EPIC to output PRO RES

[J Davis]

... and maybe soon it will be a fixed scarlet and storm for just over 6 grand

 

[Cüneyt Kaya]

... and maybe soon it will be a fixed scarlet and storm for just over 6 grand

waiting for the next orson welles

 

[Bob Rudis]

$10,000 is a small price to pay if I no longer need an Alexa.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Ouch. I really want a prores module, and really torn on this. I want it to get faster offlines, but on many respects I am with Jeff...

I think, if it comes, some will stop recording RAW alltogether. THAT won't be the case with the h.264 module. And THAT would eventually lead to a couple of bad scenarios...

Headaches.... -

 

[Hans von Sonntag]

I wouldn't want a ProRes module... If RED did make one, then suddenly most of my clients would start demanding it. And directly recording ProRes would play right into the "good enough" mindset that so many people have.

Jeff,

the "good enough" mindset is bad for researchers and scientist but in my life as a filmmaker I have tons of decisions to make that belong to the "good enough" mindset, be it scripts, actors, locations, the lenses, the camera, the post production tools, etc... If a ProRes module is "good enough" for me I'm more than happy to use it. For many projects it would cut down post production time considerably.

And why should we even need this now when we can create and load looks right into the camera anyway and then those are automatically transferred onto the R3D RAW footage. Other than FCP, every other mainstream NLE (the ones that matter, anyway) support R3D natively. If the next release of FCP/FCS does not have native R3D support I will not buy it. Case closed. L&T and QT wrappers is so 2008 -- time to move on. And maybe they'll shoot QT in the head and fix their gamma issues while they're at it. Not likely, but we can always dream of world peace and other impossible things.

My Smoke on Mac eats R3Ds natively. But later for finishing I have to reconform to full res internally transcoded DPX. This costs time. R3Ds are neither supported by QT, nor by VLC or other players. For client review transcoding is unavoidable. A ProRes module would solve those problems.

And whatever happened to the RED working / RGB codec. If that's still on the table, why should they promote ProRes when they could release something better? Something that could be completely free to license and incorporate and use on any platform...

A free, cross platform high quality intermediate codec is a great thing. But even if Red would release such a codec sometime in the future it's not there yet now and AFAIK not really on the agenda, or is it? Until then, I guess ProRes, DNxHD and CineForm are the players here with ProRes being the most used one.

IMHO, I think that transcoding is Red's achilles heel. Many producer choose other cameras to avoid transcoding. Alexa is such a success here in Germany not only because it's an Arri and a new shiny camera but also because of the ProRes option. Just recently a producer asked me to shoot a commercial on the Alexa. I did not not because I'm used to my own RedOne and don't think that Alexa can do anything better than the RedOne MX. But I had to convince her that the extra day of transcoding won't mess up the schedule. My argument was that if we were to shoot on 35mm we had the same issue. The question is: how long does this argument work?

A ProRes module does not make RAW obsolete, on the contrary. There are many good reasons to create off the RAW R3Ds DPX sequences or even ProRes files but to have the choice is better.

Hans

 

[Meryem Ersoz]

And directly recording ProRes would play right into the "good enough" mindset that so many people have.

Have to disagree - not every shot needs all of the color correction or data recovery that RAW provides, and for those that don't, transcoding = time wasted. Jeff, the strength of your points presume that all RED footage goes to into post-production with RED-equipped facilities - when in reality, that is not always the case.

As shooters...we just hand off footage, and it makes more sense to hand off something familiar and fast, not something which requires new software packages or accelerator cards to work with the files. In a perfect world, all that footage (and post- work and money) would flow back to our studios, for processing or editorial and perfecting in RAW, but the reality is, it doesn't.

 

[N_Villers]

Correct me if I'm wrong but there are two points that I'm missing in this discussion.

1. Does the Epic not have a direct scaled to 1080p RGB recording function via the normal media recorder. Could this not include a choice of codecs?

2. Isn't the whole idea of the H.264 module designed for wireless transmission and could Prores even serve this function?

 

[Cüneyt Kaya]

Correct me if I'm wrong but there are two points that I'm missing in this discussion.

1. Does the Epic not have a direct scaled to 1080p RGB recording function via the normal media recorder. Could this not include a choice of codecs?

