Thread: Finally a native DNG editing solution for Premiere

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 70
  1. #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by Wuudi View Post
    Wow, if you can use the dng directly it means I can later export the timeline to resolve and don't even have to relink it (like with proxys) but can directly grade the dng's right? If yes then just wow wow wow

    Additional question. After Effects loads the dng's so what happens if I say mark 2 clips and regroup then as AfterFX clip? It opens in AfterFX but how? With the Adobe CameraRAW or with Ginger?
    As for relinking w/o proxies, I think that should work. I've never actually used Resolve, but what you are saying sounds right.

    Any time After Effects loads a .DNG file it uses the Adobe Camera RAW importer. Any time you load a GNR file it uses the Ginger importer. That happens because After Effects doesn't allow any importer to load a file that it thinks it knows how to import. So in your case, it would use Adobe Camera RAW. However, if you were to mark 2 clips that were GNR files, and then group them in AE, then it should load with the Ginger importer. Not saying that I've done this, but I think that should happen.

    In case you haven't noticed, you guys know much more about After Effects and Premiere than I do. (-:
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,334
    Nice. Too bad you can't do this for FCPX, but this makes Premiere look pretty attractive.

    I would have only one question, which could only be answered by spending long hours with both workflows... are you actually saving time, in regards to precision in editing, or averaging the time out due to the slow playback speed?

    Does 1/4 playback help at all? Just curious!

    GOod stuff.

    SKYPE (best way to talk to me): Camera_Kholi | twitter
    Avery and Pete: Superseeds Feature Film Trailer
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,099
    Great workflow John.

    Glad most are sticking to sequential frames.

    Since DNG is sequential you avoid the stupid 2GB file limitations over SMB and AFP networks with Adobe products.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by Kholi View Post
    Nice. Too bad you can't do this for FCPX, but this makes Premiere look pretty attractive.

    I would have only one question, which could only be answered by spending long hours with both workflows... are you actually saving time, in regards to precision in editing, or averaging the time out due to the slow playback speed?

    Does 1/4 playback help at all? Just curious!

    GOod stuff.
    Good question. As you all know, DNG files are pretty big, so the first bottleneck is HD speed. If you have slow disk access, then no matter what your DNGs will be slow. On the machine that I make these videos with, I just have a regular 7200rmp hard disk. So you all should have much better read speeds.

    Also, the version that I made that video with is a bit older, and a lot slower. There are some significant speed improvements in the latest version.

    So if you have a fast drive setup, then you should get almost realtime playback at half size (which uses the fast, low quality debayer). And then when you render at full size you should be able to get like 5fps or so. That will be much faster once the GPU version is ready. The rendering scales with the number of cores in your machine. My machine has one processor with 4 cores (sandy bridge) but if you have a motherboard with multiple processors it should scale.

    Finally, the debayer is always at half size or full size. There is no quarter size. If you do a quarter size preview then it will do a complete half size debayer and then scale it down. There isn't much benefit to playing below half size, unless you have lots of effects running.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    Senior Member Wuudi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    South Tyrol - Italy
    Posts
    405
    That's wonderful John, exactly what I want. Editing in Premiere, then just opening the timeline in Resolve and working seamlessly in it.
    And for AfterFX, there are some crazy clips (super highlight recovery) I think AdobeRaw does better, so linking them into an AfterFX composition I get AdobeRaw for those, tadaaaa

    Is there a demo available to try out the speed of the realtime rendering (with democlips/dng's from other people as I'm still waiting for my camera
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    Senior Member Frank Glencairn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,829
    Quote Originally Posted by Wuudi View Post

    Is there a demo available to try out the speed of the realtime rendering (with democlips/dng's from other people as I'm still waiting for my camera
    http://19lights.com/wp/downloads/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by Wuudi View Post
    That's wonderful John, exactly what I want. Editing in Premiere, then just opening the timeline in Resolve and working seamlessly in it.
    And for AfterFX, there are some crazy clips (super highlight recovery) I think AdobeRaw does better, so linking them into an AfterFX composition I get AdobeRaw for those, tadaaaa

    Is there a demo available to try out the speed of the realtime rendering (with democlips/dng's from other people as I'm still waiting for my camera
    Np. You should definitely try both Adobe Camera RAW and Ginger HDR, test for yourself, and decide which one's better. I'm biased, of course. (-:

    But I'd keep in mind that most of what Adobe Camera RAW "recovers" from the highlight is good data that was previously thrown away. In the DNG files there is a tag (0xc62A) called "Baseline Exposure". In the Afterglow shot #1 it was set to 2.4. That means that when you open the file, Adobe Camera RAW is increasing the exposure by 2.4 stops, which throws away that highlight information. So when you drop the exposure or enable highlight recovery there isn't some magical technique that recovers those highlights. Rather, it's just giving you the data that was already there. And it seems to vary by ISO. So the 5th shot (with the sparklers) is set to 3.4.

    I have a different approach. Rather then playing a little game of "guess the actual exposure of your image", Ginger HDR just gives you the full range, and always gives you the fully recovered highlights. Then you can tweak it with levels, curves, etc. If you really want me to apply that exposure to the image, that's possible if enough people ask for it.

    BTW, there is nothing wrong with Adobe's approach. Technically, Adobe's approach is correct and my approach is wrong. The DNG file says "bump the exposure by 2.4 stops" and so Adobe Camera RAW does what it should do. But you guys are sophisticated enough to understand the value of recovering your highlights.
    Last edited by John Hable; 01-04-2013 at 06:11 PM. Reason: Need to learn how to spell.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Atlanta Georgia
    Posts
    2,815
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank Glencairn View Post
    Finally there seems to be a native DNG editing solution for Premiere.

    I have no idea, about bit depth (Adobes half assed importer only used 8 bit), but anyway, it seems a step in the right direction,
    and the implementation seems pretty simple.

    Also this sentence kind a stroke me:





    http://19lights.com/wp/tutorials/raw...pper-workflow/

    What do you guys think?

    Frank
    I believe this slight crop happens to allow a better Debayer. Otherwise the debayer will start using the edge pixels from the boundary that aren't part of the picture (ie black).

    I think you'll be hard pressed to pick the extra FOV from 32 pixels.

    JB.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #19  
    Senior Member Wuudi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    South Tyrol - Italy
    Posts
    405
    I'm not an expert in Resolve yet John, and I still have no BMC to test it out for myself. All I can do is try it with DNG's from other ppl and there are some interior shoots and one extreme testshoot where I was able to get more highlight recovery (really recovery from very blown out parts) in AdobeRAW then with Resolve. Your approach is fine but you offer a base image that has to be balanced/graded and then I'm back to Resolve
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #20  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    374
    Hi John

    When you import the 12 bit Cinema DNG file into this new version of Adobe Camera RAW, will the file be converted to 8 bit or remain at 12 bit ?
    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
  •