. People have had the option to wait without penalty when we called them to them their camera was ready.
 
Videodisc said:
I know you are telling the truth. I'm just a little nervous and impatient. I’ll be here when the answers arrive.
Click to expand...

Thats cool man.. as you can see you're not alone. The good thing is we are listening..
 
Jarred Land said:
Cineform will be a solution but its a somewhat slow transcode solution... Just like putting REDCODE into any other codec. Raw is the way to go.. specially considering the bandwidth saved.
Click to expand...

To clear up some confusion over a transcode solution. While you can do that transcode though RedCine, like any other codec, that is not the workflow we are proposing. We are proposing RAW to RAW transcode, which is significantly faster (currently clocking in at 10fps for 4K), allowing the post tools to gain all the benefits for the reduced data rates for RAW, while still having the dynamic range flexibilty, added editing speed, and control over the demosaic during post. I expect the RAW workflow you are proposing will get there, on the Mac first then migrate to the PC. We are already doing RAW workflows on the PC, with some Apple support, moving it that direction. So in the end there will be two different style RAW workflows on both platforms. Everyone wins, just waiting the Red go ahead.
 
Yes David.. but going to Cineform no matter which way you do it is still a transcode. To go from 1 hour of 4k REDCODE RAW to 1 hour of Cineform, even with your RAW-RAW at your claimed speeds, would take 3 hours of transcoding at 30fps per hour just to get somewhere you can start working.

Now many people that have a workflow based around Cineform will likely put up with that, But many others would prefer just to open up the R3D files natively into applications to worry about the transcoding when they are done.

Moral of the story.. there will be options for everyone down the road.
 
David Newman said:
The workflow are different, yes. We are slower to get started, but faster to finish. The different workflows will appeal to different users, just way it should.
Click to expand...

Not sure what your point is here, David. We have agreed to open up our SDK when it is finished. Your point is?

Jim
 
This is really starting to get irritating. We have acknowledged that we will open up our SDK when we are done. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to give out the keys to the kingdom, have Cineform (or any other company) build tools, then we change everything and have Cineform (and every other 3rd party) have to change their programs again.

What is the problem here? We will support companies like Cineform, Avid, Adobe, Baselight, Quantel and others when we are done. This seems pretty easy to understand.

Why the noise?

Jim
 
We are waiting, as requested. Only pointing at the transcoding is for a purpose. We often see transcoding described as making a workflow bad, which is what it sounded like in Jarred's post, but there is a plus side to. Just excited to share this workflow for those who are interested. I don't mean for my enthusiasm to create conflict, otherwise staying out of this thread which think is not helping anyone.
 
There is no question that native support is a good thing... both Mac and PC. We expect that this will absolutely happen in the near future. I think that Jarred was pointing out that there is a PC solution available now. And while not the most efficient, it is available. Again... sorry for stating the same thing for the 100th time, when we are done and give out the public SDK, there will be many more options.

Jim
 
David... on Nov. 18th, 2007 you wrote:

No worries there Jim, we're only interested in transcoding, nothing else was being implied. Transcoding everyone's camera format to CineForm is what we do well, native support is a thing for the big NLE vendors. We are quite happy that RedCine works as well as it does for rendering out to CineForm. Once the 4096 wide bug in fixed RedCine we are all set. Thanks for following the thread.
__________________
David Newman
CTO, CineForm
 
I'm looking forward to it. Thanks, Jim (and the entire Red team).

-Thor
 
Is it, or will it ever be possible for the RED ONE to output Cineform encoded RAW files? Would this entail a hardware upgrade or could it be done via software?

The RED.1.c -- this would be the dream cam…as you could shoot, and then attach your red drive to your pc or mac, and instantly start editing...even on a laptop.

With a Dual Xeon Quad core at 3.16ghz, it took me 21 minutes to output 60 seconds of dpx files (a file I still can’t edit). Cineform can do this at a 3:1 ratio, if not faster, and then you are immediately editing 4K in Premiere...which is a very doable workflow for me.

I mention this, not to offend, but to encourage collaboration. I'd love to see you guys both working together, as your companies have great strengths that coequally benefit each other and nearly every costumer.
 
