I've been thinking about the conclusions of this video with regards to BlackmagicRAW seeming more processed. According to Blackmagic the demosaic algorithm used for BRAW is supposedly a lot more advance than the any of the real-time demosaic algorithms that occur in editing software, because it is handled by the the hardware FPGA's in the camera vs a software solution that must operate in real time. The result is that things like a greater sample radius can in theory be used for more accurate inter pixel color estimation. What does this mean? It would in theory mean the demosaic would result in fewer residual artifacts in the final image giving the footage an overall smoother and less noisy look, but with, in theory, more accurate colors (excluding the white balance correction issue, as that is a unrelated issue ), but this smoothness could potentially be misinterpreted as if noise reduction had been applied. So this raises the bigger question that actually wasn't answered in this video: How does a post denoised version of ProresRAW compare to a post denoised version of Braw? This is ultimately the real question more so than how much noise was retained, because noise that doesn't add anything meaningful to the final image is just useless noise. In this video we were shown that BRAW cleans up significantly better than H.625, but it is never shown if ProresRAW cleans up as well or better. If ProresRAW cleans up better than Braw then that is the win, but if they clean up nearly identically then that would mean Braw got rid of useless noise information likely due to a more sophisticated demosaic algorithm and that they are equal from an end result standpoint; however, if Braw were to clean up better than the ProresRAW then that would imply the demosaic was actually better, and despite showing less noise in the initial footage could potentially be considered the superior format, because again it's the end result that really matters. My suspicion is that they will likely clean up nearly identically making them more or less equivalent outside of meaningless noise, which would mean the Braw was just better demosaiced and noise reduction was likely not used.
It's the reason I subscribed. They're so good. Your infographics are clean, concise, and clear and I walk away knowing more than I learned in most of my cinematography classes. I think any other youtuber would have put that information in some sort of "masterclass" that they charge money for.
This is a good idea actually… but won’t be an accurate comparison as it needs to be coming from the same sensor. And there’s no sensor out there that can record both formats
One thing that BRAW offers that very few people seem to realize is that you can trim your files and save them back to BRAW in Resolve (without any compromise or loss whatsoever), so you can minimize file size once your editing is done. It means you can easily record all day and fill up your 1 TB SSD if you need to.... then trim all the unnecessary moments and end up with only the ones that you need, and still have access to RAW data. Brilliant, and a total game changer! I truly don't know if you can do the same with ProRes RAW, but I doubt it.
The file size is more acceptable and you also have the hand on the white balance in kelvin and ISO metadata, it make some tweak possible with a smaller size than DNG RAW or Prores RAW , convert that in 16 bit open EXR ACES is really easy and make long term archive more easy. The BRAW are also normaly open source Hope more software use it.
You're absolutely right on your partial debayering theory regarding BRAW. The reason being is that Black Magic does that to get around RED' RAW patent of pure internal RAW. That's why prores Raw is only acquired through external devices.
That doesn't make sense. Canon has their own perfectly functional internal "pure raw" with no issues. Red raw isn't "Pure raw" either, it goes though it's own proprietary process to lower file size. Pure raw is cinema DNG, or any other special file type that is literally just pure code from the sensor and those files are even larger then redcode. Apple sued RED because Apple patent trolls everybody it possibly can. They lose these cases all the time.
@@luisa9628 sorry my bad I meant pure compressed RAW. Cinema DNG is uncompressed. Braw gets around this by partially debayering the image. If Apple won the suit it would have benefited us not Apple. It was a major lawsuit google it. In fact Sony got sued by RED for its internal compressed RAW in F65 F55 cameras.
Nerd parts are exactly why we come to watch your videos. Pretty much no one goes this deep with information and testings like you! You save us so much time to figure all this out on our own. Thank you!
One additional comment - I don't believe that Blackmagic will solve the Debayering issue. They purposely designed it this way so that the files can take some pressure off of the editor and make it very easy to smoothly edit high resolution "raw" files. When I was using the BMPCC 4K, I was recording raw in C-DNG files, and it basically retained all the noise from the original recordings, but when Blackmagic design updated the camera to record BRAW, the files were immediately softer and less noisy because of this "in camera" debayering process. I knew what was happening, but it was a life saver for editing "raw" clips quickly, while retaining WB and exposure controls. Plus the flexability to use BRAW in Adobe Premiere and Davinci are a win too, since I do not own a MAC. Since I do not own a MAC, I don't even have a choice - BRAW wins this contest for me.
I remember debates on "lossless" compressed CDNG vs uncompressed CDNG on Blackmagic Cinema camera 2.5k, and I saw the reduction in quality too) It is very sad that BM completely removed uncompressed CDNG options in all their contemporary cameras.
Can you do a test on how "real" is the 12 bit color?? I'd love to see is BRAW is equal in that respect. I'm recording for HDR content specifically, and because of the 10 bit color end space, I need 12 bit as a starting point to edit from without artifacts or banding.
Has there been any changes in BRAW since this video? I wish for a workflow using RAW that doesn’t require me to jump through hoops or forego quality for convenience. Jumping through hoops is shooting in ProRes RAW, WB in Final Cut, then grading in Resolve. Or as an alternative, shoot in ProRes RAW, convert to cDNG, then import to Resolve - more hoops! Foregoing quality is using BRAW just so I can avoid aforementioned workflows and import directly to Resolve. Seriously, this nightmare has been going on for far too long and it’s a ridiculous burden on the end user.
Yeah, I hate those company feuds where the only loser is the consumer. I think there has been some improvements that fix the white balance in the Panasonic, but I haven’t tested it personally so I won’t be able to comment on this. Maybe try it yourself and let me know
Hey Sherif, are you going to buy the Lumix S5 IIx? If you do, are you able to share your findings on the BRAW quality for it? I’m curious if it’s worth the upgrade from the S5 II 😊 By the way, do know what’s the size difference between internal H265 vs braw vs ProRes raw for an hour of footage?
Nice comparison! I would love to see a comparison between the two formats in regards to workflow. Things like editing performance, compatibility with software, and file sizes.
Blackmagic Design make all manner of profound hardware. The TV industry are supposed to be formulating the next best thing. A decade has gone by. It's not Apple against Microsoft. It's Apple against Blackmagic Design! Very strange. Australian companies are protected from monopolisers. ProRes and Avid and Apple and Adobe best pull their head in. Competition laws in Australia are profound.
- 2:37 There are cameras that output 16 bit raw, and there's a recorder that records 16 bit linear. Checkout the Sony AXS-R7 External 4K RAW Recorder for VENICE, PMW-F55 & F5. - 7:37 Thanks for the tip. - Thanks for the whole video. You answered lots of questions that I had about braw & prores raw.
Excellent analysis but I should point out that the subtle noise reduction baked into BRAW has been known from the beginning and was a subject of much discussion on Blackmagic forum. But from this I would make the OPPOSITE conclusions to yourself. As your charts show, we get half the noise from BRAW at the cost of some loss of detail. But with BRAW we also gain a smoother workflow and a better external recorder in the case of the Lumix S series. Is it worth giving up all these advantages for the subtle detail loss? That's the core question. The best way to answer is to ask whether lack of detail is the big problem with digital video footage? I'd say the opposite! That's why many DPs use ProMist or other filters, plus post-production techniques to reduce over-sharp imagery and get a more film-like naturalistic look. In summary, BRAW sacrifices (to a very small degree) the one characteristic we can most afford to compromise on, while providing all the other benefits.
Thanks for the comment Robin, you have very good points and totally agree. I have a feeling you didnt watch the episode till the very end though. I cant remember saying that all DPs should choose ProRes RAW over BRAW,. All I said was I "Personally" would choose ProRes RAW "at present", mainly was due to the WB issue it had, which was already fixed. Check 16:06 till the end if you have another min, you'll see how we both agree. especially at 16:33 Thanks again for watching
I did watch the video to the end, plus a few of your other excellent videos too. That should help your analytics. :-) I never made a claim about you stating something for all DPs... not sure where that comment comes from? I am merely venturing a different conclusion that might help other readers.