2. Isn't the whole idea of the H.264 module designed for wireless transmission and could Prores even serve this function?

proxy module with its transmitter has a different purpose, its good for dailies and on set work.

 

[N_Villers]

Exactly -- but that doesn't answer my first question. I understand you are proposing a separate prores module for a straight to rgb workflow but cannot the epic brain record directly to this format?

I guess you are right though, the whole beauty of the modular design allows for these kind of custom functions.

Ostensibly we could see three mediums recorded simultaneously. H.264 for video assist/dailies, prores 4444 and RAW.

 

[Cüneyt Kaya]

Exactly -- but that doesn't answer my first question. I understand you are proposing a separate prores module for a straight to rgb workflow but cannot the epic brain record directly to this format?

I guess you are right though, the whole beauty of the modular design allows for these kind of custom functions.

Ostensibly we could see three mediums recorded simultaneously. H.264 for video assist/dailies, prores 4444 and RAW.

add a studio module with 3-4 times aux power (with fuses), direct plug for c-motion/lcs wireless ff, timecode i/o like lock it and you have the perfect cinestyle cam.
what stress about the r1 is that there are usually a aja donconverter, canatrans, d-tap adapters, a lock it and a wifi audio receiver (to egt some reference audio while recording to a sounddevice) attached

one module that erases all these boxes plus the ones you mentioned, this would let the epic be slick and ergonomic inmho

 

[Thomas Wright]

And make all the connectors 3-pin fischers with Remote start; yay.

And 3/8ths whitworths on the bottom with a locating depression to fit a BP5/8/12; double yay.

And, get this, metric screws; quadruple super yay.

(Think of the burden on the planet because every person working with gear from both america and the rest of the world has to buy two sets of spanners; not to mention how irritating it is when you can't find one the right fraction of an inch)

 

[Peter Matthes]

I think this thread might need a question mark attached to it.

A fully baked ProRes copy (with matching timecode) would be a great tool for offline editing. This is especially true when your clients are editing in Avid.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

I think this thread might need a question mark attached to it.

A fully baked ProRes copy (with matching timecode) would be a great tool for offline editing. This is especially true when your clients are editing in Avid.

Yes.

This I am all for... -

 

[Cüneyt Kaya]

to keep the storage requirements low, i vote for avid dnxhd 36.
put in 1 ssd drive and record all the footage from one day to only one mag.
dnxhd 36 is a great offline codec....

future will tell, if there is a way to edit r3d on an imac with 3 layers in a longform project without slow downs, then there will be no need for a prores/dnxhd module.

anyhow, what do i care, i have a rocket

 

[Terry VerHaar]

I wouldn't want a ProRes module... If RED did make one, then suddenly most of my clients would start demanding it. And directly recording ProRes would play right into the "good enough" mindset that so many people have. And why should we even need this now when we can create and load looks right into the camera anyway and then those are automatically transferred onto the R3D RAW footage.

...

I won't want to suggest I know what Jim Jannard is thinking but my INTERPRETATION of some things I overheard him saying way back in April at RED Day (NAB) pretty much echoes Jeff's comments. It was around the time the proxy module was announced and my sense was that a module for dailies made sense but a ProRes module would deliver a signal that was better (and bigger) than needed for review but not "good enough" for the finished product - essentially leaving all the benefits if RAW "on the table."

Again, this was just my own take away and my own interpretation of what I heard. Nothing else.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

ProRes module.... Um... 2008 just called and wants its workflow back.

A ProRes module is an evolutionary upgrade to a persistent problem. It is not a solution for anything.

There is no reason to bake anything into a recorded file.

There is no reason you need to grade RAW and push it through extra post processing to make it look good.

Most current NLE systems support R3D files natively now. FCP is flat-lining hard and the only reason it's on life-support is due to massive throngs of fanboy users and vague rumors of promises of something better coming. FWIW, I rebuilt this Mac I'm working on right now about 3 weeks ago. I did not install Final Cut Studio on it when I rebuilt it. Haven't missed it.

