Most of us may have perceived the colorimeters by Datacolor as rather photo and print oriented. Now, that even Digital Production doesn’t come on paper anymore, they have changed directions too. And then, the first few generations didn’t earn themselves the best reputation, due to sample variation and organic color filters, which tend to fade faster.

The recent Spyders, still in their iconic three-pronged shape, should be better. We have been assured that the filter colors are anorganic now (no, we didn’t take one apart). The software got a long expected overhaul and should serve the world of film or video much better now. Of course, we’ll also compare precision with a competitor.

SpyderPro Hardware

The shell is sturdy, and the lens and sensor assembly is well protected by the counterweight. At first touch it feels like being held magnetically, but at closer inspection there are two small latches hooking into the other side. Whatever, it does its job and doesn’t fall apart in your bag. The connector is USB-C, but the unit comes with an adpter for ‚classic‘ USB-A. That’s no problem at all, the speed of the connection doesn’t matter that much. Datacolor suggests to plug it straight into your computer, though, no hub.

The only reason for some concern is the cable, which is rather thin. It might get damaged if bent in a bag or if you need to slide the counterweight too frequently when adapting to different screen sizes. The main competition by Calibrite isn’t doing any better in this respect, their clamp may even stress the equally thin cable a bit more. Just be gentle with these.

SpyderPro Software

The calibration software is very easy to operate, in simple steps from left to right. You just need to know the backlight technology of your screen and your intended target. The biggest strength is flexibility: you can handle all current technologies, from pretty old CCFL all the way to OLED and QD-OLED. If you are not sure about your screen, check here. Maximum brightness should be no issue either. The top model, the SpyderPro, can measure up to a value we’d rather not like to look at without sunglasses: 12.000 nits. 

Datacolor tends to separate models only by software now, but there still are some important differences. The older SpyderX and SpyderX2 need a paid upgrade by software, but will only measure up to 1.200 nits, just like the SpyderExpress. Last years Spyder can handle 3.000, which should suffice for any current screen. Only the SpyderPro goes all the way to those blazing 12.000. Full support of recent display technologies is available for Spyder & SpyderPro, SpyderExpress is limited to Apple Retina XDR.

The software update is free for the SpyderExpress, last year’s Spyder and the current SpyderPro. Under MacOS it’ll run on Big Sur and higher, including Tahoe. Of course, there’s a version for Windows too, but none for Linux. Well, if you know your ways around Linux, you may know how to copy and install an ICC profile, don’t you?

Look Up Tables

Apart from generating ICC profiles for your computer, you can finally export .cube 3D LUTs in several steps of precision up to 65. Those can be loaded into LUT boxes or any kind of interface supporting the option, like some SDI converters. Please note that the cheapest model by BlackMagic, the 3G SDI to HDMI for 65,- US$, will only load a lattice of 17. The 12G models, from 165,- US$ unidirectional, will support the 33 point version. This is a great option to calibrate TVs or projectors without any internal calibration capabilities and HDMI inputs only, to be used with SDI sources.

SpyderPro can calibrate and match more than one screen connected. But don’t try to move the window to the next one by yourself, the software will take care of it. You can even generate more than one profile for different lighting conditions, which will be switched automatically if the Spyder stays connected. Helpful for those working from their living rooms, but a true professional would care for a grading room with constant lighting and, most of all, no changes of color temperature.

The software can collaborate with the Datacolor LightColor Meter (see our test). But don’t expect too much: you can take up to three measurements in different locations on your desk and just feed them to the software by hand. Only brightness, no white balance, and every other source of the current Lux value will also do. Not something to brag too much about.

A more helpful menu item is installed with SpyderPro, called SpyderUtility. It will monitor the light level of your environment, if a Spyder is connected and check if the date for your next calibration is due, and inform you accordingly. Its detailed profile information and management can be very helpful, since ICC profiles are usually buried deep in your system folders. Any of those can be activated here, and also renamed or deleted if they were made by you (but not by Apple or Adobe). You can even export a 3D LUT from any of these, albeit only in the most frequently used 33 points lattice. 

Minor issues

Watch out if you have a MacBook with the infamous camera notch and already too many menu icons, SpyderUtility may be hidden and can’t be accessed by opening it directly from the Datacolor folder. A mildly irritating issue is the measurement of the monitor’s brightness during calibration. While the maximum brightness is asked for by a message in the center of the screen, the next message for getting close to the target brightness is displayed in the lower left, where it may not immediately be noticed. If you have an ultrawide, like one of our test screens, you may wonder why your calibration doesn’t continue!

If you call the Monitor Quality Analysis (Spyder MQA) without first using the calibration software, it will ask for the sensor, even if connected. You need to start SpyderPro first, but may be surprised that there’s no SpyderPro listed in the preferences. No problem, choose Spyder, and MQA is going to work.

Precision

If you want to evaluate your screen, there are several test procedures integrated under Spyder MQA, a separate software also installed by the main installer. But after the first round we were irritated by the results for color accuracy: How could it be that our calibration should be worse than the uncalibrated screen for some patches?  

Now, the choice of color patches looks pretty much photo or print oriented, while some tables used by DisplayCal are optimized for video (there are tons of choices). DisplayCal will not work with the Spyder, but isn’t it quite interesting to cross-check with the competition? So, we made one profile with the SpyderPro and its software, and one with DisplayCal and an X-Rite colorimeter. This time we got consistent results from the highly detailed verification in DisplayCal, both calibrations were quite close and perfectly usable.

Even our cheapest screen performed surprisingly well, only the darkest values were slightly above a ΔE* of 3, while most lighter values were close to or even under 2. This monitor is advertised for gamers, so video professionals may not even pay attention to the Xiaomi Curved Gaming Monitor G34WQi. Don’t worry, you can deactivate the fancy colored light on the back, so it won’t attract any insects

Some weaknesses in the darkest values are expected behaviour of LCD panels, and nevertheless a pretty impressive result for an ultrawide monitor under 250,- €. Such a screen should suffice for Rec. 709 after calibration. At least, as long as you are not working for extremely demanding clients. Clients should also not be looking over your shoulder – this is a VA screen, which has a limited viewing angle.

Those watching your results on mobile devices under less than ideal lighting won’t notice any deviation of colors in those darkest shades anyway. Of course, you can expect even better results if you need to re-calibrate a screen like this one, which is looking good not only when switched off (not saying the Xiaomi looks bad). Its factory calibration is just as good, but any screen ages and will need re-calibration sooner or later. Being a QD-OLED, this might be sooner after daily use, but you’ll get perfect blacks and dark values.

What about HDR?

The Asus QD-OLED linked above can go to some pretty serious 1.000 nits peak. Can the SpyderPro calibrate for HDR? Well, of course you can find a preset for Rec. 2020 in the software. But measuring the maximum brightness or contrast range is not an easy task. No screen for HDR can show the peak brightness for the whole screen longer than a split second, not even far more expensive ones. Trying to get around this with any hack can kill your screen, however pricey it was.

The problem for any calibration, not only SpyderPro: manufacturers have their own limits for the size of maximum highlights and adapt the brightness dynamically. If you can switch the screen to an uniform brightness mode, which is needed for calibration, that Asus for example has only 250 nits. That’s not more than most other modern screens. For the Xiaomi monitor described we measured precisely 259. Some expensive monitors offer considerably more brightness in a static mode and can be calibrated just fine by SpyderPro.

In the end, what really matters are the correct colors for the whole image. Small, but very bright areas may be a bit off, but don’t ruin the overall impression. What matters for HDR is a screen that understands those HDR standards, like Dolby Vision, HDR10, and HLG, and switches accordingly. If SpyderPro tells you that your screen is only covering 68% of Rec. 2020, that’s already a decent value, the best one we found during this review was the MacBook Pro, which covered 72%. For further explanations of Rec. 2020 read here.

And what about BlackMagic I/O devices? In our older three articles, starting here, we have described how important it is to calibrate over the whole chain, with software like DisplayCal (free). This is not yet supported by Datacolor’s software. With the recent changes in handling of profiles and tags in DaVinci Resolve 20.2.3 on MacOS, this may not necessarily be needed any more. We’ll check that very soon.

Conclusion

Both probes and their software performed equally well, so we have a choice now for video production in this price range, including screens with recent technologies and very high brightness. Datacolor is now even ahead of the game by direct export of LUTs, for which a Calibrite probe will need third-party software. Both are measuring much faster than DisplayCal, which is freeware and rather scientific in its approach. Finally, we were impressed how good a cheap monitor can be these days, at least for SDR and those producing for social media.

The post Crawly for Videoscreens: SpyderPro first appeared on DIGITAL PRODUCTION and was written by Uli Plank.