The quality is pretty much the same, but It’ll become HUGE in size in a folder structure instead of a single file. CDNG is the most inefficient codec out there
UPDATE: FW 2.6 is released and they claim they fixed the WB issue I pointed out. I didn't test it out yet. I only got a verbal confirmation from Panasonic. av.jpn.support.panasonic.com/support/global/cs/dsc/download/index4.html
I haven't tested it yet no. That’s why I was saying “it should”. Will confirm once I do I edited the statement to make it clearer that I didn't test it
@@THEDPJOURNEY No problem man, I just thought you might have tested it 2 days later. No rush at all. My guess is that it's only better, not completely fixed, since Panasonic say ''improved'' and not ''fixed''.
People are saying DNG files from BMPCC4K are much better than BRAW since its launch. If you compare BRAW to DNG photo files from my BMPCC6K the difference is night and day, in my opinion, and it is sad to not be able to enjoy this option (and ProRes RAW).
I think BRAW uses raw data as a monochromatic video signal with some moderate bitrate mpeg-like compression so it causes this softness and macroblocking (which you called mushiness where you don't see every single pixel). It's interesting to know what type of compression inside of ProRes raw with same bitrate levels.
I found some in-depth reverse engineering investigation: cml.news/g/cml-raw-log-hdr/topic/braw_codec_analysis/25749037 In short, image stores in in both formats, where first format is half resolution R-G1-B (or RGB transformmed to YCC) video which can be viewed fast and without complexity computing (which can be called as debayered), and the second is "fourth" green G2 component, which is added to compute "full resolution" if we do full quality debayer. Very smart move) It reminds me C500 external 4K raw, where R-G1-B-G2 was stored as a four 2K RGB + "Alpha" via 2 SDIs. But it was not compressed except of log curve applied.
honestly I lost my mind . I have different camera for photography but recently I decided buying Blackmagic ursa mini pro 12k , but some of the person said oh Blackmagic need a lot of time to grow up like Sony like red like canon . some of the person said you can change raw formate to prores raw , I heard tons of tons different story . I searched a lot of camera red a lot of about the camera . using different Nikon camera but recently bought Nikon z9 as well my question is is Blackmagic ursa mini pro is ok for documentary ? I am not professional cinema director making movie for cinema . . I like your video very much explain all the details most of the camera like Sony fx6 or fx9 is very much expensive like canon Eos mark lll
The it’s is a bit bulky for doc. I’d go for something lighter for sure. It also depends on what you have in mind in terms of doc. The FX6 would be a great option for example
that wouldve been great, But i guess Denoiser in Davinci Resolve is enough to state a point, plus this DP dude is not much of a premier user I believe.
BRAW compressed, we would have to use one of the compressed ProRes Raw codecs then compare. Until BRAW comes in a uncompressed format it will be processed simply due to compression. ProRes HQ files aren’t compressed= simple.
Thanks for this video. I am deciding right now whether to get the Black Magic or the ProRes (via Ninja V). Question: at 10:46, the BRAW, looks sharper than the ProRes, and despite what you stated that the BRAW must have some noise reduction processing at some point. Noise reduction should reduce detail (?). Will you be doing an analysis on the dynamic range of these format?
From what can be seen, sharpness =/= more details, they have a pass of noise reduction and a pass of sharpness to compensate for the loss that occurs with NR, it gives the illusion of a more detailed image but it's just micro contrast boosting, you can see it everywhere once you notice it. (dark edges around brigt details and the opposite as well)
Thank you for this! I’ve been waiting to see a good comparison of ProRes RAW vs BRAW from the same sensor. As I suspected BRAW is not actually RAW, but a nice 12-bit yCbCr-like codec. I’ve settled on the Sigma fp for the ProRes RAW, and real 12-bit uncompressed CinemaDNG if needed.
@@THEDPJOURNEY look what I found: cml.news/g/cml-raw-log-hdr/topic/braw_codec_analysis/25749037 In short, image stores in in both formats, where first format is RGB (or RGB transformmed to YCC) which can be viewed fast and without complexity computing (which can be called ad debayered), and the second is "fourth" green component, which is added if we do full quality debayer. Very smart move) It reminds me C500 external 4K raw, where RGBG' was stored as 2K RGB Alpha via 2 SDIs. But it was not compressed except of log curve.
Hahaha, no such thing as adding noise in camera. Noise is just fleeting electrical charges with random pattern that affects the sensor in a pixel level. Brands are fighting for reducing this phenomenon, not adding it
My thoughts: 1. As a DP, my White Balance is always in the set using Kelvin, and in the ballpark of where I want the image to be eventually. The BRAW limitation isn't a major issue (for me) 2. Davinci Resolve. 'Nuff said 3. BRAW Compression codecs are a major factor for choosing BRAW, especially for documentary style work where something like a 8:1 compression ratio might be a data saver while not compromising on quality 4. The menus and interface on the BM recorders are fantastic, plus External SSD / Internal Dual SD Card options make it more flexible for scaling up or down when shooting.. so essentially, a matter of the recorder along with the format.
Thank you for video, I have a question, I was using Panasonic last 7-8 years now I am using Sony A7SIII, I love and hate this camera, I cant do the same color as I did on Panasonic, and it is really bothering me. I want to switch again to Panasonic but there is one issue here the stops me to buy Panasonic, it is autofocus, which is important for me as an Automative Videographer. if I decide to switch which one are you recommend?
@@THEDPJOURNEY I hope GH6 will have good AF, i will wait for that and your review too, Thank You, waiting for more video. i will be happy if you give me some advice for Sony color, I am using Slog 3 +1 exposing, recorder Ninja V 5inc
when Blackmagic introduced bRAW they explained how it works very detailed as far as I remember. and as far as I remember they also mentioned the intermediate layers of processing the data and image... Me personally still prefer the good old DNG format (with 3:1 compression). I think that was (that is) the best format for RAW.
Assimilate scratch is amazing for transcoding from Prores Raw to DNxHR or ProRes - you can pipe through with correct colorspace interpreting and tagging as slog2 cinegamma or whatevever you want. So you get exactly the same files from Scratch render as if shooting in DNxHR or prores native, but with better quality and bit depth. Also perfect if you add Neat video OFX in the Scratch pipe. This works perfectly in a YRGB davinci colormanaged workflow. The color "management" in PP or FCPX or pretty much non existing, which makes working with prores raw native maddening. If been saying for years now that not supporting ProRes raw is going to be the downfall of blackmagic design ... :-) lets see ...
In Visual Effects for keying and compositing, noise makes a considerable difference in pulling a clean alpha from a greenscreen or bluescreen. It's usually a better idea to shoot with all the original sensor's noise preserved so that you can denoise the footage in-comp before keying, which gives far more flexibility without the risk of losing detail from the camera's internal denoising. This means that ProRes Raw is certainly better for this. However, we really shouldn't get too caught up in this... A good artist can pull a flawless looking key off of subpar footage, and artists will rarely ever receive a "perfect plate" to key from. There are so many other things to factor into what falls under a good greenscreen plate. Color depth is the bigger factor here, so any 10-12 bit footage will allow a good range to pull a key in a well lit studio where noise shouldn't be overt enough to contaminate the key. At the end of the day you should always decide which format to shoot based on your project budget and level of production. Most importantly, if you do have to do greenscreens or any VFX work, hire a VFX supervisor to ask questions!! It is an investment that is well worth it and will save you TONS of money on the back-end when you can eliminate potential issues on-set.
Way too extreme of a WB comparison as you said, how do you make that mistake and have that equipment, slightly illogical. And as you also said, maybe a better name is raw hybrid and it's about the end result. It's for the time you don't need raw but would like some benefits from it. I would understand if you "bashed" it for the way it advertised itself, since it's not raw, but for it's merits? It hold up already as a pretty useful tool. I've only shot braw once, and mostly shoot international across camera brands, also the only BM thing I own is Resolve, so I'm not a fan boy, just to clarify.
