RAW Workflow

K

kampfpudel

Active member
Any thoughts about it?
To my knowledge there is no NLE that can work with RAW-files?
(perhaps a Quantel or some other very exotic turnkey NLE, but...)

Or do someone have information within "the industry" about something "round the corner"?

Regards
Hans
 
"raw"

"raw"

tif sequences, quicktimes containing uncompressed fullres frames, cineon sequences and DPX files are all fairly easy to work with in final cut pro.

the stuff I've done testing 2k usually involves making a proxy to DVCPRO HD for editing, then ripping out a 2k version when I'm done by changing the sequence presets. obviously you have to watch your timebase.

anyway, works great.

_a
 
I assume you mean RAW format files pre-color conversion?

A friend worked on a indy shot on the Viper in RAW. He said they edited a proxy then did the final color conversion on the raw files in Luster.

Not sure how they did the conform. But they were editing on a high end Avid solution.
 
Remember also that you wont need a DVCPRO HD proxy for editing, you'll be editing in REDCODE (RAW) on your NLE of choice.
At least, I'm assuming that this is what Graham's contributions are intended to lead to.

J
 
RAW definitions and compression

RAW definitions and compression

I think that the definition of RAW is getting confused between its use in RED and stills cameras and its use in Viper.

RED's RAW means - 12 bit per pixel Bayer pattern data off the CMOS sensor, (similar definition to a stills camera) unprocessed in terms of gamma, white balance etc etc

Viper's RAW seems to mean RGB data off the CCD sensors, unprocessed in terms of white balance, but mapped to 10 bit log 1920 x 1080 progressive.
IMHO a less confusing name for this RGB mode is "FilmStream". RED has an equivalent user option for 2K resolution RGB recording and HD-SDI output.

Compression is a separate discussion. There is nothing inherently different about the Viper FilmStream RGB signal after it has been recorded to an HDCAM SR than when it comes out of the camera over dual link HD-SDI, except for any compression artifacts the recording itself introduces.

Same for RED or stills camera RAW. Until this point in time, all RAW stills have been captured uncompressed, but there is nothing in theory that says you couldn't also compress Bayer RAW - it would be unconventional for sure, but possible.

As REDCODE is under development I won't comment any further on that specifically, there are several posts on that subject on this board and in other forums.
 
John Allardice said:
Remember also that you wont need a DVCPRO HD proxy for editing, you'll be editing in REDCODE (RAW) on your NLE of choice.
At least, I'm assuming that this is what Graham's contributions are intended to lead to.

J
Click to expand...

I could be mistaken, but I thought I read that you could output REDCODE (for proxy) and Raw simultaneously from the camera, although I'm not really sure why you would want to do that. Just stick with REDCODE and avoid bookoo bucks working with RAW. I have a feeling it's gonna be an incredible codec. 10 bit 4:4:4 2K... Sweeeeeeeeet!
I'll worry about RAW later... much later.
 
It makes sense to edit proxies and then conform the high rez to the edit. I would rather have FCP or other NLEs have proxy capability.

After Effects does this nicely. You can load a 2k sequence, then in the project window, point to a lower resolution version of the shot as the proxy. When it comes time to render, just make sure proxies are turned off.

I would prefer either RED generate proxies automatically when shooting RAW, or FCP give the option to generate proxies automatically in a proxy mode.
 
I have to agree with you there. With ever increasing data rates, every NLE should have the capability to edit proxies and conform later. It would be a nice feature to have down the road. I'm just hoping REDCODE makes this obsolete. Of course, I thought DVCPRO-HD was the end all. Not quite. No need for me to hijack the thread... back to RAW
 
Damon Botsford said:
I could be mistaken, but I thought I read that you could output REDCODE (for proxy) and Raw simultaneously from the camera, although I'm not really sure why you would want to do that. Just stick with REDCODE and avoid bookoo bucks working with RAW. I have a feeling it's gonna be an incredible codec. 10 bit 4:4:4 2K... Sweeeeeeeeet!
I'll worry about RAW later... much later.
Click to expand...


Compressed codecs are fine if computing power and storage limitations are a big concern.

A big film can afford to deal with those issues easier than indies, so it would make more sense to shoot RAW.

RED is aiming for the full range of users.
 
Ted Schilowitz is a member of the RED-team...
Would it be possible to accelerate RAW with a dedicated card?
I am thinking collaboration between RED and AJA now...
 
Clarification of above...

"Same for RED or stills camera RAW. Until this point in time, all RAW stills have been captured uncompressed, but there is nothing in theory that says you couldn't also compress Bayer RAW - it would be unconventional for sure, but possible." -Stuart English

So I was thinking of "compressed" RAW.
 
Hans Nystroem said:
Ted Schilowitz is a member of the RED-team...
Would it be possible to accelerate RAW with a dedicated card?
I am thinking collaboration between RED and AJA now...
Click to expand...

as far as I know Ted still has a very good relationship with AJA so its very possible, and a hardware card really makes sense. Probally would be more like a collaboration between RED, AJA with a little help from a NLE maker like Apple.
 
