Thread: Is RAW uncompressed necessary?

Page 3 of 18 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 177
  1. #21  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    423
    Yes-CF is as easy to decode as ProRes (if not easier). I don't think that REDCODE decoding is as well optimized as CF. Cineform has been here already for long time and it has been heavily optimised for processing speed on modern CPUs.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #22  
    Senior Member laco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    474
    Today I downloaded some sample cinemaDNG files from the Ikonoskop camera.
    I was able to play, and grade it in real-time in Davinci...so why use cineform..
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #23  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    259
    It's like people ask, ask, and ask, but once they get it, they don't know what to do with it. I will shoot Raw whenever possible and expect to go through some bumps on the way. But also how wonderful it is to have ProRes if we need to use it. Add to that, if you want Cineform, you can get it cineform studio premium under $300. Man, aren't we fortunate to have all these options at our disposal.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #24  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    348
    Simple. If CineForm RAW is encoded in the camera, you get much smaller data requirements (and thus more shooting time on the SSD) while enjoying the benefits of raw mode. With lower data throughput, higher frame rates at 2.4K might theoretically be possible. I agree that there's much less reason to shoot uncompressed raw, then transcode to CineForm RAW. Then, unless you're going to delete the uncompressed footage, you've got even more storage to deal with.
    Last edited by Tzedekh; 05-08-2012 at 05:22 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #25  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    423
    +CF support is 10x bigger than for DNG format and CF is overall less hardware demanding.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #26  
    I don't think uncompressed will be an issue in the long run. If it were not for the flooding that destroyed WD's HDD operations, a 3 TB HDD would be 70 bucks now.

    I bought a 2 TB drive for 70 a year ago before the flood... now they are 130$ for 2 TB
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #27  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    348
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Moss View Post
    I don't think uncompressed will be an issue in the long run. If it were not for the flooding that destroyed WD's HDD operations, a 3 TB HDD would be 70 bucks now.

    I bought a 2 TB drive for 70 a year ago before the flood... now they are 130$ for 2 TB
    And prices have actually come down somewhat.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #28  
    Cineform RAW directly to the camera would be convenient, but I think it's good enough to be able to shoot RAW and convert to Cineform RAW. If you wanted the camera to record directly to CF RAW in the first place, you wouldn't be losing anything by deleting the uncompressed RAW files after converting. Worried about the time it takes to convert? Assuming you'll be storing your footage on a drive other than the SSD you record on, converting to CF RAW to another drive may even be faster than copying uncompressed RAW footage simply due to file size.

    If you just need an edit-friendly proxy, you can just make ProRes files from the uncompressed RAW, skipping Cineform altogether.

    If you absolutely require the speed of shooting and editing right on the SSD you record to, you can just choose to shoot in ProRes and get practically 98% of the quality of RAW.

    I think the only practical advantage of recording to CF RAW directly would be more recording time, which is of course welcome. But again, if recording time is that important to you, you always have ProRes with very close quality.

    Quote Originally Posted by laco View Post
    Today I downloaded some sample cinemaDNG files from the Ikonoskop camera.
    I was able to play, and grade it in real-time in Davinci...so why use cineform..
    Can you edit in real-time too with image adjustments and layers? If so, can I have your computer?
    aka Trucci on DVXuser
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #29  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    423
    As I said- there is really no need anymore for all proxy approach, at least not for HD. You edit, grade on final files, have full quality preview etc.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #30  
    Senior Member pharpsied's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Houston TX
    Posts
    638
    Quote Originally Posted by laco View Post
    Today I downloaded some sample cinemaDNG files from the Ikonoskop camera.
    I was able to play, and grade it in real-time in Davinci...so why use cineform..
    Workstation specs?
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •