Prores is irrelevant, and also spectacular!

[Django]

3 hours ago, kye said:

Apart from RED, ARRI, and BMD, and the latest crop of RAW-internal cameras, were there any other cameras that shot RAW internally?

I didn't think there were many/any others that shot RAW internally?

my point precisely.. 

[kye]

1 hour ago, Django said:

my point precisely.. 

So, if they were the only ones that offered RAW, and they all shot Prores, rather than saying......

11 hours ago, Django said:

Very few cams actually offer both ProRes & Raw options.

Basically ARRI, RED & BMD.

wouldn't it be more correct to say that all cameras that shot RAW also shot Prores?

Which was my original point...  that cameras shot either RAW & Prores or h26x-style codecs, but very few offered h26x and Prores.  Which was why it's so hard to compare the two codecs.

[Django]

8 hours ago, kye said:

So, if they were the only ones that offered RAW, and they all shot Prores, rather than saying......

wouldn't it be more correct to say that all cameras that shot RAW also shot Prores?

Which was my original point...  that cameras shot either RAW & Prores or h26x-style codecs, but very few offered h26x and Prores.  Which was why it's so hard to compare the two codecs.

..what i said was correct:  ARRI/RED/BMD offer internal RAW & Prores.

Canons/Sigma FP do RAW & H26x. Digital Bolex is RAW only. Z9 does RAW, ProRes, h26x.

Prores (4444) & h26x: Varicam line, Venice line etc.

[kye]

1 minute ago, Django said:

..what i said was correct:  ARRI/RED/BMD offer internal RAW & Prores.

Canons/Sigma FP do RAW & H26x. Digital Bolex is RAW only. Z9 does RAW, ProRes, h26x.

Prores & h26x: Varicam line, Venice line etc.

Well done for saying something that was correct, unfortunately I have completely lost any sense of what point you are trying to make.

Perhaps you could try again?

[Django]

lol you were the one asking those questions

[kye]

6 minutes ago, Django said:

lol you were the one asking those questions

Actually, what I said was "I've heard that most professional productions shoot Prores rather than RAW, and that RAW is typically only used by the big budget productions and by amateurs."  and that's when this side-conversation started.

I'm still keen to hear more about how often and why productions would shoot Prores even on cameras that can shoot raw.  I figure the explanation is probably a combination of it being simpler to work with (as all software can play it) and that its image quality is good enough.

[Django]

basically budget, workflow & shooting scenario but that's where the cameras and what they offer is important to look at.

on Alexa's shooting RAW is 3 to 6 times the bitrate over Prores. That transforms into cost when you know how expensive the media is on Alexa's. But if you wanna shoot the highest res in open-gate mode then it's RAW only.

RAW also requires additional steps in post and time = money. If you've got very fast turnover project you may simply not afford to go RAW.

In some scenarios you may want to even bake-in a LUT. Prores makes sense for that.

But on RED/BMD you may still wanna go RAW over ProRes because the RAW compression options are so good, ProRes doesn't go up to 4444 and media isn't proprietary.

and even then when you've selected RAW, there are a bunch of compression ratio options you may select depending on requirements. for example RED gives out these suggestions:

RED qualifies HQ for VFX work where you need extreme detail or when you need to pull stills from motion. Next is MQ — or medium quality. Non-VFX cinema and high-end TV productions typically use MQ. In MQ, a 512GB card can capture up to 48 minutes. Last up is LQ — or low quality. In LQ, it records 77 minutes on a 512GB card. RED says its intended use is for TV, online content, documentary, interviews, and long takes. 

In the end, I guess my point to you was that it depends on an ensemble of factors.