If they could engage Apple in the process it would be great!
Apple have "Aperture", so they have interest and knowledge about RAW.
Perhaps FCP-X (extreme or number) could handle RAW natively.
And with the help of a dedicated hardware card make the workflow fly!

A bit strange that Apple didn´t show anything at NAB...hm.
 
Nice idea, but until now AJA makes no processing on the their cards except scaling. Thats when the card "supports" codecs. Unfortunately no coding/decoding on the board yet. Don't want to be negative, but that card would cost a fortune. Think about WMV accelerators and such. But I would appreciate that too.

Editing in true/raw whatever native of 4k or so is not necessary. Nobody wants to shift around the big files/sequences. Think about editing on a laptop and all the big things become unrealistic or uninteresting completely. Except HD, nobody is currently
editing in 2k or 4k. Not even one the 'High-End' systems as they are simply too expensive to fuddle around for 3 months on a film-edit. A high-quality proxy-mov would be nice. After picture-lock press conform, go home and tomorrow its done.

On the other hand, if you talk about image sequences there are some very special truths in picture handling and quality in the Apple-Post world.

- Quicktime and FCP support image sequences very bad.
In my experience FCP simply cannot process them. Image sequences are imported as individuals. Tied to OSX and Quicktime only for image sequence support, your practically limited to a very low number of images from a sequence.
Ever tried to make a QT out of a 15000 frames image sequence ? Good night and good luck. And thats only 10 minutes at 25 or 8.x in 30 fps. And this non-support is official. Its even written in the help pages.

- Quicktime incorporates a gamma-shift when you move from image sequences.
Compositing becomes a horror when mixing Quicktimes and image sequences as the Quicktimes make that gamma shift regardless of their origin and impossible to switch it off.

- Quicktime doesn't support log-files.
You're tied to a plug-in from a programmer somewhere out there. But thats only a way, unfortunately not a solution, when you think about sequence support in general (andw ant to do DI/Film)

My summary of film support based on image sequences: poor.

Solution might be indeed a simultaneous support of native (raw, red-code..) and a proxy version of it at the same time.
One advance of image sequences over Quicktime:
Ever got a corrupt Qucktime ? Or recording broke before finishing. Or very stupid: power loss during capture ? That Quicktime is corrupt. And probably stays so. An image sequence is complete except the last (broken) frame.
Think about your shoot, a nice unrepeatable session and the 60 min quicktime gets corrupt right at the end.


I can think of 2 ways of how people want to work:

- Image sequence based work for high end post, feature film, highest quality, safety blabla. Problem: You need videos from the sequences for review and editing.
Question: How to get an according Quicktime fast from a image sequence without ages of converting.

- complete QT work style for indies, docs etc. Problem: They cannot afford full-res editing or mobile resources (Laptop-Editing etc.) limit that possiblity.
Question: A small QT as an exact copy from the original again with less or no waiting.


Suggested solution: both ways would benefit from a simultaneous recording of two streams.

Version 1:
Image sequence capture and a Lower-Res QT in parallel. Editing in FCP then High-End post.

Version 2:
Native recording QT (Red-Codec) and Lower-Res in parallel for those finishing projects completely in FCP.

RED: possible ? (Without codex; )
 
image sequence to QT

image sequence to QT

"- Quicktime incorporates a gamma-shift when you move from image sequences.
Compositing becomes a horror when mixing Quicktimes and image sequences as the Quicktimes make that gamma shift regardless of their origin and impossible to switch it off."

That depends on the app. There are lots of gamma concerns with QT.

If you must have QTs from sequences, your best bet (as far as I know) is Shake. Not only was it designed primarily to handle image sequences, but it suppresses QT's gamma-fiddling for exactly the reason you state: You never want these adjustments to wind up in your composites.

If you want lower-data-rate proxies, I'd suggest the DV-based codecs, 50 or 100. If you want full res but minimal bloat from image sequences, check out BitJazz's Sheer codecs, which use lossless compression and don't screw around with the gamma.
 
Yes, Shake does suppress the Gamma daftness of QT. But FCP does not, and that's something we've all got to bug Apple about to fix (speaking as Graeme personally here, not as RED). I mean, it's just not "pro". I think AE might also avoid the gamma weirdness for the most part too, and depending upon how a QT codec is written it might be avoidable in FCP, but you'd still have levels issues on stills.

Graeme
 
Raw format freely available?

Raw format freely available?

Is Red going to document the raw format? It would be nice to convert it to any useful format, such as OpenEXR. Actually, I'm surprised I haven't seen much discussion about OpenEXR. It supports the "windowing" feature of the Red camera and seems like an excellent format for FX-heavy footage.
 
We'll make sure you can get access to the raw data to feed into your own conversion app, should you need to convert it to a file format we don't support.

Graeme
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top