ProRes is tied to QuickTime. It can't exist without QuickTime. As nice a codec as it might be, QuickTime is a scourge upon our industry and should be dispatched with extreme prejudice. Nothing good comes from QuickTime. Other than a facility for which to use ProRes, can someone please tell me one good thing about QuickTime as it applies to our industry and workflows today? I don't care what it's done for us in the past... I'm talking about now.

ProRes is not cross-platform. At least not in a complete sense. It is read-only on Windows and essentially non-existent on Linux. So if you hand your footage off in ProRes format to half the industry, they still need to transcode or utilize some intermediate codec.

I see that several people are making the ASSumption that I'm speaking from the point of view of cine-style workflows or RED-specific post houses. On the contrary... My work is mostly non-scripted, non-narrative, non-hardlined EFP, documentary type work. I choose to shoot RED for quality. I don't have a problem with speed or making deadlines and quick turn-arounds these days. I work with R3D native files in most of my post pipelines right up until final render for delivery. I deliver many of my projects with fast turn-arounds. Often 48 to 96 hours for the completed project, delivered on Blu-Ray and DVD. I'm a one man show with 2 part-time helpers. I don't survive by doing what others do. I have to innovate and when it comes to my competition, I either make friends and keep my distance or I go for the throat.

I agree that transcoding wastes time. So, don't do it if you don't have to. If you think you have to, then you're not exploring all your options.

And I started to post a list of tips for breaking out of '08 and '09 workflow paradigms, but I'm holding off on that for right now. That might cause a bigger ruckus around here and crush a few egos. Maybe I'll save that for another thread... But I will say that it's time for people to start thinking a lot more out of the FCP/QT/ProRes box -- it's become quite stuffy and moldy in there anyway.

 

[M Most]

I agree that transcoding wastes time. So, don't do it if you don't have to. If you think you have to, then you're not exploring all your options.

Or you want real fluidity while editing. Or you don't want to carry around a tower or external drives. Or you don't want to use 1/8 res images. Or you're a professional editor who doesn't want to deal with debayering or color settings. Or you want color corrected dailies. Or you're planning to go to preview on a movie and want to use the offline as a source for that. Or......

There are still a number of good reasons for an offline/online workflow, even if they're not necessary for you personally.

 

[Hans von Sonntag]

A fully baked ProRes copy (with matching timecode) would be a great tool for offline editing.

For many productions ProRes is not only an offline format but also a sufficient codec for online rushes. Arri Alexas are either used with a tethered SR recorder or with the ProRes option. Projects shot with the Alexa ProRes option are surely not cheap productions. I'm sure that most RedOne originated shots end up in ProRes files anyway. ProRes 444 is a good codec.

H264 on the other hand is a delivery codec and not an intermediate post production codec. I'm guessing here but h264 is an open codec and there are many hardware encoder on the market - hence the comparable easy development of an Epic h264 module.



Hans

 

[Gunleik Groven]

LOL Jeff... -

On the quality side I am all with you.

On offlines I am not... -

FCP is only a small part of that equation. Where I am just now, it is just not an option to replace a large organisation workflow overnight. I could do that privately, but not in a quite big integrated organsisation only dealing with RED for feature and promo.

For longer form with many people working on a project, offline/online is both secure, quick and effective and each person can focus on his/her profession without everyone from editor to VFX persons to colorists having to understand everything about the colorworkflow. It actually makes things move faster with better results.

If you are a "RED only" house, I can see that that makes sense, but for a lot of larger organisations, that is not true...

Edit:
I see I and M Most are in agreement, sort of -

I feel I may have learned a thing or two over the last few years... -

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Or you want real fluidity while editing. Or you don't want to carry around a tower or external drives. Or you don't want to use 1/8 res images. Or you're a professional editor who doesn't want to deal with debayering or color settings. Or you want color corrected dailies. Or you're planning to go to preview on a movie and want to use the offline as a source for that. Or......

And I can do all that without touching ProRes. I can do CC'd dailies while delivering R3D's or real-time generated H.264 or AVC.

I'm not saying anything against an offline/online workflow.

Maybe I'm just saying that people think they know what they want and they're asking for the wrong thing.

EDIT> Yes, Gunleik, you're right about the larger organisations and established workflows. That is a factor I have admittedly ignored. Those who are tied to a cruise-liner that can't change course quickly have my deepest sympathy.