4 ms·
Oh god no. It’s partial debayering. ProRes raw doesn’t come close to it. Baked in profiles??
by mmaunder 5y ago
Oh god no. It’s partial debayering. ProRes raw doesn’t come close to it. Baked in profiles??
- pwython 5y agohttps://ymcinema.com/2022/03/28/braw-vs-prores-raw-which-is-better/ https://ymcinema.com/2022/03/28/braw-vs-prores-raw-which-is-... > "Sherif analyzed noise levels by comparing ProRes RAW and BRAW and found that ProRes RAW has significantly higher noise levels than the external BRAW. Furthermore, Sherif has used a blue channel as an X-ray to explore macro-blocking that appears in highly compressed media (H.265 for instance), and that compression is presented by pixels structure that indicates an unbaked image that came straight out of the sensor. Yeah… it’s a bit complicated. To make the story short, ProRes RAW demonstrated much better (and real) raw compared to BRAW. In a sentence, ProRes RAW has defeated BRAW" > "According to Sherif’s analysis, ProRes RAW is more… real raw than BRAW. And external BRAW is less accurate (in terms of White Balancing) compared to internal BRAW from Blackmagic cameras. But generally speaking, ProRes RAW won. However, it must be taken into consideration that ProRes RAW is not natively available in Resolve." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPB6wrVKHiw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPB6wrVKHiw > "...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."
- AussieWog93 5y agoI actually worked on the BRAW SDK a couple of years back. Not going to go into specifics, but there's a far bit more going on than just that! I think a big part of it had to do with Red's patents, actually.