The Mac mini has become a surprisingly capable little workhorse. With Apple’s M-and M-Pro chips, it easily handles cutting, grading, and playback duties once reserved for towers. But anyone who has actually used one in a studio knows what follows: a nest of cables snaking from Thunderbolt hubs, audio interfaces, SSDs, and PCIe expansion boxes. For facilities that rackmount their systems in machine rooms, the mini’s minimalist form factor quickly becomes a liability.

Enter Sonnet Technologies with its xMac mini (2024+) family: modular 2U rackmount enclosures designed to house one or two Mac minis while adding full Thunderbolt-to-PCIe expansion. The result: less cable chaos, better airflow, and no more artists tripping over power bricks on the way to the coffee machine. And a power button you can reach without shoving your hand into the gordian knot of cables behind/below the machine. Yes, it is nicely at the front.

Modular Rackmount for Modular Macs

The xMac mini (2024+) comes in several configurations, all based on a half-width 2U chassis. The core xMac mini module mounts up to two Mac minis side by side, providing front-panel power buttons and access to all I/O ports.

Studios starting from scratch can opt for the xMac mini (2024+) Base System, which includes the module plus an empty half-width bay ready for a PCIe expansion of choice. For heavier workflows, Sonnet bundles two preconfigured systems with its Echo Thunderbolt-to-PCIe technology.

PCIe Expansion via Thunderbolt

The xMac mini (2024+)/Echo II DV pairs the Mac mini module with a half-width Echo II DV expansion chassis. It provides two full-height, full-depth PCIe slots, each connected via a dedicated Thunderbolt link. This layout allows two separate Thunderbolt paths from one Mac mini (or from two individual minis) ideal for cards with sustained high bandwidth such as AJA or Blackmagic capture, 25GbE network, or RED Rocket acceleration.

The higher-tier xMac mini (2024+)/Echo III module offers three PCIe slots through a single Thunderbolt port, targeting audio professionals running multiple Avid Pro Tools | HDX cards. Both Echo modules rely on quiet Noctua fans, which keeps noise low enough for control-room placement if required.

Quiet, Compact, and Very Specific

Sonnet’s enclosure design stays true to the company’s utilitarian/professional aesthetic: steel construction, quiet thermals, no unnecessary LEDs. The half-width modules allow two full systems to occupy one 2U space, which makes sense for audio and broadcast racks where space is at a premium. The modular approach also allows users to mix and match components, for example, a single Mac mini alongside a PCIe expansion, or two minis for redundancy.

Admittedly, it’s a niche solution. Few studios are clamouring to rackmount Mac minis, but those who rely on macOS for editing or ingest tasks and want their systems housed neatly in a server room will find the xMac mini a practical, production-friendly setup.

And if your goal is to have a color monitoring workstation: We got you covered!

Pricing and Availability

All xMac mini (2024+) systems are available now from Sonnet Technologies and its authorised resellers.

• xMac mini (2024+) Module (XMM-MOD): $479.99
• xMac mini (2024+) Base System (XMM-SYS-0): $699.99
• xMac mini (2024+)/Echo II DV (XMM-SYS-IIDV): $1,799.99
• xMac mini (2024+)/Echo III (XMM-SYS-III): $1,799.99

All variants are compatible with Thunderbolt-equipped Mac minis, including the current M4 and M4 Pro generation.

For the Cable-Averse

In essence, Sonnet’s xMac mini (2024+) family provides what many studios quietly wish Apple would: a professional, rackmount-ready version of the Mac mini with PCIe flexibility. It’s not for everyone, and it’s certainly a specialised island solution but for facilities that want to stay within macOS without inviting the cable octopus, Sonnet’s design delivers a tidy, scalable path.

As always, professionals should test the system thoroughly in their workflow before deployment in production environments.

The post Rack ’n’ Mini: Sonnet Turns Mac mini into Studio Hardware first appeared on DIGITAL PRODUCTION and was written by Uli Plank.

Source: Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K

Or in short, the BMPCC 4K, is the first camera by BM to get the option of shooting ProRes RAW (PRR in short) by installing the 9.8 Public Beta firmware. Not a big risk, since you can always go back if that beta is not performing as expected. Filmmaker Christoph Janetzko from Berlin has kindly sent us a few samples to compare, shot at maximum quality in BRAW Q0 and ProRes RAW HQ (PRR for short) under identical conditions. We wanted to have a closer look at resolution and noise, since BRAW is based on partial debayer and ProRes RAW might retain some more information.

