cpc
Well-known member
For a linear image Gain (as in lift/gamma/gain) in a coloring application = white balance + exposure compensation. And providing linear images is what raw does best.
ProRes RAW
- Thread starter dpc
- Start date
For a linear image Gain (as in lift/gamma/gain) in a coloring application = white balance + exposure compensation. And providing linear images is what raw does best.
cpreston
Veteran
It would be interesting if you could change the white balance metadata used by FCP X to interpret the clip. You can change the RAW to Log conversion to none within FCPX for the clip info and you still get an image that you can color correct in FCPX. The weird part is that FCP X is still doing some type of conversion because it definitely isn't a straight linear image from 0 to 100% IRE. The interpreted RGB values are far outside the upper and lower limits of the RGB parade and the image appears very highly saturated with high contrast and lifted blacks. In addition, the white balance is baked in even if the RAW to Log curve is turned off. I'm not sure what is going on, but it would be nice to have access to a more RAW like image or at least be able to change the white balance metadata.
I will say that there is quite a bit more color information being captured in the ProRes RAW than I get in my standard 4K recording from the C300 II. Some testing has shown that the ProRes RAW HQ can handle much more aggressive color masking and hard saturation and tint curves than the standard 4K footage. There is also noticeably more detail, especially when even a bit of NR is added to the internal recording. The main problem would be that the RAW on the C300 II gets pretty noisy at normal ISO's for the camera, so it is best to use the lowest ISO's possible and deal with the reduced dynamic range available.
Last edited:
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Ability to pull 4:4:4 color out of the raw.
Ability to handle RGB color.
Less image compression.
12bit color vs 10bit color of ProRes422 HQ.
Raw was not invented as a lazy tool so people don't have to white balance anymore. It is a way to take the raw sensor data and give it to users to manipulate as they see fit. ProRes Raw gives you flexibility ProRes422 HQ could never provide.
With that said ProRes422 HQ is still lan exceptional format that can yield some amazing quality. If you don't need 4:4:4 color and don't have an issue with the compression quality of ProRes HQ then you are right you will likely not gain much. Even Hollywood has been using ProRes recently for some movies. Granted they will usually use ProRes4444 to maintain the RGB frames and no color sampling loss but in many situations we are talking about splitting hairs unless you like the beat the crap out of the grade.
cpreston
Veteran
The benefit for me with a camera like the C300 II is that I can get a more efficient compression scheme than the standard ProRes with the possibility to get more detail and color information for recording the RAW output from my camera. ProRes 422 HQ wasn't any better than the internal recording and the Atomos recorders couldn't record ProRes 4444 anyway. Plus, the ProRes Raw actually plays back fairly well on my computer so it isn't a problem to use it over any other codec. I think the ProRes RAW is really only of interest to people with midrange camcorders who need the option of sometimes working with higher quality footage for heavy effects, product, or green screen work. The biggest drawback is the lack of noise reduction on a RAW signal that means either NR needs to be done in post or lighting needs to be tightly controlled. At least on my camera, the ProRes RAW is not going to be any better than just shooting in CLog 2 internally if I am worried about compensiting for mixed lighting, white balance, or changing dynamic range and exposure.
dmitrizigany
Veteran
Also, not all raw formats are the same...For example, the FS RAW of the FS700/FS5/FS7 have WB baked in. That’s one of the ways they manage to get all that data out of a standard 3G SDI...
Thomas Smet
Veteran
I really wish Atomos and other recorders would start supporting ProRes4444 recording. I would honestly be 100% ok with that vs raw. Pretty sure HDMI can handle RGB and 444. This would be a great way for DSLRs, cough cough Panasonic, to get around the need for raw for now.
filmguy123
Veteran
One day? More like imminently. I'd be surprised if this wasn't implemented by fall. I would not be surprised if it was patched in next month.
Adobe has already acknowledged this and said they are working on it "in an appropriate time frame". The forums and boards there are going crazy asking it to be hotpatched in within the next weeks. While I doubt that will happen so soon, and it doesn't mean anything other than the fact that Adobe is very aware, at the same time it's a big release, Apple has already stated they'd like to see it become an industry standard, all other ProRes formats are available on Premiere/Windows/etc, and Adobe is generally (semi) good about staying on top of major new formats. ProRes RAW is pretty high profile.
This is for "read-only" support I am referring to. Which is all you really need. On the occasions I need to deliver ProRes I just export DNxHR on PC and drop it into a Mac laptop to make a ProRes version.
cpreston
Veteran
As far as I can tell, ProRes RAW is read only for mac as well. I don't see any compressor settings or FCP X output settings. Frankly, I'm not sure why or how it would exist as an output setting.
Agreed... read only makes perfect sense, while outputting ProResRaw from an NLE makes no sense at all. But then, neither does outputting CinemaDNG or any other flavor of raw, for that matter.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Only advantage I could see to being able to write to ProRes raw would be to convert other raw formats to ProRes raw. Eventually you might see better support for ProRes Raw in cameras but as of right now there is no way to get cinemaDNG into FCPX. Being able to convert cinemaDNG to ProRes raw could be a nice thing to have. Eventually it wouldn’t matter assuming BMD someday supports ProRes raw in their cameras.
That might become a good opportunity for a utility app to implement, since in theory it wouldn't have to de-Bayer the cDNG like an NLE would.
cpreston
Veteran
I have been playing around with the ProRes RAW and wanted to point out an issue. I am seeing some noticeable coloring in black to white high contrast areas. For example, black test on a white page will start to look either blue or red when it starts getting to the size of a couple of pixels. This is coming from a Canon C300 II. This is not seen in the internal footage.
starcentral
Veteran
Anyway to get prores raw on c200, or is that dead idea?
You mean internally? I doubt Canon would integrate Prores RAW on the c200 to cfast cards. You might see it in their higher end C700 and C700 FF as those already have options for Prores 4K.
Canon's RAW Lite is very efficient. It is just compressed 12 bit RAW. There's nothing really "lite" about it.
The C200 has a 3G SDI spigot which could theoretically be used to output uncompressed RAW, like the C300 II, but right now the only signal that comes out of that is Rec709.
Last edited:
Please report this to Atomos or Apple.
cyvideo
Veteran
Hi All. 6 months in now since the announcement of ProRes RAW. Any new hardware or NLE apps supporting this yet? Is FCPX still the only NLE handling it? A lot of interest at ProRes RAW's release but I'm not hearing much lately? Seeing as Resolve now has BRAW BM's own RAW what do you think the likely hood of seeing ProRes RAW in Resolve.
Chris Young
Chris Young
NorBro
Major Contributor
Blackmagic owns Resolve so that was never a question...and Resolve has been very good at supporting EVERYTHING, so I think they will support PR RAW one day too.
Especially since Apple licenses them ProRes for all of their cameras (which they don't do for everyone or didn't so easily for a while).
Especially since Apple licenses them ProRes for all of their cameras (which they don't do for everyone or didn't so easily for a while).