FS7: Raw image from raw video

V

vilrockerdefer

Member
Hello,

I have been asked by a client (a web agency) to shoot their offices, and they specifically asked if they would be able to process selected individual frames as RAW images in Photoshop.

The problem is, I don't know anything about RAW video, and nothing either about extracting RAW stills from RAW video.

So far I think I need to rent the XDCA-FS7 for my FS7, and an Odyssey 7Q, to get RAW video. Am I correct so far ?

Given I am, is there a way, after the shooting, to extract RAW (for example DNG's) images from the video ?

Thanks a lot.

Fred
 
You should be able to see every frame in the footage as single DNG files. Take into consideration your shutter speed if you're moving the camera or shooting someone who is moving.
Yes, you will need the XDCA-FS7 and use it with an O7Q (with raw support).
 
Thank you. Did you try this already ?

Apart from that, I am confused when I see on the Odyssey website that it can record both CinemaDNG and "Sony Raw FS". I there an advantage with the latter ? Will I get individual RAW files from it as well ?

Thanks.
 
I don't have the FS7, I have the FS700, but they work in the same way and I know that you get DNG files (if you choose it in the O7Q). The O7Q records FS raw (that's the camera output) and transcodes it to CinemaDNG. You only see the DNG files, or if you choose Prores as codec you will see Prores files.
 
Agree with Clermond. Also not 100% sure Photoshop can open DNG files - if you plan to simply hand them over.
 
Well I was not directly in contact with the client but with the person hiring me for this task from the company the client is working with so I don't know exactly why they would want that but I agree that if they want stills they would have better resolution with any still camera.

But apart from resolution, I am just curious, why would a still camera produce better results ? Better image processing ? Would that be enough to make a visible difference in most cases ?
 
In general a still shot is done with a much shorter shutter time, reducing motion blur. That's better for still photo use. But for video camera motion blur is a good thing as it smooths images together to help give the illusion of continuous picture instead of a series of separate frames. If you set a video camera to a short shutter it can have a strobe-like appearance.
 
One can pull perfectly acceptable stills from motion raw clips, especially shooting at UHD which is 8.8 megapixels. It hasn't been too many years since that was a common range for still camera pixel counts. Just make sure you get some static shots with good focus. If the stills are for web content anyway, the extra resolution of a still camera is not particularly relevant. Processing DNG frames with the more sophisticated high quality debayer algorithms used by stills processors results in significantly better image quality than processing for video.
These are Raw Therapee wavelet processed 2k DNG frames from my D16.

17262609766_b0351767dd_o.jpg

16636390280_18750ce8cf_o.jpg

25893716885_2e1d739229_o.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top