What is the point of N-RAW?

[Andrew Reid]

So with N-RAW we have file sizes in the region of 2500Mbit/s, which is huge.

With H.265 we can go as low as 50Mbit/s and still have a very usable 10bit LOG image with as much dynamic range as the sensor can give us.

This guy did a comparison...

And RAW should not really look like this, should it?

I thought RAW is supposed to have a very fine grain and a lot more dynamic range than H.265, as well as less compression especially in the shadows but instead we have WORSE macroblocking and noise than in the H.265 and less dynamic range.

When I had my Z9 I did a similar comparison as well to the Sony a1 H265 8K.

And found pretty much the same.

So...

Can someone tell me what the point of N-RAW is?

(Click to enlarge...)

[Ilkka Nissila]

I think if you have  subject with a lot of colorful texture (such as samba dancers' costumes) then the difference between h265 4:2:0 and RAW should be obvious. I don't shoot N-RAW (I don't have enough storage and don't need 8K) but I do use 4K 10-bit 422 Prores HQ. I love it, the colorful costumes look gorgeous. 

N-RAW doesn't come with built-in spatiotemporal noise reduction which is likely applied to h265 footage. This may be why it might appear the latter to have more dynamic range (it's not real but because of the way DR is typically measured, one may get that impression) but you can always apply similar processing to raw footage to get similar or better results. The beard details in the h265 appears more smeared than the raw. The difference should be more clear with subjects that have colorful highly detailed textures.

 

[j_one]

1 hour ago, Ilkka Nissila said:

I think if you have  subject with a lot of colorful texture (such as samba dancers' costumes)-

 

1 hour ago, Ilkka Nissila said:

The difference should be more clear with subjects that have colorful highly detailed textures.

 

This. I find RAW helps most when an actual budget is put into production design on a well-lit set where one can quite visibly benefit from the differentiation and depth of colors. That's when I see the benefits at least.

[Andrew Reid]

Interesting answers 👍

[MrSMW]

Every time I muse about trying raw, I get reminded about those file sizes and put the notion back to bed.

[zlfan]

every time when i grade 14 bit true lossless ml raw, i am so happy. 

[Andrew Reid]

13 minutes ago, zlfan said:

every time when i grade 14 bit true lossless ml raw, i am so happy. 

All depends what your benchmark for happiness is.

If it was the stock 1080p codec on those cameras, then the raw was an insane improvement in every possible way.

It's still a stunningly beautiful image today.

With none of the super-smooth and clean look of today's not-quite-raw codecs.

[ND64]

It shows how h265 capture is good enough for YouTube level content, rather than unnecessity of the raw. And by the way we haven't seen true potential of NRAW, because as of now its only available in cameras that have relatively low DR sensors.

The perfect scenario however would be universal support of JPEG XL by all camera makers. Its free, its efficient, it can do raw, alpha, up to 32 bit, HDR, basically every feature that is needed. 

[Andrew Reid]

3 hours ago, ND64 said:

It shows how h265 capture is good enough for YouTube level content, rather than unnecessity of the raw.

It's good enough for more than that really, we're talking pixel peeping level differences to RAW with a demanding grade.

3 hours ago, ND64 said:

And by the way we haven't seen true potential of NRAW, because as of now its only available in cameras that have relatively low DR sensors.

13 stops is Low dynamic range now?

3 hours ago, ND64 said:

The perfect scenario however would be universal support of JPEG XL by all camera makers. Its free, its efficient, it can do raw, alpha, up to 32 bit, HDR, basically every feature that is needed. 

The problem with all these new raw formats is they are all debayered in-camera, and compressed quite a bit.

Magic Lantern Cinema DNG has more character.

[MrSMW]

I looked at a few more examples of this kind of thing yesterday and came to the conclusion, that without even trying it, raw is not for me 🤔

It's those file sizes when it comes down to it.

If ultimate image quality was my thing rather than 'high level of quality that is 'good enough as far as I am concerned', then 200mbs smashes 2500mbs  in my world because I don't need file sizes 12x the size for marginally improved image quality some of the time that only the nerdiest of nerds would ever notice.

Nah, quite happy with burning a custom LUT at the time of shooting into all my footage.

I have no need to please anyone but myself and my paying client who is paying and trusting me to deliver something similar to that which I showcase which comes full circle back to shooting to please myself, because that is what they are seeing and buying into.

Which is partly why the S5ii (I should be on commission from Lumix) for me cannot be beaten, as in add up all the features I want out of a camera and system, for my needs, and it's top dog at any money.

Considered Z8 and Z6iii and a number of Sony's and some Canon's and a few Fujis and nope, - nothing quite measures up.

I still prefer...just, the image straight out of the S1H, but you can't burn a LUT straight into the log footage and it's AF is a bit wonky.

I've been editing a ton of footage recently and with most clips, I am saying to myself, "yep, just what I wanted and limited tweaking required" and if it's off in any way, it's more because of my failures re. lighting and WB where I have either not recognised something or simply forgot to flip to another custom setting.

Perfect? Ha, no, just as above, 'good enough as far as I am concerned', for my wants and needs. Raw would just be a major headache and overkill. At a level of 12x. As a minimum.

[Jahleh]

Been following this excellent website and forum since I got Canon 550D in 2010. Ended two months ago to Z6iii after using GH3, GH4, GH5, S5, S5ii and have shot also a bit with GH6 and GH7. 

If viewed from 3 meter wide screen with true 4K HDR projector, there is a slight difference in resolution and colors in 6K NRAW vs 5.4K H.265 in my opinion. 

The 6K NRAW seems to be a bit sharper, but not over sharp, and colors feel a tad richer. For example, during the sunsets NRAW seems to have nicer hues to my eye, but it could be my Resolve skills are still just lacking for correcting H.265 NLog white balance. Correcting NRAW WB is just easier. 

Z6iii 6K50p NRAW in normal quality is 11.7GB per minute vs 3GB for 5.4K50p H.265. The Z6iii NRAW is noisy and it flickers if you under expose. Still, by over exposing a stop or two according to the wave form and zebras ISO 12800 seems usable. The slight amount of noise looks more organic to my eye on the big screen than noise in H.265  

Still, if S5ii did not have that slight over sharpening compared to original S5 IQ, and it had 6K50p mode, it’s H.265 at 1.5GB or even 3GB per minute would be perfect.

[Andrew Reid]

12 hours ago, Jahleh said:

Been following this excellent website and forum since I got Canon 550D in 2010. Ended two months ago to Z6iii after using GH3, GH4, GH5, S5, S5ii and have shot also a bit with GH6 and GH7. 

Nice!

12 hours ago, Jahleh said:

The 6K NRAW seems to be a bit sharper, but not over sharp, and colors feel a tad richer. For example, during the sunsets NRAW seems to have nicer hues to my eye, but it could be my Resolve skills are still just lacking for correcting H.265 NLog white balance. Correcting NRAW WB is just easier.

N-LOG white balance has to be nailed in-camera, more or less. RAW definitely more flexible in that regard.

How did you find the N-LOG view assist? Is it accurate in terms of exposing N-LOG correctly or does it mess with you and the histogram?

Did you spot what the difference is between N-RAW quality NORMAL and HIGH?

It would be nice to get those file sizes down in 24p at least.

No 4K N-RAW mode?

 

[Jahleh]

15 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

How did you find the N-LOG view assist? Is it accurate in terms of exposing N-LOG correctly or does it mess with you and the histogram?

The N-LOG view assist is complete mess, it over exposes by 2/3 or 1 stop. If exposure looks good in the EVF with view assist you get under exposed footage and lot's of noise. I just disable the view assist and use wave form and zebras their highlight threshold at 245 to check nothing is clipping and then bring down the exposure in Resolve.

With Panasonic you could always trust what you see via the EVF with their view assist LUT and use wave form to double check you are not under exposing or clipping the highlights. Panasonic's wave form is also clearer to read and understand. Just hope Nikon would update the view assist LUT via firmware at least. It is just hilarious that the EVF is very good, but you can't use it fully.

15 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Did you spot what the difference is between N-RAW quality NORMAL and HIGH?

It would be nice to get those file sizes down in 24p at least.

No 4K N-RAW mode?

 

I have not tried N-RAW HIGH yet as FX 6048×3402 50p HIGH is 3110 Mbps and NORMAL only 1560 Mbps. 6K25p HIGH seems to be also only 1560Mbps so I definitely need to check it out if it has any benefits.

FX 6048×3402 24p HIGH is approx. 1490 Mbps and NORMAL 750 Mbps according to Z6iii Technical Guide.

There is FX 4032×2268 N-RAW modes with lower bitrates than 6K as well, but they seem to be a bit softer than 6K, so for 4K N-RAW I have only used DX 3984×2240 100p. I usually shoot sports with FX 6K50p and DX 4K100p N-RAW, or 5.4K50p and UHD100p H.265 modes and have tried only briefly H.265 UHD 50p with eStab to check how it works. 

[Ilkka Nissila]

3 hours ago, Jahleh said:

The N-LOG view assist is complete mess, it over exposes by 2/3 or 1 stop. If exposure looks good in the EVF with view assist you get under exposed footage and lot's of noise.

Hmm. I tested N-Log with View Assist on the Zf and when metered using my Sekonic indicent meter, exposure in the viewfinder and LCD seemed correct at the metered setting. 

[Andrew Reid]

4 hours ago, Jahleh said:

The N-LOG view assist is complete mess, it over exposes by 2/3 or 1 stop. If exposure looks good in the EVF with view assist you get under exposed footage and lot's of noise. I just disable the view assist and use wave form and zebras their highlight threshold at 245 to check nothing is clipping and then bring down the exposure in Resolve.

Wonder if this is an issue unique to the Z6 III, as the view assist on the Zf seemed to be quite accurate for exposure.

4 hours ago, Jahleh said:

With Panasonic you could always trust what you see via the EVF with their view assist LUT and use wave form to double check you are not under exposing or clipping the highlights. Panasonic's wave form is also clearer to read and understand. Just hope Nikon would update the view assist LUT via firmware at least. It is just hilarious that the EVF is very good, but you can't use it fully.

Yeah definitely would be nice to have LUTs in-camera.

Panasonic S9 and S5 II leading the way on that, for the rest to catch up.

4 hours ago, Jahleh said:

I have not tried N-RAW HIGH yet as FX 6048×3402 50p HIGH is 3110 Mbps and NORMAL only 1560 Mbps. 6K25p HIGH seems to be also only 1560Mbps so I definitely need to check it out if it has any benefits.

Thanks for the data rate info.

Canon RAW Lite in 6K on the EOS R3 is 700Mbit/s vbr

That's a sweet spot for me, any higher and tend to want to delete the original RAW files or convert to ProRes LT, which is a bit of a shame.

4 hours ago, Jahleh said:

FX 6048×3402 24p HIGH is approx. 1490 Mbps and NORMAL 750 Mbps according to Z6iii Technical Guide.

There is FX 4032×2268 N-RAW modes with lower bitrates than 6K as well, but they seem to be a bit softer than 6K, so for 4K N-RAW I have only used DX 3984×2240 100p. I usually shoot sports with FX 6K50p and DX 4K100p N-RAW, or 5.4K50p and UHD100p H.265 modes and have tried only briefly H.265 UHD 50p with eStab to check how it works. 

Did the AF still work in 4K 120fps for you?

And estabiliser?

[Jahleh]

58 minutes ago, Ilkka Nissila said:

Hmm. I tested N-Log with View Assist on the Zf and when metered using my Sekonic indicent meter, exposure in the viewfinder and LCD seemed correct at the metered setting. 

19 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Wonder if this is an issue unique to the Z6 III, as the view assist on the Zf seemed to be quite accurate for exposure.

Could be it is unique to the Z6 III as pretty much every fellow on every forum or on Youtube I searched, even the fellow whose video is linked at the start of this thread, said the same thing that View Assist with N-Log cannot be trusted. Would be really nice to get it fixed on Z6 III too.

27 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Did the AF still work in 4K 120fps for you?

And estabiliser?

I have used only 4K 100fps, as I edit on 25fps timeline, and with 100fps AF has worked as well as with 6K 50fps. Even in the dark, subject lit with dim flashlight the AF could stick to the subject quite dependably. At the edge of the frame AF would not lock on the subject if it was really dark and subject not moving, but when it got the lock it stuck to the subject. Compared to S5ii even after it's latest firmware update, this Z6 III AF seems to be a bit stickier, more trustworthy and it will not loose the subject as easily as S5ii did, especially if someone walked between the camera and the subject.

The estabiliser is maybe not quite as good as in S5ii, and stabiliser itself in normal or VR mode is not that good as in S5ii or in GH7. The estabiliser works only with H.265 UHD up to 60fps, so I have not used it much, only tested how it behaves. The VR mode is ok for my use and mostly I get good results with it. With longer focal lengths having heavier lens helps of course too, like it was with the S5ii. 

IMO with Z6 III and NRAW you get a FF 6K 60fps and APSC 4K 120fps, bit better IQ, AF, EVF and can use higher ISO values than with S5ii. I like the switch to photo mode too in Z6 III more than having custom modes on S5ii.

S5ii seems to have a bit more DR, has better IBIS, open gate and some functions are better implemented. Tried even Sirui Saturn 75mm 1.6x anamorphic with it and it was good, but only on a tripod. Now with Z6 III I got the more resolving and calmer IQ I wanted, but lost a couple of other things.

[Jahleh]

In case you are wondering how Z6 III behaves in low light I made this short clip  where I tested the camera and some of it’s functions. No plot, just random B-roll clips taken  between climbing, before or after sunset, during September and October, including labels which clip is N-RAW and which just N-Log. There’s even one S5ii V-Log clip for comparison. Darkest clips are taken with ISO 6400 and 12800 on Nikkor 85mm F1.8 or 50mm F1.2. Just mute the sound as it’s mostly sea waves splashing near a highway. 

 

[ND64]

On 12/10/2024 at 10:41 PM, Jahleh said:

With longer focal lengths having heavier lens helps of course too, like it was with the S5ii

Nikon IBIS+VR combo at tele is best in class, and its intriguing that nobody figured it out yet how to reach peak performance at both ends, Sony is very good at wide focal length but terrible at tele. 

[Evgeniy85]

The benefits of N-Raw won't be visible on Youtube. It's overkill for most projects but for HDR it's a must have.
I also noticed that the quality is worse than H265 in 4K modes on Z6III due to line skipping.