Also I just picked up Mojo and it's perfect for this improv sci fi project I'm working on.
I recognized your voice on the tutorial! Awesome!

Have u checked out Photosmith yet for iPad?

Lightroom and iPad integration.

YAY!

instagram.com/danwolfe

Yep, sorry about that. We had to start somewhere.

Part of the reason for the free public beta is to gather as much information as possible about what additional formats people would like.

http://prolost.com/blog/2006/3/16/linear-color-workflow-in-ae7-part-6.html

But be warned: the settings I use in that post don't apply to the new Camera Raw processing version. You'd have to manually choose PV2010.

http://help.adobe.com/en_US/lightroom/using/WS2bacbdf8d487e58240e1c02a1341ed8e630-8000.html

My problem is After Effects since I need to convert my DNG... I want to export an 32bit float EXR Linear so I can grade them even further i Fusion or Nuke the 2 compositning program I use daily in my work.

It seems like After effects clamps my EXR color to 0-1 so even though I render out 32-bit EXR´s...

I have setup the project setting to use 32-bit and sRGB with Linear and in Intepret footage the color managment is grayed out so I import and make some adjustment in the RAW conversion and then render ou at EXR with 32bit and the same here the Color magamneg is grayed out but it says Srgb and Linear...

When I open the exr sequence in Fusion its clamped to 0-1.. Shouldn´t I be able to store the "RAW" 14-bit data in a 32bit EXR? If I push my RAW conversion so its burned out I can´t retrieve any info from my EXR´s in Fusion.. The white just gets grey...

Am I missing somethig vital in AE? Is the RAW conversion 32bit if I set my Project setting to 32bit in AE?

Sorry if my question is a little bit off topic...

Cheers and thanks for a great Blog

(I thought I was being smart when I ordered some of these parts and adapters last week... I'll be playing with my soldering iron this weekend, but I guess that, if this can be done, the ML guys will develop the thing a lot faster than myself)

I wish the metadata input was accessible via the organize tab, but I realize that would really break up the workflow and actual flow of the application. I'm also a little disappointed that .MTS files from my FS100 were not recognized...it would be fantastic to rewrap/transcode AVCHD footage within the application, rather than offloading the camera files to be handled elsewhere. But it's a fantastic idea, and a great beta so far—kudos to the RedGiant team! I'll definitely be buying this as soon as possible.

I can totally see that not everyone is going to be happy about CC being fully subscription based. It suits me currently - and you too by the sound of it. But, this won't be the case for everyone.

I also think that point that you make about Adobe having a potential cartel on the most used creative packages is also valid. They are PLC company with stockholders, and a PLC company's aims are to generally seize market share whenever possible. So the situation needs to be watched.

However, I just don't buy into the idea of CC being a closed ecosystem.

My main package is After Effects. I've commented here before that that I've loved AE since we first met 15 years ago - although time hasn't always been kind to her… I've also been critical on this blog before that AE has been a little off the pace for some high-end work for at least the last 7 years (compared to the other packages like Nuke). So, I'm really pleased that Adobe have stepped up a gear with their tech offerings in the last few releases of AE. Some of the advances have been great (though maybe a little to blackboxed) like the 3D tracker and stabilisation, other aspects like their first shot at 3D in CS6 - needed work.

For me though, After Effect's biggest draw is that it has such strong field of 3rd party plug-in developers - Red Giant, VCP, Peder Norrby, and AE scripts etc.

So it's hard to imagine CC in the future as a closed ecosystem, one that Adobe control with a iron fist, when a lot of the real innovation comes from the developers like these.

Adobe have come to dominate the compositing market (in users numbers) by keeping their price point low and allowing others to build affordable software that springboards off of AE.

Most people will never use more than 4 or 5 of the adobe CC packages, but a highly concentrated base of paying users brings other 3rd party developers flocking to a platform, and good things follow.