Could someone explain me one thing please, since I am new to AE and Premiere

CIneform is kind of high performance plug in (turbo) for AE and Premiere and few other apps.
I understand that native support of REDRAW is the best but Adobe writes the code for multi platform and many PCs and video cards.
Adobe native support will be never optimized for speed and quality because they have to support so many GPUs CPUs AND OSes, correct?

Now CIneform comes and offers turbo charged plug-in that may restricts the number of GPUs and hardware out there but makes Adobe and other applications fly, is that correct?

Also, it attempts to standardize RAW in one format so instead of waiting for large software company to start supporting some native format, Cineform as a more dynamic company can attempt to transcode any new RAW out there in to the standard RAW format?

So two benefits, adds high octane turbo charged environment to some apps as a plug-in and is trying to standardize the RAW so its support is more universal? Is this correct?

I agree that native support for any format is good but may not be the best for some time to come.
 
Jannard said:
This is really starting to get irritating. We have acknowledged that we will open up our SDK when we are done. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to give out the keys to the kingdom, have Cineform (or any other company) build tools, then we change everything and have Cineform (and every other 3rd party) have to change their programs again.

What is the problem here?(snip)
Click to expand...

The problem is that postings like this http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=174089&postcount=46 suggest that there will not be a direct access to the actual RAW Data stored the r3d files via the SDK. Or that this access is not as fast as a standalone C++ application could read the data. And this would limit the workflow possibilities again.

Jim, I think there would be an easy way to end this type of discussions once and for all - and that is to simply put down on the table what you require to be in the SDK when it is released on XXXX/XX/XX. Because just stating that there *will* be an SDK does not fully address all concerns.

E.g., via the SDK you will get access to
* High quality de-bayered RGB frame data
* High-speed preview quality de-bayered frame data in RGB/YUV/...
* All Metadata (Camera settings, /i data, Look files, ...)
* Fastest possible access to RAW frame data
* ...
* "Everything in life changes..." but there will be no item removed from the list above
* We target to release early July because we are bound by exclusive agreements till then
* Based on our experience there might be a delay till September

Boom. No more speculation going on, no more discussions, everybody happy.

You shared the plans for the RED ONE quite early in the process and gained advantages from the feedback you got. Why wouldn't you apply the same logic to the software side?

Mike
 
tillHavis said:
From what I can see Cineform is waiting as requested until Red opens up its SDK.
Click to expand...

Not that I give a hairy rat's ass - But i think it's pretty clear that David is not waiting for the SDK - and i believe that is Jims problem - He is publicly actively making tools he promised never to make and already posting benchmark speed promises from them -

And you know what may happen? Something will change - and it wont be 10:1 anymore - and when people complain David will simply say " its Jims fault, he changed the code "

tis a tricky situation i would say!
 
My post seem to inflame, they are not ment to do anything like that. We have requested RAW access since the project began, we the desire to transcode REDCODE into CineForm RAW. We have been very open about this. The fast conversion times are because no demosaic is required, and RAW to RAW conversions are fast. I would expect similar conversion times through the Red SDK, and would happy to share all the information with the Red team on how to do it (private or publicly, but I expect they will have no difficulties.) It would even allow others to use RAW, not just CineForm. CineForm will be very happy use SDK, we are waiting with our figures crossed that it will be flexible enough for RAW conversions.
 
I do humbly apologize David - I thought I remembered you saying a few moons ago that you were not interested in native RAW support at all - and your only wanted to go from REDCINE into CINEFORM.

- My memory has failed me again !!!!
 
Epic Films said:
SNAP! - busted ya David -

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?p=109645#post109645

- you got some splainin to do!!! -
Click to expand...

I'm kinda lost on what your point is with this post. Seems like you're getting into semantics. Among Cineform's claims to fame is providing accelerated speeds within Premiere because Adobe allows their rendering engine to be rewritten (essentially).

David just wants to get RedCode Raw into Cineform... and that's all he's ever claimed he wanted to do. I don't see anything else at work here.

No one told him he couldn't try to do that until he actually did it as far as I know. And if you look at the date of the post you put up you'll see that was 5 months ago now. Friggin' 5 months people have been talking about this! I'm giving David and everyone else credit for being pretty patient on that front.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top