ProRes RAW?

[Joel Arvidsson]

Yes, I'm pretty sure ProRes Raw will never be in any Red products. The lower tier camera of new Red Hydrogen phone will be recording in R3D. I see Red offering lower bit .R3D before allowing what would be a codec killer into their cameras.

Im not sure, apple already sells raven kits. Its possible they sell even more raven packages if red and apple puts prores raw in it aswell.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

...backlog of 10 years of projects that can no longer be accessed...

Yes, they abruptly stopped selling FCP7 - which still functioned fine for about 5-6 years after the FCPX introduction. Not enough time? (But, I'll give you this- Premiere Pro did seem to function nicely as FCP8.)

And one interesting datapoint about usage... over the last year, Apple added about 500,000 users to the existing 2 million seats sold of FCPX. (I know, all those people are amateurs and hobbyists, of course). LOL

 

[C. Burkhart]

Yes, they abruptly stopped selling FCP7 - which still functioned fine for about 5-6 years after the FCPX introduction. Not enough time? (But, I'll give you this- Premiere Pro did seem to function nicely as FCP8.)

And one interesting datapoint about usage... over the last year, Apple added about 500,000 users to the existing 2 million seats sold of FCPX. (I know, all those people are amateurs and hobbyists, of course). LOL

The rollout was such crap for FCPX that the fact that it has taken them this long to make a viable NLE says all one needs to know. I know a post house in Atlanta that would have gone under if it hadn't been for Premiere taking up the slack. It was just plain irresponsible the way in which it was handled by Apple. And frankly, getting down to brass tacks I hate the interface and workflow of FCPX and the majority of experienced editors I know feel the same. And please, don't tell me that the way in which it handles color correction is a preferable interface...oh my god. Just NO.

I don't love Premiere, but it get's the job done.

I actually think if Resolve continues to evolve it's editing software, it might become a more viable alternative...here's hoping anyway.

 

[Rakesh Malik]

I actually think if Resolve continues to evolve it's editing software, it might become a more viable alternative...here's hoping anyway.

Resolve is already viable... it's gotten a few studios in LA off of Avid already. And with BMD's development pace, odds are v15 will be ahead of Premiere as an NLE, and already FAR ahead in every other area, so I think Adobe is going to lose users a lot more quickly then Avid.

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

I'm only one seat, so Adobe doesn't care, but I'm ready to quit the Creative Suite monthly bite. It's hard to imagine not having access to Photoshop, but I've never loved Premiere the way I did FCP 4-7.

Sure would be nice if Resolve can do it all under one roof - XML is weak sauce which often makes round tripping to a separate grading app a huge PITA.

Cheers - #19

 

[Rakesh Malik]

I'm only one seat, so Adobe doesn't care, but I'm ready to quit the Creative Suite monthly bite. It's hard to imagine not having access to Photoshop, but I've never loved Premiere the way I did FCP 4-7.

I've switched to using Affinity Photo for photo finishing.

Sure would be nice if Resolve can do it all under one roof - XML is weak sauce which often makes round tripping to a separate grading app a huge PITA.

I don't think it's a limitation in XML, but rather the fact that Adobe can't be bothered to update its exporter to a current version of it.

 

[C. Burkhart]

I like the processing engine of Resolve. When I output, it's quick, reliable and uncomplicated. Premiere and FCP are a pain in the butt.
The workflow of Resolve just continues to be more and more robust. I think however, it does lack some of the finition and details necessary for a serious editor.
One thing avid always had was a great note taking/stickies system. I would like to see Resolve take some lessons from Avid on that front.
I also think it needs more shortcuts so that the manual memory which all good editors seem to have will become more refined.
Watching a good editor is liking watching a pianiste, sometimes it hardly feels like there is a seperation between them and the keyboard.

 

[Rakesh Malik]

Regarding notes, I agree. Resolve has some notes and markers, and the marker system is actually quite good, but there's room for improvement. (You can even use ranged markers, complete with color coding, custom comments, and so on). The finesse functionality however is a lot better than I expected. Once I started working through the Definitive Guide, I was very surprised... and I'm as a result now on the fence between Resolve and Lightworks as far as preference. They both have features that I wish the other had, but as much as I like Lightworks, I still find Resolve's UI to be easier to use, especially as I get more familiar with its hotkeys.

