Patrick Tresch
Well-known member
You would probably have better noise floor but your highlights will tend to be clipped rapidely. As people judge the camera quality by it's highliths retention/roll-off you'r playing the ball of the blue label.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
ProRes RAW won't have the latitude that RED RAW, ArriRaw or even CDNG have in terms of highlight recovery. It's a "fake" version of RAW, not even allowing you to change basic metadata settings like ISO and WB. So while you have a little bit more flexibility, most people will find it isn't worth the effort of adding a recorder, media, bulk, etc., as the cons far outweigh the pros. There are several you tubers who did comparison with even Sony SLOG 2 and PRR...and you'd be surprised, PRR didn't look all that great.
Patrick,
In my own personally experience I only use 800 ISO for grading red footage, and if I actually owned a Red camera, I would base getting a good exposure from that. Now in a camera like the Mavo LF and potentially the Mavo Edge, a 1600 ISO that comes from negative gain from a higher Native ISO would probably look better than a 1600 ISO from positive gain from a lower Native ISO . In that case, I would want to use a 1600 ISO and not the 800 ISO which would be the native and last ISO setting of the camera's sensor before digital gain was being added.
David,
I was trying to wrap my head around the benefits of using the EI mode over the ISO mode. I believe you just cleared that up for me, thanks. Yeah, to my knowledge I've never heard of anyone else using that Arri method.
This is incorrect. While true that support and workflow are underdeveloped for ProRes Raw, you have full control over Exposure and White Balance. There is no interfase that lets you change 'ISO' like with redraw, but changing the exposure slider in FCPX as long as you don't have a log conversion on achieves the same thing. I think ProRes Raw is terribly misunderstood and has terrible examples on the internet. I had my eyes opened at the FCPX Creative summit, when I went in pushing for a Red style interface for FCPX for ProRes Raw and was taught how to work with it and understood that we have full control over a raw signal, its just called different things.
The 'fake' raw floating around is Braw, which does a partial Debayer in-camera, but is still quite good from what I understand.
Based on my own experiments with a few posted Braw sample files, I would say its main advantage is decoding efficiency on lower powered computers. It runs 4k real time on my 4 year old I7 6700 series MSI laptop, better than CDNG 2k, either compressed or uncompressed. This fits well with the consumer market for their relatively low cost cameras. It does offer a bit more grading flexibility compared to log video formats, but not as much as deep raw formats like CNDG and Redcode.
Arri raw let you change iso, whitebalance etc, exlain the difference between that and redraw exept red raw is compressed?
ARRI uses dual gain to increase to first stage captured bit depth (22 bit AD) for better deep shadow detail retention and noise performance, effectively increasing usable dynamic range. I don't think anyone else does this.
Blackmagic BMCC 2.6K (OG)
Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera.
Blackmagic micro cinema camera.
Ursa Mini 4.6K
Ursa Mini Pro
Ursa Mini Pro G2
Same idea. Dual gain sensors that have a combined high bit depth (22+) to create a single 16 bit lin image. Then converted to 12bit LOG for encoding.
JB
BMD Ursa's have the fairchild mst4625a which are 2x11 bits https://www.fairchildimaging.com/products/scmos-sensors/mst4625a
The Alev III sensor is 2x14 bits https://www.onsemi.com/PowerSolutions/newsItem.do?article=3723