C200: Canon Raw Development Software Requests

R

robotfist

Active member
Starting this thread to make requests for the next version of the Canon Raw Development software and other software based tools for dealing with Canon Raw and Canon Raw Light.

After using the C200 for a month now, there are definitely issues in dealing with the Raw codec in post that need to be improved if Canon wants to keep C200 users happy and prevent them from selling and moving to an EVA1 or some future Sony release.

My list is below:

1.) MORE 4K PRORES EXPORT OPTIONS. Where is the export option for a middle ground 4k codec?? I want to be able to export to ProRes HQ, ProRes and ProRes LT in 4k! Not just ProRes 4:4:4 which doesn't save much space at all compared to Canon Raw Light. I understand Canon is protecting the C300 MK II by leaving out a middle ground codec on the C200 camera. I don't like it, but it's what they did. It's a business decision. However, why leave out the middle ground codec on the software development tool? We've already been forced to shoot in Raw to get the most from the C200, why can't we process it into a more efficient 4k codec? I understand that there are 1080p proxy options available, but where are the more efficient 4k options? Canon has crippled the C200 from the hardware all the way through the post production pipeline, which is absurd and extreme. DaVinci Resolve 14, while powerful, has not proved itself to be a stable output option for me when simply exporting terabytes of Raw footage at once. The Canon Raw Development tool needs to step up and provide more options. If Canon wants us to be shooting Raw, they better be giving us the post options to deal with it in as many ways as possible.

2.) EXPOSURE TOOLS. I want the adjustment tools that Canon's Photo Raw files have. I want to be able to change ISO and other exposure settings. If we're shooting in Raw, we want all the benefits of Raw.

3.) AUDIO EXPORT ONLY. I ran into this recently and needed to get the audio off a bunch of Raw Clips quickly. It would be nice to be able to check a box and just export the audio only. Instead, I had to export full video clips just to grab the audio from the Raw files. It was time consuming and needlessly took up drive space.

4.) NO FOLDERS OPTION. Why Canon Raw Development wants to put every single clip into its own unique folder after exporting is downright silly. We should at least have the option to export all the clips into a single folder. I shot 4 TBs of Raw footage recently and it was a pain having to deal with all these stupid folders. I want to just export my clips, then grab all those clips and drag them into my editing system. Instead, I've not got an extra step of contending with a hundred folders for which I must extract every single clip from.
 
Agreed on all accounts.

As for #3, instead of exporting the full quality clips, you could in the options choose to only export out the low res proxies. Not sure if that would speed things up, but it would at least cut down on the drive space.
 
robotfist said:
Starting this thread to make requests for the next version of the Canon Raw Development software and other software based tools for dealing with Canon Raw and Canon Raw Light.

After using the C200 for a month now, there are definitely issues in dealing with the Raw codec in post that need to be improved if Canon wants to keep C200 users happy and prevent them from selling and moving to an EVA1 or some future Sony release.

My list is below:

1.) MORE 4K PRORES EXPORT OPTIONS. Where is the export option for a middle ground 4k codec?? I want to be able to export to ProRes HQ, ProRes and ProRes LT in 4k! Not just ProRes 4:4:4 which doesn't save much space at all compared to Canon Raw Light. I understand Canon is protecting the C300 MK II by leaving out a middle ground codec on the C200 camera. I don't like it, but it's what they did. It's a business decision. However, why leave out the middle ground codec on the software development tool? We've already been forced to shoot in Raw to get the most from the C200, why can't we process it into a more efficient 4k codec? I understand that there are 1080p proxy options available, but where are the more efficient 4k options? Canon has crippled the C200 from the hardware all the way through the post production pipeline, which is absurd and extreme. DaVinci Resolve 14, while powerful, has not proved itself to be a stable output option for me when simply exporting terabytes of Raw footage at once. The Canon Raw Development tool needs to step up and provide more options. If Canon wants us to be shooting Raw, they better be giving us the post options to deal with it in as many ways as possible.

2.) EXPOSURE TOOLS. I want the adjustment tools that Canon's Photo Raw files have. I want to be able to change ISO and other exposure settings. If we're shooting in Raw, we want all the benefits of Raw.

3.) AUDIO EXPORT ONLY. I ran into this recently and needed to get the audio off a bunch of Raw Clips quickly. It would be nice to be able to check a box and just export the audio only. Instead, I had to export full video clips just to grab the audio from the Raw files. It was time consuming and needlessly took up drive space.

4.) NO FOLDERS OPTION. Why Canon Raw Development wants to put every single clip into its own unique folder after exporting is downright silly. We should at least have the option to export all the clips into a single folder. I shot 4 TBs of Raw footage recently and it was a pain having to deal with all these stupid folders. I want to just export my clips, then grab all those clips and drag them into my editing system. Instead, I've not got an extra step of contending with a hundred folders for which I must extract every single clip from.
Click to expand...

I also agree on all counts but out of curiosity, what would be the difference between changing the ISO and using the Brightness slider in CRD? Isn't the end result identical? I shot some night footage recently, added two stops in CRD, output it and it looked great. Are we just talking labeling semantics here or would RAW ISO adjustment have a net gain over the already included Brightness slider?
 