 

[Reuben Evans]

I listened to an interview with the Atmos CEO.

https://www.redsharknews.com/produc...-founder-ceo-of-atomos-about-prores-raw-video

It sounds like camera companies will have to issue plugins (like RED's) to make raw metadata editable in the NLE. This sounds a lot like the scenario with stills cameras, where macOS gets updates from each camera manufacturer. I'm guessing this will take six months to a year to deploy. but this would imply that RED (if they implemented ProRes RAW in camera) would have to make their plugin able to edit RAW metadata for both R3D and ProRes RAW, which sounds potentially messy. Because each flavor of RAW would have different metadata parameters available to it.

I love the fact ProRes RAW eliminates the need for proxies and is more that 5 times more efficient in the timeline than R3D. But it seems like we are still a bit of the way off from the holy land here.

 

[Misha Engel]

Remember apparently Red has been getting back in with Apple. I wonder if Red had anything to do with it? It's clipped at 12 bits, like it's for lower end products. Hdr delivery is up to 12 bits consumer, which would require more in acquisition professionally for post.

The only things pro from apple, are names like "Pro"res, "Pro"res RAW, iMac"Pro", iWatch"Pro", iPhone"Pro" etc...

 

[Terry VerHaar]

The hate is palpable. Always interesting although not often well substantiated or explained. Better than indifference, I suppose.

 

[DJ Meyer]

The hate is palpable. Always interesting although not often well substantiated or explained. Better than indifference, I suppose.

Hate might be the right word for some, but not for me personally.

The apple pro community for the past 5-7 years is more of the neglected dog whose loyalty to its owner is wavering. Every once in awhile it's owner (apple) throws it a milk bone to try to keep it from leaving.

No matter how much you like FCPx, no honest assessment of Apple's overall efforts in the pro space (both hardware and software) over that time frame could be described as adequate.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

...No matter how much you like FCPx, no honest assessment of Apple's overall efforts in the pro space (both hardware and software) over that time frame could be described as adequate.

My comment wasn't really aimed at you but this part of it does seem a bit self aggrandizing. I consider myself "honest" and would not agree with your perspective. Every company makes decisions, makes mistakes and suffers miscalculations. I'd hardly be willing to believe that Avid, Adobe, RED, Google, and any other modern company you can name, are without their bloopers and failures.

It is curious how those that obsess so very much over Apple's failings actually know so much about those products. Do these folks continue to purchase and use all these 'terrible" products? Or, like so many of those I have met who hate on FCPX, did they just use an Apple product once, a decade ago, and have judged them as as a "fail" ever since.

HONESTLY - I think Apple generally does a pretty good job of balancing innovation, design and usability; so much so that they are successful and meeting the needs/wants of a great many people. You may not be one of them. That's life. I really do think that FCPX is a superior product but I don't go around bashing Adobe. I could really care less about Adobe.

This thread is about a new version of a codec that has been an indisputable success; despite the naysayers.

 

[DJ Meyer]

I think Apple generally does a pretty good job of balancing innovation, design and usability

In the consumer space, I agree, with the exception of the inexcusably bad keyboards on their current laptops. Which is a shame as the keyboards used to be so great. I bought my first Dell laptop after trying the current MacBook Pro keyboard. In the Pro space, strongly disagree, at least in recent times.

This thread is about a new version of a codec that has been an indisputable success; despite the naysayers.

Perhaps a bit early to call ProRes Raw an indisputable success.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

In the consumer space, I agree, with the exception of the inexcusably bad keyboards on their current laptops. Which is a shame as the keyboards used to be so great. I bought my first Dell laptop after trying the current MacBook Pro keyboard. In the Pro space, strongly disagree, at least in recent times.



Perhaps a bit early to call ProRes Raw an indisputable success.

Read carefully - this is a "new version" of a codec (an EXISTING codec) that HAS (already) been a proven success.

 

[jake blackstone]

I like the processing engine of Resolve. When I output, it's quick, reliable and uncomplicated.