That was a surprise! I’ve always thought that black magic & pro red raw process the noise the same way! Watching the raw war is pretty fun Can’t wait to see how it will develop
Your videos are so insightful! 🙏🏽 Just watched 4 in a row. I hope you do make the one about noise post production that (I think) you mentioned. And one about Canon’s R5C, or Canon RAW Light.
Really helpful and well presented review. I really like the smooth and interesting graphics used and found the 'nerd alert' part, the most fascinating - though great to have it announced beforehand as an option to skip, if it's not the right time to 'get into it' in the moment. For me, one very big part of the equation is the significantly much higher cost of Adobe Premiere and the fact it is on a subscription model. It is much more attractive and cost effective to purchase another monitor for BRAW at $800 than pay for Premiere and use that for Prores Raw using my Ninja V. Let alone the extra time and work required to process the Prores Raw file in Premiere first, before re-rendering it to then use in Davinci Resolve as the preferred editing software.
Thank you so much Marc for your kind words. Glad you liked the “Nerd alert” bit. Yeah the option of Resolve is looking much better than Adobe Pr. I’ll still be talking more about this topic. That’s just a start anyway
The thing ProRes Raw needs to work on is compression sizes. They have a giant HQ size and a still large standard size, but no smaller sizes like Blackmagic Raw. They should implement a 8:1, 12:1, constant quality options like Braw and it'll be more versitile for those who can't necessarily tell the difference between slightly more compressed images and don't have the budget for ginormous file sizes.
Clearly the fundamental issue is a true (and usually obvious) judgement call: are these nearly invisible visual differences justified by the actual things you're shooting (e.g., wedding videos for most people arguing about this?). After accepting that irrelevance, it comes down to file size and performance, where BRAW is the obvious (and less pernicious, considering Apple's brand paranoia) winner.
ProRes RAW "[more] pernicious"?? 😂 Never mind that PRRAWs performance is in fact *much* better than that of BRAW. And that, while being *actual RAW* and, as we now know, better quality (as much as you'd like to shift the goalposts to conveniently make that "irrelevant"). As well as the file sizes being virtually identical. You merely have one more, superfluous compression ratio with BRAW. But sure… let's not forget the perniciousness! 🤣
@@postpros-e I'm not joking. The Apple Corporation (besides other unethical practices) lobbies for ProRes RAW with an iron fist (and deep pockets, fronted by a ravenous accounting department) whereas BRAW is considerably more open source (i.e., less greedy). Whatever you're shooting -- wedding videos probably, for tech squabbles like this -- almost definitely offsets the nearly imperceptible quality differences between BRAW and ProRes RAW, because of the lenses and skills you lack (and you're not shooting feature films for gigantic-screen projection). Meantime, BRAW users are saving tons and tons of file storage space, and dealing with an honest -- and yes, not pernicious -- company.
Hey there :) Great video, thanks! Is that white balance issue still thing with modern Blackmagic Cameras like those announced at NAB? Same question for the raw fidelity you mentioned? I am currently a Sony user but kind of annoyed by the lack of internal raw options an we are considering making the switch to Blackmagic and their new Ursa cine 12k. But since it now only records in BRAW I wondered if those issues still exist?
The world will be so much better when the Red RAW patent(s) expires in a few years. Never should have been granted for something so obvious. It's held everyone back. Meanwhile, I don't see companies jumping on the bandwagon of Prores RAW like they do with regular Prores. BRAW technically seems better, but we will have to see how things play out. My bet is on BRAW for now
Thank you so much for the comment, I use neat video for the noising. It has a basic and advanced level in all cases. The basic level is pretty good out of the box
I'm curious if the same amount of denoise/sharpening is present in other BM camera's using BRAW. I'm using the UMP12K and the noise is absolutely different from how the pocket6K noise behaves. The pocket6k has this clean look to it, might run some tests to look into it later. Do you know if regular proress does any sharpening/de-noising in the debayer proces?
Its very possible the URSA 12K processing is different. I assume blackmagic probably did more NR on the P6K and 4k as they are more consumer targeted where noise is often looked down on, especially when they have to compete against heavily noise reduced images coming form other cameras in the 1-2k price range.
I really like your channel, and once again you are sharing great information. Just don't understand how you are saying that's no camera recording or outputting 16 bits, because there are and I work with 16-bit depth footage everyday, such as from the Sony Venice. If there's a visible difference between 16bits and 12 bits for the human eye, that's another subject.
why did you base the winning point of the black magic monitor on the fact that it has 5'' and 7", th eatomos also has a 5" and a 7". black magic calls them the same, atomos calls them 2 names.
Great video. Been looking for a comparison of the formats for a while. As a PC user, and davinic user, braw is the only option for me for now. I also love how lightweight it is, and now we know why. I look forward to seeing how the wb issue is in the s5 update coming soon. But not an overall deal breaker for me.
Great video man as always. Just to comment on the noise discovery. This is something that Blackmagic themselves even said when they announced BRaw. BRaw partially debaters some information (I.e. baked information into the image) and noise reduction was one of the things that they decided to allow to be debayered in camera along with Lens corrections amd other small things. This is how Blackmagic was able to bypass RED Raw patent and avoid paying them the license fee. ProRes Raw being a full Raw codec does not and Apple has to pay RED the fee. That is why you see less noise in BRaw compared to ProRes Raw.
@@JonPais he actually does. Go back amd watch the video. Grant Petty said “we moved the heaviest processing work into the camera to be debayered there” the heaviest part of the processing is noise reduction and sharpening for most cameras. And given the fact that the OP of this video is seeing this backed into the camera, the facts back it up.
@@JamesJacksonFilmz you are making up stories again. Please stop your misinformation campaign. Petty never mentions anything about denoising or lens corrections. There is enough misinformation spreading around the world today creating chaos. Bye.
Can you do a video comparing FCPx being basic verses advanced? I believe everything you need to do as a professional filmmaker you are able to do in FCPX as with any other NLE. So please debunk me and show me and others how FCPX misses the boat and why it is not advanced and just simply basic if you would please kind sir. This is a genuine request to learn and see the differences. I know you are going to put it in a way I can understand! Love your work and insights on your channel! Thank you for all that you do.
Thank you so much for following and liking my work. FCPX is definitely a great software when it comes to editing but when it comes to grading it’s really falls behind. I would say if CPX is great for a one-man show kind of filmmaker. But sucks big time when it comes to collaborative workflow and round ripping. It’s too self centered
It not clear where the prores RAW file was shot internal in the camera or also in external recorder. If internally then I think this is why it performed better for noise etc.
Superb video! This is a subject that so many of us had been talking about but you are first to actually make a detailed video on. Yup, it IS highly debatable to call Blackmagic Raw a "real" raw sensor data file save. Yes, they do take the RGGB and they deBayer it into the file. In other words, it's a color merged "flattened" video file. ProRes is REAL raw with three "seperate" raw color channels. BRaw had to flatten their channel data to avoid RED's patent attacks. The part that shocks me is the Blackmagic pre-processing before the file save. I was not expecting that kind of noise reduction in a "raw" file. Thanks for getting this info out there. Question...is Canon "Raw Light" doing the exact same in camera Blackmagic deBayer trick? Is this how Canon also avoids RED's lawyers?
Thank you so much for your support! yeah we all knew it's partially debayered, but nobody ever talked about what that really means. So I thought it's a good opportunity to do so. That's when I stumbled upon this discovery. What I feel honestly is that BRAW is just a very high end richly colored 12bit compressed format...Like a Blackmagic version of ProRes 4444. They probably came up with a perfect algorithm to make it act like raw by controlling the right parameters in a slider on davinci to act like it's a RAW WB control. Like what I did in the episode manually, but they have a complex algorithm in a shape of a slider. And with that quasi RAW behavior in place, they just called it RAW. That might sound like conspiracy theory, just a thought... so again, I don't care what really happens under the hood or what they call it... the results are great and I'd surely shoot on it. And I haven't tested the canon Raw Light, but what i think canon might have done, is they had a barter deal with RED, they gave them their RF mount for the Komodo in exchange for internal RAW recording... Who knows?