Shooting conditions and metadata

Both were shot at full DCI 4K from the sensor in 25 fps, which generated around 1.150 mbps in PRR, but only around 878 in BRAW. This is for identical scenes, in this case the focus chart, but these codecs are quite adaptive to image detail. For resolution, both were shot with a Minolta 50mm/1.4, stopped down to f5.6. It’s vintage, but still a damned sharp lens.

The clips show more metadata in both formats than the iPhone 17 in our recent test, like shutter speed (or angle), of course no focus data from a manual lens. What is missing in PRR, even from electronic lenses, is gyroscope data. In BRAW, these work with manual lenses too, if you remember to set the focal length in the camera.

Resolution and noise

Some users claim that BRAW is pre-filtering the image to improve compression, which might lead to loss of detail. From our test chart, we could neither prove that, nor a tendency towards aliasing with the unfiltered PRR footage. From the start, they look a tiny bit different, even if both decoded as BMD Film generation 5 (which can’t even be changed for the PRR clip). After some minor corrections of contrast and luminance, they look virtually the same, even as a 2x center crop. There’s also no aliasing with the unfiltered PRR shot. Can you tell the difference? There was no correction of colors applied.

For the noise test, we underexposed considerably, but of course identically. This camera has been around for a long time, and it’s not really a low-light monster. We raised the ISO from the recorded value of 400 to 1.000, which is the maximum for BRAW. ISO can be raised to 25.600 for PRR, but that would be a ridiculous level for these shots. Instead, we had BRAW raised by another stop with the Exposure slider, and raised PRR to a similar level in the waveform. BRAW is offering 5 stops here, while PRR has just one.

What’s missing for PRR shots in the RAW tab: the tint slider, white balance presets, and the Highlight Recovery option. A correction for the tint axis in particular would be desirable, our camera would have needed about +10 for either clip, but that can easily be corrected elsewhere in DR. If your clips were recorded externally with a Ninja V, some cameras and their color space plus gamma are identified, but adjustments are also very limited.

These shots confirm some mild pre-filtering in BRAW, resulting in a much smaller noise floor. So, at the cost of around 30% higher data rates, maybe there’s a tad more detail from PRR in the shadows. Sensors with more photocells may expose more of a difference, but I’d say this is still a matter of taste, not only storage space. Some may appreciate the mild softness of BRAW. With some noise filtering applied (more on that below), PRR can look cleaner than unprocessed BRAW. This also proves that the pre-filtering in BRAW is quite restrained. Of course, you can also filter BRAW if needed, but that needs extra time.

Denoising compared

Looking at those extreme night shots in part one and noticing that new ML Denoise feature in Apple’s Compressor, we decided to compare with Neatvideo 6 (NV 6 for short) and with the internal noise reduction in DaVinci Resolve (DR for short). Of course, next to image quality, speed is crucial, since none of the best denoisers is realtime. It has been a while that we evaluated Neatvideo 5, which has always been our “go to” solution for noisy footage. We have prepared 5 second clips at an ISO of 8.000 in ‘small’ HD (1.280 x 720) to compare, which you can download from a Google Drive. The first, without any NR, is just below. These are 1:1 center crops from the main camera of the iPhone 17, as seen in our last article. Please download the following ones and play as a loop to judge the quality.

No Noise Reduction – the orignal

Straight outta Resolve

Here Comes Compressor

With Neatvideo

NV 6 has been improved a lot on Apple silicon, we measured a speed advantage of 75-80% over version 5 under optimal conditions: rendering from the internal SSD to a Thunderbolt NVMe drive. The CPU cores get to full load, the GPUs nearly as much, while rendering at close to 8 fps in DCI 4K. You can hardly squeeze more out of a Mac mini M4 Pro. Memory usage for even larger frames has also been improved. Image quality was impressive, as usual, even if you’d not really want to use footage as dark as our sample without having documented Mafiosi fighting in the shadows (and gotten away with it). Or without grading it as a night shot, as we did.

Apple’s ML Denoise, which works only with iPhone footage and is only available in Compressor 4.11 up to now, did a pretty good job. It needed about twice as long as NV 6, rendering with the GPUs only, while using the full open gate resolution, so you could get some vertical wiggle room out of it. On a serious Mac Studio with 60 GPU cores it should fly, but Neatvideo might get close to realtime on that. We found the results quite impressive, but only the setting Low is preserving enough texture on the street, for example. Medium and High look too plasticky, and there are no other adjustments. But if you use an iPhone 17 anyway, it’s not too expensive at 50,- US$ for a license without time limit. You’ll have to live with watch folders and batch processing, instead of integration with DR, though.

DR’s internal NR features can get pretty close in quality to NV 6 with careful fine-tuning, as explained in this tutorial by Darren Mostyn. But NV 6 offers better tools for very precise adaptation to your footage. It is highly adjustable and integrates with DR, while Compressor only co-operates with Final Cut Pro (of course). And then, DR is more than two times slower, using only the GPU cores, at similar settings (better or high in either software). Image quality might be even better with AI UltraNR, but that is unbearably slow if you don’t own a high-end Nvidia GPU. Finally, if there is too much noise in your sources, the software solutions don’t turn PRR noise into pretty grain, it gets blotchy in the darkest areas, just like from other cameras. Better add some convincing grain, if needed, but watch your final compression.

Conclusion

Footage in ProRes RAW out of a BMPCC 4K demonstrates the quality and malleability of the format in DaVinci Resolve, even if a few parameters are still missing. But there is not much of a reason to switch, since the same footage in BRAW is just as good, if not better in the shadows, and you save space with it.

Footage from the iPhone 17 at low light is impressive for such a tiny sensor, and it cleans up pretty well with a good denoiser if needed. It should not stand out in a negative way when used in a major production. But be aware that this is still quite new, so expect bugs or missing features, like those reported in forums for most of the camera apps currently recording the new codec.

P.S. The first chart on top is from ProRes RAW.

The post ProRes RAW vs. BRAW first appeared on DIGITAL PRODUCTION and was written by Uli Plank.

Very soon after making that big arctic wave with DaVinci Resolve (DR for short) version 20.2 supporting ProRes RAW, Blackmagic (BM for short) has fixed some of the most annoying bugs with 20.2.1. Now we can truly explore ProRes RAW from an iPhone 17 and other sources. Clips from an iPhone 17 were kindly supplied by Kurt Friis Hansen from Denmark, who shot some tests with all three lenses, carefully framed and exposed. These are night shots, so we have very high contrast and low-light. We are of course very curious when it comes to noise from that small sensor, and the influence of compression and pre-filtering (if any). So his footage should be perfect to check these – but there was one hurdle.

System requirements for MacOS

While DR is still running fine under MacOS Sonoma 14.8, you’ll not get access to all the advanced adjustments you may expect from a true RAW format. There’s simply no choice under the entry “Plugin” other than “Standard”, so you can only adjust exposure and white balance. After all, in many cases that may already be enough, if you don’t decide to stick to the camera metadata anyway. The decoding from RAW should be set to HLG, as this is the iPhone’s color space, at least it’s not labeled „none“ anymore. But you’ll have the option of decoding into Apple Log or Log 2 (yes, a new, flatter version).

But where is the rest? Well, it was obviously up to Apple to care for that, since it all showed up on a machine with MacOS Sequoia 15.7 installed. Even the current versions of Apple’s Compressor (4.11) and Final Cut Pro (11.2) need Sequoia to receive the updates. Final Cut Pro, or FCP in short, BTW has lost the “X”, just like the new MacOS naming. On a system with those already present and with DR updated to 20.2.1 we had access to all the parameters you’d expect from a serious RAW format. Now, this system had already receiced Apple’s recent Pro Video Formats update and was showing all new features right away. After receiving information from others, who were not as lucky, we needed to dig deeper.

Problems upgrading projects

To check things, we made a virgin installation of Sequoia 15.7, adding only Apple’s video codecs and DR. When trying to copy and open one of our existing projects, we were back to square one: no RAW parameters. We carefully went through many iterations of installing fresh systems, and combinations of DR installed first or after Apple’s codec pack. What worked in the end was starting a fresh project in DR, importing PRR clips and voilá – all parameters availble! We got confirmation that it should work from Sequoia 15.6.1 upwards. But an existing project doesn’t show these when simply adding PRR clips, you need an empty project and import some PRR footage first. After that, you can also import timelines from other projects. Having test clips shot open gate, we configured our project for DCI 4K at 25 fps and scaled full with crop

True RAW, finally

Now it’s all there, even if there’s a minor cosmetic error: as long as Demosaic is set to Standard you can’t really use the three sliders on top of the right side. They should be greyed out, since they only become workable after switching Demosaic to Custom, and they only work on clips from an iPhone 17. What’s more annoying: you still can’t define RAW presets for PRR under Camera RAW in the project settings, so you’ll need to change them one by one. At least, they get copied by using gallery stills. We found all information about those three sliders in the help files for FCP, but not yet in DR.

Color Noise will not increase it, but reduce – of course. The other two are doing pretty much what the name implies: enhance only edges, and/or apply sharpening. As usual, use with discretion, and they can also slow down playback in high resolutions. On our very noisy test shots at night they are pretty useless, color noise didn’t do much and the other two look ugly, as you’d expect. There is another option in Compressor, which Apple seems to keep for themselves: ML Denoise (yes, machine learning) at three levels. It’s not even in FCP 11.2, but Compressor is not expensive, and we’ll do further testing.

The hardware

There’s not really much in the metadata, just the camera, its manufacturer, plus location and date of the shot. You don’t even see which lens was used in the metadata in DR or the shutter angle, even if the latter exists in the file. A bit depth of 16 for video seems slightly exaggerated, even Nikon is just claiming 12 bit for all three of the codecs offered in their new ZR.

Audio in the iPhone is limited to 16 bit and ProRes RAW internally to the standard version, HQ needs external recording. Some claim that you can trick it into using that, by setting up with an external SSD and then removing it. But do you really want such massive data inside the phone? Even if our noisy night shots may be at the upper limit, while ProRes RAW is quite variable, see here.

The data rate for video in our test samples in ProRes RAW open gate (4224 by 3024) is quite high at around 1200 mbps, recording at 25 fps. The best news here: this is constant frame rate! True, there is a beta version of Mavis Camera with CFR, even on older iPhones. But only for the iPhone 17 it’s officially announced. And before you start bothering BM: no, that will not come to older iPhones, you need extra hardware in the phone for this. We got that ‘straight from the horse’s mouth’, as they say. Now, that hardware also allows BM to add their Camera ProDock, which offers the connections needed for professional work, like timecode and genlock. Only SDI output is missing, you’ll need to use HDMI. But for a price of 325,- US$ that’s still impressive.

Image quality

Right from the start, the samples taken don’t look all the same quality wise, even if taken under identical conditions and all set to ISO 5000 in the RAW tab. According to Apple, all the sensors now have 48 megasensels. Yes, I refuse to call them pixels, since this is RAW and pixels only exist after debayering (aka demosaicing) anyway. While the new wide and tele shots have far better resolution than the 12 ‘mpx’ ones in older models, at closer inspection they are slightly worse than from the 24mm f equivalent still called the main camera for good reason.

The wide, a 13mm equivalent, has about 120 degrees of view and one would expect serious distortion from such a tiny ultrawide. It’s actually there, but automatically corrected when Processing is set to “iPhone ProRes RAW”. The correction and the resulting cropping nevertheless result in some loss of resolution, since it can’t use all the sensels at open gate. At f 2.2 it’s a bit slower too, but that does not result in much more noise. If raised from log to good contrast in post, it also vignettes.

Photographers, like Lux Camera, are pretty impressed with the tele, a 100mm equivalent. They even enjoy it when zoomed in further by what Apple calls “optical” zoom quality, while that is not of much interest when filming. Since the stabilization in the iPhone is not working when shooting PRR, a 200mm equivalent would need a tripod made of concrete. Even at its true resolution, the tele is softer than the main lens. Our clip at dark night is also clearly showing the fact that this lens is more than one stop slower at f 2.8.

Conclusion

We don’t expect anybody to replace an Arri Alexa with an iPhone for a major production. But for the first time a smartphone can be teamed-up in a professional environment with reliable synchronisation and serious grading options. No more fiddling with asynchronous sound, no more guesswork where a shot belongs in time or fighting compression artefacts. You can get into really small spaces, hand that phone to actors, or hang it on a pretty small drone. Heck, for that price you can even risk to crash it, if needed to get that perfect shot.

And other cameras, like the BMPCC or the Nikon ZR? We are seeing a shift of paradigm here, away from clunky external solutions, to recording compressed RAW in cameras. Red’s monopoly seems to be gone, and it’s good to have choices! Of course, we’ll have a closer look at BRAW vs. PRR and also at denoising those extreme night shots above.

The post ProRes RAW News – Fresh from the Freezer first appeared on DIGITAL PRODUCTION and was written by Uli Plank.

The post Hell Froze Over – ProRes RAW for Resolve first appeared on DIGITAL PRODUCTION and was written by Uli Plank.