I feel the software is to amateur not to even include a waveform window, it is a development program!? Wondering if there is a conflict between BM Davinci and Canon because of there competitive raw cameras, that aims rightly at the same spot? There for no updates in Davinci? Cinema Raw Development (software) is one of the biggest downsides of C200, fortunately it's so easy to fix if someone is willing to!
 
robotfist said:
4.) NO FOLDERS OPTION. Why Canon Raw Development wants to put every single clip into its own unique folder after exporting is downright silly. We should at least have the option to export all the clips into a single folder. I shot 4 TBs of Raw footage recently and it was a pain having to deal with all these stupid folders. I want to just export my clips, then grab all those clips and drag them into my editing system. Instead, I've not got an extra step of contending with a hundred folders for which I must extract every single clip from.
Click to expand...


If you're on a Macintosh, I can help with this. I wrote an AppleScript that'll collapse the folder structure of the export folder. You'll end up with all your ProRes files in one folder. Here's the link:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/gujisv6kbna6okj/Folder Flattener.zip?dl=0
 
Steelej said:
A usable codec option for PC users would be nice.
Click to expand...

I'm not a C200 owner, but IMO this is absolutely the biggest barrier to buying one. Cineform, DNxHR - anything but DPX please. Alternatively, Adobe need to get their support out there ASAP.
 
puredrifting said:
I also agree on all counts but out of curiosity, what would be the difference between changing the ISO and using the Brightness slider in CRD? Isn't the end result identical? I shot some night footage recently, added two stops in CRD, output it and it looked great. Are we just talking labeling semantics here or would RAW ISO adjustment have a net gain over the already included Brightness slider?
Click to expand...

Has it been confirmed that the adjustment of the brightness slider in Canon Raw Development is the actual equivalent of increasing and decreasing the in-camera ISO? With RedRaw it is the same thing, with noise levels rising and decreasing in accordance to the ISO setting. Whatever you set the ISO to in Red Cine, that is what the image would look like if shooting at that equivalent ISO with the camera. I don't really know what's happening behind the scenes with the "brightness setting" in Canon Raw Light. Might be an interesting test.
 
I'm guessing the C200 works like any other Canon camera in that changing ISO when shooting determines the amount of gain applied to the signal, internally. For digital cameras, it would probably more "correct" to call this setting 'gain', but as photographers/cinematographers we are more comfortable with ISO.

Therefore, once gain is applied, there would be no way to undo this in post. You could however always shift the already captured data around making the image darker or brighter. An appropriate name for such a slider might be 'Brightness'. But this operation could of course also be done in any number of ways in a NLE or color grading application.

A RED camera doesn't work this way. Changing the ISO on RED will not adjust applied gain to the signal. In this scenario, the ISO setting becomes a 'rating'. Let's say you're shooting a white wall and by setting ISO to 200 your peaks reach IRE 30 on your waveform. If you want to arrive at the noise characteristic of ISO 200 in end, you will need to open up your aperture (or choose a slower shutter speed). You will need to do this before shooting. If you shot it at ISO 200 and then went into RedCine X in post and increased ISO to whatever—that is exactly the same as just lifting the signal in the NLE. No magic here. So ISO here serves as a tool to determine proper aperture/filtration (assuming shutter is constant/set).

I see the benefits of raw in that it's often high bit depth like 12-bit or higher, and in a large color space with no picture profile 'baked in'. But once the data is captured, I much prefer to make any adjustments directly in my working application and not in a separate step in a 'raw development' software.
 
Thanks for doing this as the folder thing is a major drag. I downloaded it and it's giving me issues when trying to put it in applications folder. Is there something simple that I may be missing on how to use the folder flattener?
 
bigteethproductions said:
Thanks for doing this as the folder thing is a major drag. I downloaded it and it's giving me issues when trying to put it in applications folder. Is there something simple that I may be missing on how to use the folder flattener?
Click to expand...

What are the issues you're having? You might have to right-mouse button click on the app and click Open. Some versions of OS X prevent un-signed apps from running and the right mouse button click to open is a way to handle that.
 
Random bug, not sure if it's just my machine, but every time I use CRD it disables my screen saver. If I'm going to let a long render run on my machine and don't want it to go to sleep I will turn a hot corner on for my screen saver, but after a few seconds CRD's bg activity always triggers it off. If I was doing the same thing with any other software (like Adobe Media Encoder) the screen saver would work just fine.
 
This doesn't help any, but honestly my request for CRD would just be to have all the controls a RED or BMD camera has within Resolve. Better than any standalone, one-off piece of software will ever be...
 
chris f said:
Random bug, not sure if it's just my machine, but every time I use CRD it disables my screen saver. If I'm going to let a long render run on my machine and don't want it to go to sleep I will turn a hot corner on for my screen saver, but after a few seconds CRD's bg activity always triggers it off. If I was doing the same thing with any other software (like Adobe Media Encoder) the screen saver would work just fine.
Click to expand...

Same here! It also prevents the display sleep for me.

On Mac you can press control+shift+eject in keyboard and force the display to sleep (and prevent unwanted "screen burn".)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top