Well, I'm not aware of another color grading software, that allows you to display your handiwork, but when you try to render, it chokes, when there is not enough of VRAM. There is no option to slow it down, there is no option to utilize your RAM to assist in complicated renders, there is no way to cache stuff in order to offload it from GPU, nothing, nada, zip. You can either render it or you can't. You can consider yourself lucky, if Resolve tells you to reduce number of nodes or to reduce resolution. It will often just disappear in the thin air when GPU will run out of RAM. And don't even get me started with random glitches with Trashcan renders. So, is it fast? Sure. Is it reliable? Well, define reliable

 

[Misha Engel]

Well, I'm not aware of another color grading software, that allows you to display your handiwork, but when you try to render, it chokes, when there is not enough of VRAM. There is no option to slow it down, there is no option to utilize your RAM to assist in complicated renders, there is no way to cache stuff in order to offload it from GPU, nothing, nada, zip. You can either render it or you can't. You can consider yourself lucky, if Resolve tells you to reduce number of nodes or to reduce resolution. It will often just disappear in the thin air when GPU will run out of RAM. And don't even get me started with random glitches with Trashcan renders. So, is it fast? Sure. Is it reliable? Well, define reliable

DJ Meyer tried an SSG with 16GB HBM2 + 2TB SSD, maybe that can help you with the memory problems.
Upto now 16 GB has been sufficient for us in Resolve.

 

[jake blackstone]

DJ Meyer tried an SSG with 16GB HBM2 + 2TB SSD, maybe that can help you with the memory problems.
Upto now 16 GB has been sufficient for us in Resolve.

No, to keep shoving more hardware in never an answer, doing better coding is. On Baselight I can render 6k image with whole bunch of corrections, noise reduction, shaders etc using simple GTX780 card with 3GB without any issues. The same goes for Nucoda. In this case having faster render is not necessarily better. And please tell this to the legions of users struggling with Trashcans. They would need to disable both internal GPUs (they work horribly with Resolve anyway) and use external eGPU- not cheap and it's a waste of money to boot. I never had any issues rendering from Daylight on the same Trashcan hardware, where Resolve on the same hardware is usually a non starter...

 

[Wayne Morellini]

My comment wasn't really aimed at you but this part of it does seem a bit self aggrandizing. I consider myself "honest" and would not agree with your perspective. Every company makes decisions, makes mistakes and suffers miscalculations. I'd hardly be willing to believe that Avid, Adobe, RED, Google, and any other modern company you can name, are without their bloopers and failures.

It is curious how those that obsess so very much over Apple's failings actually know so much about those products. Do these folks continue to purchase and use all these 'terrible" products? Or, like so many of those I have met who hate on FCPX, did they just use an Apple product once, a decade ago, and have judged them as as a "fail" ever since.

HONESTLY - I think Apple generally does a pretty good job of balancing innovation, design and usability; so much so that they are successful and meeting the needs/wants of a great many people. You may not be one of them. That's life. I really do think that FCPX is a superior product but I don't go around bashing Adobe. I could really care less about Adobe.

This thread is about a new version of a codec that has been an indisputable success; despite the naysayers.

Now, now, is it honest to think them well balanced?

Personally, I haven't bought because I'm waiting for a well balanced product that suites my needs, which means it would suite most everybody's nerds here as well, as broadly we want to achieve similar capability and performance. But it was all a compromise to somebody's vision which more suited his balance sheet. No Bluray, 3D rec2020, 8k, 10k, 16k computer tables, holographic screens, honking lifting power, drives, bays, just to be chick and have things centralised on one's profit servers. Now no earphone plugs making people spend hundreds when wireless ear plugs could be done for a small fraction of that.

The nail in the coffin is, if it was all as good as they say, Apple could have been 90%+ of desktop long ago, and 90%+ of the phone tablet market now. Poor people. Innovative follows not just form but functionality too.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

No, to keep shoving more hardware in never an answer, doing better coding is. On Baselight I can render 8k image with whole bunch of corrections, noise reduction, shaders etc using simple GTX780 card with 3GB without any issues. The same goes for Nucoda. In this case having faster render is not necessarily better...

Interesting. I thought resolve was sorting it's gpu stuff out?