@@THEDPJOURNEY People talk a lot about wanting more white balance control "in" raw. What many dont know is that "true" raw,....has zero "color" in it. True raw sensor data is three optically filtered grey-scale (black and white) data channels. How do you white balance three seperate grey channels that have zero "color" at all? White balance happens on the IMAGE ASSEMBLY and deBayer stage in raw player. THAT is where white balance is applied. Otherwise, its only metadata for the assembler to go by. Yes,...this is true raw. Blackmagic raw?...because its all flattened and color mixed before it goes to file, then yes!...you CAN bake in white balance. This is a key difference between real raw and Braw
Yeah...BRAW is not RAW. ProRes RAW is hardly RAW but much closer... Compare them to REDCODE 5:1 or ArriRAW or CinemaDNG that have immense bitrates....H.264 is a distribution codec designed for the internet... Not for recording. Even log is only for inferior cameras that can not record RAW... But this gen of filmmakers grew up with log, and believe that it is the way to go. It's a compromise and basically crap.
@@artemus80j.4 wild is that NOBODY is talking about it!!!!! Anywhere!!! The consequences may possibly be a (more expensive albeit more useable) BMPCC4K!!!
@@artemus80j.4 yeah, I got my ninja v on the ready for it. I dying to see one thing... The highlight recovery tab in Resolve 17 come to life. Somewhere I was told that the GH5S and the BMPCC4K are the EXACT same sensor except BMD literally flipped it upside down and cropped it a little. Side from processing... If this is true and we shoot a true RAW of the sensor... We might see some extremely good gh5s results.
BRAW is 12 bit vs ProRes RAW’s 16 bit including the potential to go higher than that! Of course ProRes RAW is better. However, BM are pretty good and rapid with their development and will likely close the gap as it definitely has and lead the way with Resolve.
I really love your in depth look into these things. I don't feel smart enough to do these kinds of tests myself, but I love learning about it as it can influence how I approach different formats. It's a shame that Resolve still doesn't support ProRes RAW. Until that happens, it's still a no go to me. Thank you for the video!
Really happy you like my approach, yeah ProRes RAW on Resolve will never happen... I can bet on that. Just export to ProRes 4444 and you'll get almost identical results
Thanks for your support. No of course not, RAW is mainly for Commercial work or in a challenging lighting circumstances where you don't have much control over color and lighting maybe. RAW needs proper post work.... I shoot 75% of my work in RAW
Thanks for the deep dive. It never fails to amaze me that correcting white balance in post is such a big deal. Do experienced filmmakers routinely not set ISO and white balance on set? I realize that things can fall through the cracks when working under pressure, but still. Isn't this on everyone's checklist?
Post WB adj is not just about getting the “correct” WB on set. Many times you shoot in mixed color lights conditions, where there’s no right or wrong. So if you set it to one of them, then the parts exposed to the other colored light would look “wrong” so to speak. Also sometimes you need to intentionally shoot off white balance to preview a special effect and show your client. Like intentionally shooting with WB shifted to cool in a horror or eerie scenario. But you know you’ll need to bring that back to normal and properly grade it. There are many other scenarios that you need it for… I can go on forever 😂
I've been thinking about the conclusions of this video with regards to BlackmagicRAW seeming more processed. According to Blackmagic the demosaic algorithm used for BRAW is supposedly a lot more advance than the any of the real-time demosaic algorithms that occur in editing software, because it is handled by the the hardware FPGA's in the camera vs a software solution that must operate in real time. The result is that things like a greater sample radius can in theory be used for more accurate inter pixel color estimation. What does this mean? It would in theory mean the demosaic would result in fewer residual artifacts in the final image giving the footage an overall smoother and less noisy look, but with, in theory, more accurate colors (excluding the white balance correction issue, as that is a unrelated issue ), but this smoothness could potentially be misinterpreted as if noise reduction had been applied. So this raises the bigger question that actually wasn't answered in this video: How does a post denoised version of ProresRAW compare to a post denoised version of Braw? This is ultimately the real question more so than how much noise was retained, because noise that doesn't add anything meaningful to the final image is just useless noise. In this video we were shown that BRAW cleans up significantly better than H.625, but it is never shown if ProresRAW cleans up as well or better. If ProresRAW cleans up better than Braw then that is the win, but if they clean up nearly identically then that would mean Braw got rid of useless noise information likely due to a more sophisticated demosaic algorithm and that they are equal from an end result standpoint; however, if Braw were to clean up better than the ProresRAW then that would imply the demosaic was actually better, and despite showing less noise in the initial footage could potentially be considered the superior format, because again it's the end result that really matters. My suspicion is that they will likely clean up nearly identically making them more or less equivalent outside of meaningless noise, which would mean the Braw was just better demosaiced and noise reduction was likely not used.
Who else gets excited during Nerd alerts? 🤓
hahaha... I thought they were turn offs for most people!
@@THEDPJOURNEY but in fact they make us to focus on nerd parts more than anything else)
It's the reason I subscribed. They're so good. Your infographics are clean, concise, and clear and I walk away knowing more than I learned in most of my cinematography classes. I think any other youtuber would have put that information in some sort of "masterclass" that they charge money for.
@@THEDPJOURNEY PLEASEEEEE kindly do a comparison like this between Red Raw and Prores Raw please. Your explanation of PRORES RAW is the best
This is a good idea actually… but won’t be an accurate comparison as it needs to be coming from the same sensor. And there’s no sensor out there that can record both formats
I only watch two nerdy's. Dp journey❤️ and Gerald undone.❤️
The NERD LEAGUE
Facts
One thing that BRAW offers that very few people seem to realize is that you can trim your files and save them back to BRAW in Resolve (without any compromise or loss whatsoever), so you can minimize file size once your editing is done. It means you can easily record all day and fill up your 1 TB SSD if you need to.... then trim all the unnecessary moments and end up with only the ones that you need, and still have access to RAW data. Brilliant, and a total game changer! I truly don't know if you can do the same with ProRes RAW, but I doubt it.
Very good point!
Wow this is also hard to believe, I'd love to see a tutorial on this
@@certainlyjoel ua-cam.com/video/ELDvrF3ZDJQ/v-deo.html
The file size is more acceptable and you also have the hand on the white balance in kelvin and ISO metadata, it make some tweak possible with a smaller size than DNG RAW or Prores RAW , convert that in 16 bit open EXR ACES is really easy and make long term archive more easy. The BRAW are also normaly open source Hope more software use it.
You're absolutely right on your partial debayering theory regarding BRAW. The reason being is that Black Magic does that to get around RED' RAW patent of pure internal RAW. That's why prores Raw is only acquired through external devices.
First I've heard of this. Any idea when that patent expires? I think it's usually 20 years...
@@andrewrabon Not sure, but Apple tried suing RED and lost the case so maybe its a permanent thing?
That doesn't make sense. Canon has their own perfectly functional internal "pure raw" with no issues. Red raw isn't "Pure raw" either, it goes though it's own proprietary process to lower file size. Pure raw is cinema DNG, or any other special file type that is literally just pure code from the sensor and those files are even larger then redcode.
Apple sued RED because Apple patent trolls everybody it possibly can. They lose these cases all the time.
@@luisa9628 sorry my bad I meant pure compressed RAW. Cinema DNG is uncompressed. Braw gets around this by partially debayering the image. If Apple won the suit it would have benefited us not Apple. It was a major lawsuit google it. In fact Sony got sued by RED for its internal compressed RAW in F65 F55 cameras.
RED as a company sucks for this reason.
