Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

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 :)

Red SDK and Adobe

You're just naive that Adobe can give you what you want :) ,
don't follow 'Kusta's' way anyway,
(not even Maradona's Church like hand of God approach) can help you :) :) :) .
 
The Third Man said:
You're just naive that Adobe can give you what you want :) ,
don't follow 'Kusta's' way anyway,
(not even Maradona's Church like hand of God approach) can help you :) :) :) .
Click to expand...


Why do you say that?
Adobe works with many hardware and software developers to create solutions. Red workflow I have heard from other forums is on thier list of things to get to. they have suported every highend codec and workflow to this point. they did with Aftereffects forthe longest time, and now for thier Dynamic link aproach they support ingest formats with PProCS3.

I hope I am not wrong about Adobe's interest in supporting this new technology.

please explain what you mean
 
I expect that we will see some pretty amazing things from a RED / Adobe pairing in the near future. The level of integration across the Adobe products and the fact that Adobe is cross platform makes for a very compelling argument. The inclusion of fully (or mostly) integrated support for RED source files would considerably increase the value of both products.

Fingers crossed over here!
 
I would love to see Red participate in the Adobe RAW initiative... maybe even have the Red One record directly to the Adobe RAW standard as an option in addition to Redcode.

This would be down the road, but it would be nice.

-Thor
 
I'm not certain that RED could write to CinemaDNG. I'm suspicious that they're using more purpose built hardware on the encoding end and trying to cram a DNG codec through it would be predicated on the assumption that RED is using a generic DSP.
 
I could be wrong but I think that recording to Cineform codec or the proposed new standard directly from the camera would only be possible if Red were to make available the RAW port.
 
shashbugu said:
Why do you say that?
Adobe works with many hardware and software developers to create solutions. Red workflow I have heard from other forums is on thier list of things to get to. they have suported every highend codec and workflow to this point. they did with Aftereffects forthe longest time, and now for thier Dynamic link aproach they support ingest formats with PProCS3.

I hope I am not wrong about Adobe's interest in supporting this new technology.

please explain what you mean
Click to expand...

nevermind sanjin, he is such a snob, always prowling around tirelessly promoting macs and banged up vintage glass with shitty coatings.
I am sure Adobe is going to be a good workable solution. AND you get to use a PC!!!

...btw sanjin, how is the CA on that "superman" lense, still got that magic green-krypto look?

:tongue:
 
..........waiting for SDK. I don't want to go mac route.
 
A slight offtopic:

Wouldn't that One RAW Codec to Rule Them All be a kind of monopoly?

My brain tells me that monopolies are bad... and having different options is good.
 
after build 16, next milestone is SDK for Adobe. I beleive there are hundreds of Red owners desperately waiting for it.
 
Jay A. Kelley said:
I'd be happy with the release of the SDK.. there are solutions out there that are ready in hours, not days.

Jay
Click to expand...

I know EXACTLY what your talking about. it's about time that SDK was out.

Things will be looking far better in PC land when this happens.
 
Jim stated few days back that they will start working on SDK as soon as they are finished with Build 16 and Redcine.
 
Finger's still crossed here too for the SDK!
 
karapetkov said:
A slight offtopic:

Wouldn't that One RAW Codec to Rule Them All be a kind of monopoly?

My brain tells me that monopolies are bad... and having different options is good.
Click to expand...

I think there is a difference between a monopoly and an open standard.

There arent many complete monopolies in the software world. but say company X had a complete monopoly over a product. It would be a monopoly if they had some trade secret that they did not give out that nobody else could use that made thier product better.

On the other hand there is something like HTTP. Its a protocol that we all use and love. its the ONLY(well pretty much) thing we use to browse websites on the internet. Now because its an open standard, there are three major browsers, and many minor ones that use that standard, and they all (largely) do the same thing but in different ways.

The cinemaDNG i hope will be like a complicated version of HTTP. Open standard that if tomorrow i wanted to make a camera/editing platform i could implement as an ingest format, freely without any penalties or legal ramifications. They need to do this for ingest AND sequence format ideally. and then the post production suites are really competeing on interface, just like the browsers..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top