are there any sites that provide sample clips shot in RAW that we can upload into Hitfilm and “test”?
I want to see how my computer would fare, if at all, working with RAW files. I’ve never done it.
Or even sample 4K videos?
Hitfilm doesn't work with RAW formats but heres you go. RED - https://www.red.com/sample-r3d-filesProres RAW - https://filmplusgear.com/prores-raw-testfiles-for-download-nab-2018/You might try this to convert the RED files - https://www.any-video-converter.com/free-r3d-converter.phpProres RAW is currently only editable in FCPX4K samples - http://4kmedia.orgI'd link you to some of my QUAD HD files, or 1440p, but they are huge. 12G+ If you could run two of those in a Hitfilm comp at the same time your doing pretty good. Heck...load up 6 instance of a 2k (1080) video and try and play all 6 of them in single comp. That should put a pretty good test on your machine.
So no RAW footage in Hitfilm. 10-4.
Note the term "RAW footage" is an oversimplification. There is not a single "RAW format." Because a RAW image depends on capabilities of an individual sensor, every different camera sensor requires its own unique "RAW file."
Using "DNG" files as an example, the "DNG" file is a "container," and each sensor has its own "codec," much like an MOV file is a container that can contain Quicktime, ProRes, DNxHD, h.264, h.265 and other codecs.
You'll actually see this need to have individual codecs for each sensor a lot in photo-raw editing software where incremental updates usually include new camera support.
An individual "RAW format" is usually propriety, not open source. RED's R3D files are owned by RED, and FXHOME would have to pay them to include R3D support in Hitfilm This raises the price on Hitfilm Pro and becomes a new add-on for Express.
Hitfilm supports " MOV files," and can load Quicktime, ProRes, DNxHD and h. 264 MOV but NOT h. 265. Why? H. 265 "expensive" Current licensing) for h.265 have a per-unit price for the sale and another cost for royalties/year. Number of royalty-years depends on the license type - for a phone they assume 3 years, a computer 5 years, a TV, 10 years. I think 5 years for software. This is "only" about $7 per unit total, but FXHOME isn't paying for it, isn't raising the price of Pro (yet) for it, and isn't (yet) selling an add-on pack with it.
Let me also note something else based on discussion with Josh Davies, and other friends I have who work in the industry (including an Emmy-winning VFX supervisor): you don't edit in RAW!
RAW workflow (for Hollywood studio production) goes a little like this: Shoot RAW. Use the camera provider's software to do initial color correction. Render to a 10-12 bit/4:4:4:4 intermediate (ProRes, DNxHD, Cineform). Edit with the intermediate. At color correction stage, return to the RAW file and adjust the initial color correction. Re-render intermediate. Finish grading with intermediate. Final render from intermediate source.
Ok. So if and when the new BMPCC 4K gets this “black magic RAW” that is all abuzz, I wouldn’t be able to work with it here because it’s proprietary?
Again, still wrapping my head around just what exactly RAW is and what it does. I’ve just heard it mentioned...especially in recent days with Blackmagic. It interests me because I plan on buying this new camera.
For me as a basic novice, I planned on shooting in prores 422HQ (I think I got that right). Because it sounds easy enough to work with and understand.
I just wonder what it would be like working with large video files on my laptop. One of the concerns I had months ago when I was on here bothering people with questions regarding my new MacBook. I’m still only shooting, editing, and coloring footage with my crappy T5.
I believe BM is making the decode SDK for BM raw available without cost.
The big thing is just how do you think this might perform. You need a stout PC to handle this. Backmagic has implemented RAW demosaic (interpolation) via the GPU, for some raw formats like RED, Arri, (?) but that still wants a lot of GPU. I would assume the same for BM RAW.
What is raw and why do you need a stout machine to decode raw in real time? Because RAW is not a complete image. Only 1/3 the real data you look at exists in a RAW file. The other 2/3rds has to be made up from the color pixel array (it's "faked"). Most digital image sensors are using what is called a bayer color filter array and this is the basis of the 1/3rd, 2/3rds statement.
(#3 in the article is what a raw image "really" looks like without interpolation of the other 2/3rds of RGB color components)
In video, aka low res, bayer is not as bad as it might sound. Quality cameras have a bayer sensor large enough to downsample to get a pure RGB image frame. e.g. A Canon C300 MkII with 1080 output. However if a C300 outputs a 4K video then there is the 2/3rd "fake" thing going on.
@Triem23 That's incorrect... there's an SDK for that: Red DSK
Same as for Black Magic... there's an SDK for that.
That doesn't make it free, because FXHome still has to do some work to integrate it, but it's quite possible.
Black Magic raw is designed to require a fairly modest machine, because Black Magic is oriented toward independent filmmakers who can't necessarily afford a big beast box.
Red, not so much. It is however quite possible to edit in Redcode now... with a big enough machine, or a modest machine with a Turing GPU when the new SDK ships that incorporates hardware wavelet decoding using Turing.
That said, a proxy workflow makes a lot more sense, because it's easier. Then you only use the raw footage for color grading and VFX.
Raw can be edited real time without an ultra machine. Some time ago, just for giggles, I downloaded a sample raw file from the Arri website. It was a UHD(ish) resolution (slightly lower). It played real time in Resolve. One clip was at 6% CPU and 25% GPU. ArriRaw In Resolveseems to use GPU for demosaic and maybe other ops in raw decode.
A RED 5K file, UHD project, does not play. The CPU pegs to 100% and only makes about 11 fps. GPU only about 5%. So more CPU needed for that format to get performance. I thought RED was supposed to use GPU more but apparently not. Maybe my settings are borked. GPU is checked for RED.
4GHZ i7 4770K (4C/8T) and a GTX 1080.
I have lurked the Resolve forum for a year or so. There are some people the with some crazy BadA hardware. 24 core CPUs, mega RAM, and 2 GTX 1080Ti GPUs is not uncommon. Goes up from there.
The current Red SDK uses the CPU for wavelet decoding, so it does require a lot of CPU power. The next major SDK revision coming later this year uses the GPU to accelerate wavelet decoding in addition to de-Bayer, so it will require less CPU, but it will gain quite a bit more according to Red with Turing GPUs due to new dedicated hardware that nVidia designed into Turing than it will with Pascal GPUs.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!