DP Journey, spends on expensive gear so you can learn before you swipe your own card..... simply the best on YT!!!!
Wow, thanks! Really appreciate your support
This channel really is the Netflix of reviews! So interesting and joyful to watch!!!
Hahah that’s the best compliment ever!!
16 minutes felt like 8 minutes, I left with feeling I want more) Thank you Sherif for great and this time pretty soon released video.
Nerd parts are exactly why we come to watch your videos. Pretty much no one goes this deep with information and testings like you! You save us so much time to figure all this out on our own. Thank you!
Thank you so much Aleks! really glad you find my content valuable.
One additional comment - I don't believe that Blackmagic will solve the Debayering issue. They purposely designed it this way so that the files can take some pressure off of the editor and make it very easy to smoothly edit high resolution "raw" files. When I was using the BMPCC 4K, I was recording raw in C-DNG files, and it basically retained all the noise from the original recordings, but when Blackmagic design updated the camera to record BRAW, the files were immediately softer and less noisy because of this "in camera" debayering process. I knew what was happening, but it was a life saver for editing "raw" clips quickly, while retaining WB and exposure controls. Plus the flexability to use BRAW in Adobe Premiere and Davinci are a win too, since I do not own a MAC. Since I do not own a MAC, I don't even have a choice - BRAW wins this contest for me.
Yeah exactly... that was my point that this softness is here to stay. But of course WB could be fixed (Theoretically) since it's more on Panasonic
@@THEDPJOURNEY Got it. Understood.
I remember debates on "lossless" compressed CDNG vs uncompressed CDNG on Blackmagic Cinema camera 2.5k, and I saw the reduction in quality too)
It is very sad that BM completely removed uncompressed CDNG options in all their contemporary cameras.
The partial debayering has a lot to do with them Bypassing RED’s paten
@@JamesJacksonFilmz these mysterious Red patents... How does Canon and Arri implement raw recording in their cameras?
Can you do a test on how "real" is the 12 bit color?? I'd love to see is BRAW is equal in that respect. I'm recording for HDR content specifically, and because of the 10 bit color end space, I need 12 bit as a starting point to edit from without artifacts or banding.
Has there been any changes in BRAW since this video? I wish for a workflow using RAW that doesn’t require me to jump through hoops or forego quality for convenience.
Jumping through hoops is shooting in ProRes RAW, WB in Final Cut, then grading in Resolve. Or as an alternative, shoot in ProRes RAW, convert to cDNG, then import to Resolve - more hoops!
Foregoing quality is using BRAW just so I can avoid aforementioned workflows and import directly to Resolve.
Seriously, this nightmare has been going on for far too long and it’s a ridiculous burden on the end user.
Yeah, I hate those company feuds where the only loser is the consumer. I think there has been some improvements that fix the white balance in the Panasonic, but I haven’t tested it personally so I won’t be able to comment on this. Maybe try it yourself and let me know
Hey Sherif, are you going to buy the Lumix S5 IIx? If you do, are you able to share your findings on the BRAW quality for it? I’m curious if it’s worth the upgrade from the S5 II 😊
By the way, do know what’s the size difference between internal H265 vs braw vs ProRes raw for an hour of footage?
No plans on buying any of the S5 II actually. Looking at what Panasonic is offering now makes me want to wait for the new S1H basically
Nice comparison! I would love to see a comparison between the two formats in regards to workflow. Things like editing performance, compatibility with software, and file sizes.
it's not a nerd,
it's a knowledge that everyone should know and understand every detail.
Blackmagic Design make all manner of profound hardware. The TV industry are supposed to be formulating the next best thing. A decade has gone by. It's not Apple against Microsoft. It's Apple against Blackmagic Design! Very strange. Australian companies are protected from monopolisers. ProRes and Avid and Apple and Adobe best pull their head in. Competition laws in Australia are profound.
S1H and SIGMA FP allows now braw externally in 10/12 bit raw and they are very awesome in results !!
- 2:37 There are cameras that output 16 bit raw, and there's a recorder that records 16 bit linear. Checkout the Sony AXS-R7 External 4K RAW Recorder for VENICE, PMW-F55 & F5.
- 7:37 Thanks for the tip.
- Thanks for the whole video. You answered lots of questions that I had about braw & prores raw.
Excellent analysis but I should point out that the subtle noise reduction baked into BRAW has been known from the beginning and was a subject of much discussion on Blackmagic forum. But from this I would make the OPPOSITE conclusions to yourself. As your charts show, we get half the noise from BRAW at the cost of some loss of detail. But with BRAW we also gain a smoother workflow and a better external recorder in the case of the Lumix S series. Is it worth giving up all these advantages for the subtle detail loss? That's the core question.
The best way to answer is to ask whether lack of detail is the big problem with digital video footage? I'd say the opposite! That's why many DPs use ProMist or other filters, plus post-production techniques to reduce over-sharp imagery and get a more film-like naturalistic look.
In summary, BRAW sacrifices (to a very small degree) the one characteristic we can most afford to compromise on, while providing all the other benefits.
Thanks for the comment Robin, you have very good points and totally agree. I have a feeling you didnt watch the episode till the very end though. I cant remember saying that all DPs should choose ProRes RAW over BRAW,. All I said was I "Personally" would choose ProRes RAW "at present", mainly was due to the WB issue it had, which was already fixed. Check 16:06 till the end if you have another min, you'll see how we both agree. especially at 16:33 Thanks again for watching
I did watch the video to the end, plus a few of your other excellent videos too. That should help your analytics. :-)
I never made a claim about you stating something for all DPs... not sure where that comment comes from? I am merely venturing a different conclusion that might help other readers.
All good, thanks again for watching and for your support 👍👍
How do you feel about trans-coding from Prores RAW to Cinema DNG to use in Davinci?
The quality is pretty much the same, but It’ll become HUGE in size in a folder structure instead of a single file.
CDNG is the most inefficient codec out there
Thanks for the reply. So, there is no other way to use Prores RAW in Davinci, right? @@THEDPJOURNEY
UPDATE: FW 2.6 is released and they claim they fixed the WB issue I pointed out. I didn't test it out yet. I only got a verbal confirmation from Panasonic. av.jpn.support.panasonic.com/support/global/cs/dsc/download/index4.html
Did you test it? Does it completely solve the issue, or only makes it better?
I haven't tested it yet no. That’s why I was saying “it should”. Will confirm once I do
I edited the statement to make it clearer that I didn't test it
@@THEDPJOURNEY No problem man, I just thought you might have tested it 2 days later. No rush at all. My guess is that it's only better, not completely fixed, since Panasonic say ''improved'' and not ''fixed''.
Yeah good point! Curious about their choice of words. Unless they don’t wanna admit it was “broken” before, to need “fixing” ;)
have the BRAW issues with Panasonic been fixed in 2024?
People are saying DNG files from BMPCC4K are much better than BRAW since its launch. If you compare BRAW to DNG photo files from my BMPCC6K the difference is night and day, in my opinion, and it is sad to not be able to enjoy this option (and ProRes RAW).
Cinema DNG is shit….
I think BRAW uses raw data as a monochromatic video signal with some moderate bitrate mpeg-like compression so it causes this softness and macroblocking (which you called mushiness where you don't see every single pixel). It's interesting to know what type of compression inside of ProRes raw with same bitrate levels.
I found some in-depth reverse engineering investigation:
cml.news/g/cml-raw-log-hdr/topic/braw_codec_analysis/25749037
In short, image stores in in both formats, where first format is half resolution R-G1-B (or RGB transformmed to YCC) video which can be viewed fast and without complexity computing (which can be called as debayered), and the second is "fourth" green G2 component, which is added to compute "full resolution" if we do full quality debayer. Very smart move)
It reminds me C500 external 4K raw, where R-G1-B-G2 was stored as a four 2K RGB + "Alpha" via 2 SDIs. But it was not compressed except of log curve applied.
honestly I lost my mind . I have different camera for photography but recently I decided buying Blackmagic ursa mini pro 12k , but some of the person said oh Blackmagic need a lot of time to grow up like Sony like red like canon . some of the person said you can change raw formate to prores raw , I heard tons of tons different story . I searched a lot of camera red a lot of about the camera . using different Nikon camera but recently bought Nikon z9 as well
my question is is Blackmagic ursa mini pro is ok for documentary ? I am not professional cinema director making movie for cinema . . I like your video very much explain all the details
most of the camera like Sony fx6 or fx9 is very much expensive like canon Eos mark lll
The it’s is a bit bulky for doc. I’d go for something lighter for sure. It also depends on what you have in mind in terms of doc. The FX6 would be a great option for example
Very interesting. But I much missed neatvideo-denoised image of proresRAW vs BRAW of that lens.
that wouldve been great, But i guess Denoiser in Davinci Resolve is enough to state a point, plus this DP dude is not much of a premier user I believe.
@@itsnukeguy He used neatvideo himself. I ment not quite that. Btw, resolve temporal DN tends to blur moving parts of footage.
Did anything change ,did they fix the problem in may 2022 ?
BRAW compressed, we would have to use one of the compressed ProRes Raw codecs then compare.
Until BRAW comes in a uncompressed format it will be processed simply due to compression.
ProRes HQ files aren’t compressed= simple.
Hahah. ProRes RAW HQ is compressed my friend. It’s just less compressed than the standard ProRes Raw. “Simple”
Thanks for this video. I am deciding right now whether to get the Black Magic or the ProRes (via Ninja V). Question: at 10:46, the BRAW, looks sharper than the ProRes, and despite what you stated that the BRAW must have some noise reduction processing at some point. Noise reduction should reduce detail (?). Will you be doing an analysis on the dynamic range of these format?
From what can be seen, sharpness =/= more details, they have a pass of noise reduction and a pass of sharpness to compensate for the loss that occurs with NR, it gives the illusion of a more detailed image but it's just micro contrast boosting, you can see it everywhere once you notice it. (dark edges around brigt details and the opposite as well)
Thank you for this! I’ve been waiting to see a good comparison of ProRes RAW vs BRAW from the same sensor. As I suspected BRAW is not actually RAW, but a nice 12-bit yCbCr-like codec. I’ve settled on the Sigma fp for the ProRes RAW, and real 12-bit uncompressed CinemaDNG if needed.
Yeah it’s like a Prores 444 I’d say but with advanced RAW like controls
@@THEDPJOURNEY look what I found:
cml.news/g/cml-raw-log-hdr/topic/braw_codec_analysis/25749037
In short, image stores in in both formats, where first format is RGB (or RGB transformmed to YCC) which can be viewed fast and without complexity computing (which can be called ad debayered), and the second is "fourth" green component, which is added if we do full quality debayer. Very smart move)
It reminds me C500 external 4K raw, where RGBG' was stored as 2K RGB Alpha via 2 SDIs. But it was not compressed except of log curve.
You're very good at it, but be keeping it so simple for the new comers in the game. Thank you very much for the Master Class lecture
Thank you so much for watching, glad it was simplified enough for you
Is there any update on BRAW since this was posted?
What if its not BRAW that is semi-denoising the image, but its ProResRaw that adds noise? I always felt ProRes was too noisy.
Hahaha, no such thing as adding noise in camera. Noise is just fleeting electrical charges with random pattern that affects the sensor in a pixel level. Brands are fighting for reducing this phenomenon, not adding it
Hells yeah. Got my coffee and excited to watch this one.
Hope you like it Jon 👍
My thoughts:
1. As a DP, my White Balance is always in the set using Kelvin, and in the ballpark of where I want the image to be eventually. The BRAW limitation isn't a major issue (for me)
2. Davinci Resolve. 'Nuff said
3. BRAW Compression codecs are a major factor for choosing BRAW, especially for documentary style work where something like a 8:1 compression ratio might be a data saver while not compromising on quality
4. The menus and interface on the BM recorders are fantastic, plus External SSD / Internal Dual SD Card options make it more flexible for scaling up or down when shooting.. so essentially, a matter of the recorder along with the format.
You never cease to amaze me! As usual, a very thorough and detailed info. You’re the best👍
I appreciate that!
What’s the best way/plug-in to denoise the prores raw image ?
Neat video plug-in
Thank you for video, I have a question, I was using Panasonic last 7-8 years now I am using Sony A7SIII, I love and hate this camera, I cant do the same color as I did on Panasonic, and it is really bothering me. I want to switch again to Panasonic but there is one issue here the stops me to buy Panasonic, it is autofocus, which is important for me as an Automative Videographer. if I decide to switch which one are you recommend?
At the moment... I would wait for the GH6 then... I have a feeling it'll have a new AF system that could be reliable.
@@THEDPJOURNEY I hope GH6 will have good AF, i will wait for that and your review too, Thank You, waiting for more video. i will be happy if you give me some advice for Sony color, I am using Slog 3 +1 exposing, recorder Ninja V 5inc
These animations are sick! Love that style! Why can't I subscribe x10 times in a row, but just once? ))) Great video!
Thank you so much D, really flattered with your kind words
when Blackmagic introduced bRAW they explained how it works very detailed as far as I remember.
and as far as I remember they also mentioned the intermediate layers of processing the data and image... Me personally still prefer the good old DNG format (with 3:1 compression). I think that was (that is) the best format for RAW.
I think BMD should offer the option for true RAW alongside their hybrid version, for recorders that can meet the bandwidth needs.
@@jjones2582 definitely. however I would still choose the BMMCC because of the more pleasing Fairchild sensor :)
9 Months since this release, have there been any updates to BRAW workflow or white balance?
did they fix the white balance yet?
Assimilate scratch is amazing for transcoding from Prores Raw to DNxHR or ProRes - you can pipe through with correct colorspace interpreting and tagging as slog2 cinegamma or whatevever you want. So you get exactly the same files from Scratch render as if shooting in DNxHR or prores native, but with better quality and bit depth. Also perfect if you add Neat video OFX in the Scratch pipe. This works perfectly in a YRGB davinci colormanaged workflow. The color "management" in PP or FCPX or pretty much non existing, which makes working with prores raw native maddening. If been saying for years now that not supporting ProRes raw is going to be the downfall of blackmagic design ... :-) lets see ...
assimilate scratch costs an obscene amount of money for the simple purpose of transcoding. adobe media encoder works just as well
In Visual Effects for keying and compositing, noise makes a considerable difference in pulling a clean alpha from a greenscreen or bluescreen. It's usually a better idea to shoot with all the original sensor's noise preserved so that you can denoise the footage in-comp before keying, which gives far more flexibility without the risk of losing detail from the camera's internal denoising. This means that ProRes Raw is certainly better for this.
However, we really shouldn't get too caught up in this... A good artist can pull a flawless looking key off of subpar footage, and artists will rarely ever receive a "perfect plate" to key from. There are so many other things to factor into what falls under a good greenscreen plate. Color depth is the bigger factor here, so any 10-12 bit footage will allow a good range to pull a key in a well lit studio where noise shouldn't be overt enough to contaminate the key. At the end of the day you should always decide which format to shoot based on your project budget and level of production.
Most importantly, if you do have to do greenscreens or any VFX work, hire a VFX supervisor to ask questions!! It is an investment that is well worth it and will save you TONS of money on the back-end when you can eliminate potential issues on-set.
Way too extreme of a WB comparison as you said, how do you make that mistake and have that equipment, slightly illogical.
And as you also said, maybe a better name is raw hybrid and it's about the end result. It's for the time you don't need raw but would like some benefits from it.
I would understand if you "bashed" it for the way it advertised itself, since it's not raw, but for it's merits? It hold up already as a pretty useful tool.
I've only shot braw once, and mostly shoot international across camera brands, also the only BM thing I own is Resolve, so I'm not a fan boy, just to clarify.
That was a surprise!
I’ve always thought that black magic & pro red raw process the noise the same way!
Watching the raw war is pretty fun
Can’t wait to see how it will develop
This analysis is amazing. Thx. I will still shoot BRAW cause I got BMPCC6k and Sony APS-C which does not support ProRes RAW.
Your videos are so insightful! 🙏🏽 Just watched 4 in a row. I hope you do make the one about noise post production that (I think) you mentioned. And one about Canon’s R5C, or Canon RAW Light.
Really helpful and well presented review. I really like the smooth and interesting graphics used and found the 'nerd alert' part, the most fascinating - though great to have it announced beforehand as an option to skip, if it's not the right time to 'get into it' in the moment. For me, one very big part of the equation is the significantly much higher cost of Adobe Premiere and the fact it is on a subscription model. It is much more attractive and cost effective to purchase another monitor for BRAW at $800 than pay for Premiere and use that for Prores Raw using my Ninja V. Let alone the extra time and work required to process the Prores Raw file in Premiere first, before re-rendering it to then use in Davinci Resolve as the preferred editing software.
Thank you so much Marc for your kind words. Glad you liked the “Nerd alert” bit. Yeah the option of Resolve is looking much better than Adobe Pr.
I’ll still be talking more about this topic. That’s just a start anyway
The thing ProRes Raw needs to work on is compression sizes. They have a giant HQ size and a still large standard size, but no smaller sizes like Blackmagic Raw. They should implement a 8:1, 12:1, constant quality options like Braw and it'll be more versitile for those who can't necessarily tell the difference between slightly more compressed images and don't have the budget for ginormous file sizes.
Clearly the fundamental issue is a true (and usually obvious) judgement call: are these nearly invisible visual differences justified by the actual things you're shooting (e.g., wedding videos for most people arguing about this?). After accepting that irrelevance, it comes down to file size and performance, where BRAW is the obvious (and less pernicious, considering Apple's brand paranoia) winner.
💩
ProRes RAW "[more] pernicious"??
😂
Never mind that PRRAWs performance is in fact *much* better than that of BRAW. And that, while being *actual RAW* and, as we now know, better quality (as much as you'd like to shift the goalposts to conveniently make that "irrelevant"). As well as the file sizes being virtually identical. You merely have one more, superfluous compression ratio with BRAW.
But sure… let's not forget the perniciousness! 🤣
@@postpros-e I'm not joking. The Apple Corporation (besides other unethical practices) lobbies for ProRes RAW with an iron fist (and deep pockets, fronted by a ravenous accounting department) whereas BRAW is considerably more open source (i.e., less greedy). Whatever you're shooting -- wedding videos probably, for tech squabbles like this -- almost definitely offsets the nearly imperceptible quality differences between BRAW and ProRes RAW, because of the lenses and skills you lack (and you're not shooting feature films for gigantic-screen projection). Meantime, BRAW users are saving tons and tons of file storage space, and dealing with an honest -- and yes, not pernicious -- company.
Thank you very much for the blogger who explained the most detailed information on the whole website!
How to record 120fps ? From ninja v + & siii ? And Does the gyro data (or active stabilization) work with external recording?
Hey there :) Great video, thanks! Is that white balance issue still thing with modern Blackmagic Cameras like those announced at NAB? Same question for the raw fidelity you mentioned? I am currently a Sony user but kind of annoyed by the lack of internal raw options an we are considering making the switch to Blackmagic and their new Ursa cine 12k. But since it now only records in BRAW I wondered if those issues still exist?
Hi please is sigma fp capable of both raw?
And did it give the same quality externally?
Thank u
The world will be so much better when the Red RAW patent(s) expires in a few years. Never should have been granted for something so obvious. It's held everyone back.
Meanwhile, I don't see companies jumping on the bandwagon of Prores RAW like they do with regular Prores. BRAW technically seems better, but we will have to see how things play out. My bet is on BRAW for now
Amazed by the level of the production, every single time 🔥🔥 btw, how do you denoise (or recommend to do it) your braw footage?
Thank you so much for the comment, I use neat video for the noising. It has a basic and advanced level in all cases. The basic level is pretty good out of the box
The temperature control should be adjusted with the gain color primary not the the temperature slide...
I'm curious if the same amount of denoise/sharpening is present in other BM camera's using BRAW. I'm using the UMP12K and the noise is absolutely different from how the pocket6K noise behaves. The pocket6k has this clean look to it, might run some tests to look into it later.
Do you know if regular proress does any sharpening/de-noising in the debayer proces?
Its very possible the URSA 12K processing is different. I assume blackmagic probably did more NR on the P6K and 4k as they are more consumer targeted where noise is often looked down on, especially when they have to compete against heavily noise reduced images coming form other cameras in the 1-2k price range.
The Ursa Mini Pro 12K uses a completely different sensor than all of Blackmagic's other cameras so I'd expect the results to be different.
Hey my friend. what camera are you using at the moment? is the pocket is still your best choice or you went full sony a7s3?
I’m using all cameras I have equally… each serves a different purpose.
A7S3
RED
Bmpcc6k pro
bmpcc4k
S1h
S5
Gh5
I Wonder how ProRes RAW from the Fujifilm X-H2s is processed because this camera doesn’t have a Bayer CFA.
I can't believe that I've been missing out on your Channel. Thank you for the great info & knowledge!
I really like your channel, and once again you are sharing great information.
Just don't understand how you are saying that's no camera recording or outputting 16 bits, because there are and I work with 16-bit depth footage everyday, such as from the Sony Venice.
If there's a visible difference between 16bits and 12 bits for the human eye, that's another subject.
There no camera in the market that records 16 bit. I already confirmed from Sony this info. They do output 16bit yes, but again, not recorded
How does the fan noise compare on the ninja v vs the bmd video assist?
Hasn't been consistent on both... Gotta have a proper test for both
I remember there being a minor controversy when cdng was replaced with braw I'm the bmpcc 4k, with a few videos showing that it was softer
Yeah i guess it's confirmed now... it's a bit softer, but they seem to apply some sort of edge Sharpening
thank RED
Changing the slider on the S1H to 5500k looks more like Sony colors😂😂😂😂
I have noticed the softness from my Pocket Cameras but I thought it may have been the low Megapixels on my BMPCC 4K
Apparently not
why did you base the winning point of the black magic monitor on the fact that it has 5'' and 7", th eatomos also has a 5" and a 7". black magic calls them the same, atomos calls them 2 names.
Do you have a LUT pack for ProRes RAW I can buy for the S1H
I do... just need to find the time to package it LOL...
@@THEDPJOURNEY Can’t wait.
amazing content
Great video. This was exactly what I was looking for. Thanks for testing it out!
Glad it was helpful!
Great video. Been looking for a comparison of the formats for a while. As a PC user, and davinic user, braw is the only option for me for now. I also love how lightweight it is, and now we know why. I look forward to seeing how the wb issue is in the s5 update coming soon. But not an overall deal breaker for me.
Where are we with BRAW as of December 2023? I heard it’s progressed from here.
Wow, been searching for article about prores vs braw for a long time!
Finally you made one for us👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻🔥🔥🔥!
Happy to help 😀
Great video man as always. Just to comment on the noise discovery. This is something that Blackmagic themselves even said when they announced BRaw. BRaw partially debaters some information (I.e. baked information into the image) and noise reduction was one of the things that they decided to allow to be debayered in camera along with Lens corrections amd other small things. This is how Blackmagic was able to bypass RED Raw patent and avoid paying them the license fee. ProRes Raw being a full Raw codec does not and Apple has to pay RED the fee.
That is why you see less noise in BRaw compared to ProRes Raw.
That is a complete falsehood, dude. All of it.
@@JonPais this came from Blackmagic’s livestream announcement of BRaw. So straight from the sources mouth.
@@JamesJacksonFilmz Grant Petty says nothing about denoising, sharpening or lens correction in his Blackmagic RAW Intro video. Bye.
@@JonPais he actually does. Go back amd watch the video. Grant Petty said “we moved the heaviest processing work into the camera to be debayered there” the heaviest part of the processing is noise reduction and sharpening for most cameras. And given the fact that the OP of this video is seeing this backed into the camera, the facts back it up.
@@JamesJacksonFilmz you are making up stories again. Please stop your misinformation campaign. Petty never mentions anything about denoising or lens corrections. There is enough misinformation spreading around the world today creating chaos. Bye.
Thanks for the video! I was curious!
My pleasure
Can you do a video comparing FCPx being basic verses advanced? I believe everything you need to do as a professional filmmaker you are able to do in FCPX as with any other NLE. So please debunk me and show me and others how FCPX misses the boat and why it is not advanced and just simply basic if you would please kind sir. This is a genuine request to learn and see the differences. I know you are going to put it in a way I can understand! Love your work and insights on your channel! Thank you for all that you do.
Thank you so much for following and liking my work. FCPX is definitely a great software when it comes to editing but when it comes to grading it’s really falls behind. I would say if CPX is great for a one-man show kind of filmmaker. But sucks big time when it comes to collaborative workflow and round ripping. It’s too self centered
@@THEDPJOURNEY ahh I see what you mean. You’re welcome. Also, if you ever need free help on set in NYC NJ area, I’d be happy to oblige.
It not clear where the prores RAW file was shot internal in the camera or also in external recorder. If internally then I think this is why it performed better for noise etc.
It's soo deep. I like it. Thanks!
Glad you liked it. Thanks for watching
wow amazing
Yeah, but ProRes RAW is controlled by a dubious tech behemoth.
2 years later. Did they fix the white balance issue?
Superb video! This is a subject that so many of us had been talking about but you are first to actually make a detailed video on. Yup, it IS highly debatable to call Blackmagic Raw a "real" raw sensor data file save. Yes, they do take the RGGB and they deBayer it into the file. In other words, it's a color merged "flattened" video file. ProRes is REAL raw with three "seperate" raw color channels. BRaw had to flatten their channel data to avoid RED's patent attacks. The part that shocks me is the Blackmagic pre-processing before the file save. I was not expecting that kind of noise reduction in a "raw" file. Thanks for getting this info out there. Question...is Canon "Raw Light" doing the exact same in camera Blackmagic deBayer trick? Is this how Canon also avoids RED's lawyers?
Thank you so much for your support! yeah we all knew it's partially debayered, but nobody ever talked about what that really means. So I thought it's a good opportunity to do so. That's when I stumbled upon this discovery. What I feel honestly is that BRAW is just a very high end richly colored 12bit compressed format...Like a Blackmagic version of ProRes 4444. They probably came up with a perfect algorithm to make it act like raw by controlling the right parameters in a slider on davinci to act like it's a RAW WB control. Like what I did in the episode manually, but they have a complex algorithm in a shape of a slider.
And with that quasi RAW behavior in place, they just called it RAW.
That might sound like conspiracy theory, just a thought... so again, I don't care what really happens under the hood or what they call it... the results are great and I'd surely shoot on it.
And I haven't tested the canon Raw Light, but what i think canon might have done, is they had a barter deal with RED, they gave them their RF mount for the Komodo in exchange for internal RAW recording... Who knows?
@@THEDPJOURNEY People talk a lot about wanting more white balance control "in" raw. What many dont know is that "true" raw,....has zero "color" in it. True raw sensor data is three optically filtered grey-scale (black and white) data channels. How do you white balance three seperate grey channels that have zero "color" at all? White balance happens on the IMAGE ASSEMBLY and deBayer stage in raw player. THAT is where white balance is applied. Otherwise, its only metadata for the assembler to go by. Yes,...this is true raw. Blackmagic raw?...because its all flattened and color mixed before it goes to file, then yes!...you CAN bake in white balance. This is a key difference between real raw and Braw
Thanks a lot, subscribed
Thanks, welcome aboard
Yeah...BRAW is not RAW. ProRes RAW is hardly RAW but much closer... Compare them to REDCODE 5:1 or ArriRAW or CinemaDNG that have immense bitrates....H.264 is a distribution codec designed for the internet... Not for recording. Even log is only for inferior cameras that can not record RAW... But this gen of filmmakers grew up with log, and believe that it is the way to go. It's a compromise and basically crap.
H.264 is Basically crap?
So if it’s not ARRI RAW, then we’re doomed?
You're a cool guy, and reminded me to drink. Cheers!
Wow, that’s how you do motion graphics in a tech video. Outstanding work! Great video.
Thanks 🙏 really appreciate it
Epic
What do you use to denoise and sharpen?
Neat Video. I don't really sharpen much
I do wonder if this was done more to get around the RED patents and law suits
This is helping me be comfortable with the coming Pro Res Raw for my GH5S. THANKS BRO!!!
Always Happy to help David!
This was best news for me this week! GH5S just got even better.
@@artemus80j.4 wild is that NOBODY is talking about it!!!!! Anywhere!!! The consequences may possibly be a (more expensive albeit more useable) BMPCC4K!!!
@@DavidGriffin true I was looking for it too. Could be a bit too soon. Once when firmware gets released we will for sure see something.
@@artemus80j.4 yeah, I got my ninja v on the ready for it. I dying to see one thing... The highlight recovery tab in Resolve 17 come to life. Somewhere I was told that the GH5S and the BMPCC4K are the EXACT same sensor except BMD literally flipped it upside down and cropped it a little. Side from processing... If this is true and we shoot a true RAW of the sensor... We might see some extremely good gh5s results.
Nerd Alert within a Nerd Alert, stop the madness! lol great video as always.
Hahahaha… inception style “Nerd alert”
BRAW is 12 bit vs ProRes RAW’s 16 bit including the potential to go higher than that! Of course ProRes RAW is better. However, BM are pretty good and rapid with their development and will likely close the gap as it definitely has and lead the way with Resolve.
This is a beautifully crafted video. Excellent information.
Thank you so much for the kind words, really appreciate it
I really love your in depth look into these things. I don't feel smart enough to do these kinds of tests myself, but I love learning about it as it can influence how I approach different formats. It's a shame that Resolve still doesn't support ProRes RAW. Until that happens, it's still a no go to me.
Thank you for the video!
Really happy you like my approach, yeah ProRes RAW on Resolve will never happen... I can bet on that. Just export to ProRes 4444 and you'll get almost identical results
What is raw?
I have a couple of other episodes that talk about it in details (ProReRaw)
🤡 was just a joke … 🙏
Thank you for creating this video so I didn't have to
Hahaha… no problem
Do you still recommend prores at this time?
Great job!
Very interesting information!
THanx a lot!!
Glad you liked it!
Bro thanks for this crazy breakdown. I'm curious would you choose to record in RAW for everything?
Thanks for your support. No of course not, RAW is mainly for Commercial work or in a challenging lighting circumstances where you don't have much control over color and lighting maybe. RAW needs proper post work.... I shoot 75% of my work in RAW
@@THEDPJOURNEY so when shooting run and gun commercial or doc work it could be beneficial
Thanks for the deep dive. It never fails to amaze me that correcting white balance in post is such a big deal. Do experienced filmmakers routinely not set ISO and white balance on set? I realize that things can fall through the cracks when working under pressure, but still. Isn't this on everyone's checklist?
Post WB adj is not just about getting the “correct” WB on set. Many times you shoot in mixed color lights conditions, where there’s no right or wrong. So if you set it to one of them, then the parts exposed to the other colored light would look “wrong” so to speak.
Also sometimes you need to intentionally shoot off white balance to preview a special effect and show your client. Like intentionally shooting with WB shifted to cool in a horror or eerie scenario. But you know you’ll need to bring that back to normal and properly grade it. There are many other scenarios that you need it for… I can go on forever 😂
@@THEDPJOURNEY Thank you for the explanation. White balance and exposure up/down make sense.