This is the true ecosystem that really matters to me, not CC's slightly unbalanced grouping of its app offering. In my mind, AE is often just a framework to launch 3rd party tools, and I think that Adobe are smart enough to see this, and keep that ecosystem growing too.

I think Panasonic has learnt this with the GH3 vs GH2. Who knows if with next models we have a nice surprise.

The ideal DSLR camera (for filmmaking) Canon or Nikon could make would be an 8 megapixels one with raw direct to card and/or external drive. Imagine no line skipping and full 14 bit raw at 4K with big dot CMOS.

Canon may respond by improving the functionality of their cinema products but more likely they will take additional steps to lock down the hardware in the future to prevent upstarts like ML from exposing the limitations they impose.

Seems like there is a middle ground here for the 5d that would allow better image quality with higher bit rates and audio if Canon cared to implement it. Canon bring us the 5Dc.

it would be technically possible to make an adapter that acts as a CF card and passes through the image signal to an SATA port where you could attach an much cheaper, bigger and faster SSD. With 300MB/s+ 3.5k should be possible without frame loss, unless thats a limitation of the camera.
Maybe such an adapter already exists, haven't found one though.

Something like this but way faster
USB 1.1 Host Adapter CF Card

Personally, I've found it to be very convenient (playback at 15 fps instead of 1.5 fps), but also a big blow to image quality, not because of the compression (which is great) but because the debayering method in Adobe Camera RAW is a lot better:
Optimal image quality with the BMC

Have you found a way to work with CineForm without this hit to IQ?

Fair enough, thanks for the correction Stu. :-)

Shawn

I totally agree, It's not ok to hide any special skills.

I agree with most of Aharons points. His argument about ownership is probably over-egged but fundamentally the point he is trying to make is valid.

In fact I also agree with Stu that the issues are complex and difficult to distill into a simple "position", by which I mean for or against, I am not for or against but I have real concerns, that's my simple position.

Here is where I disagree with you. In a straightforward sense subscription is very flexible, you can dip in and out as you choose (assuming Adobe sorts their subscription infrastucture) but choice relies on you having options to choose between. Adobe is in a very strong position in the creative space, many professionals will subscribe to CC because the introductory price is good and it is the only way of getting updates. Once Adobe have us in the CC ecosystem we will have little motivation to go outside it. Imagine this scenario: You subscribe to CC specifically to use Premier and After Effects, 6 months down the line you need to use a vector drawing application, hey you are already subscribed to CC, brilliant, Illustrator it is. Lets say you then get a print brochure produced by a third party. You ask the design company to let you have the InDesign file, you have InDesign in CC so it makes sense to have the file seeing as it is in a format that you can access. A few years down the line why is anyone going to develop a Photoshop competitor or an Illustrator competitor or an InDesign competitor, the whole creative world is subscribing to CC so any competitor has to be either pursuing a niche market that is too small for Adobe to be interested in, or they need to compete with the whole of CC. To try and compete with an individual application is effectively trying to compete with free! The points that Aharon makes about subscriptions helping Adobe become stronger and more efficient works against us now because it has stifled competition.

I accept that subscription is the future, I appreciate the positives, but like ubiquitous CCTV it is the all enveloping nature of Adobe offering that makes me feel a bit uncomfortable. Subscription isn't the issue here it is Adobes near monopoly.

Edward, I agree with you. But, in fairness, the aliasing in that sample is mostly visible on bright horizontal edges like the lit trim on that building. Even a perfect Digital Cinema camera will alias if you aim it at something like that.

But that sample shows other artifacts that corroborate an assumption that the 1080p raw is achieved by skipping whole lines.

Much better image for sure, but I'd wager they're still line skipping. You see it run along straight lines.

It seems pretty cool but I'm not sure how practical it is.

Truthfully, I don't think it's a matter of capability. I think it's will. DSLRs have turned out to be massively useful for filmmakers... but I suspect our numbers are dwarfed by people who use DSLRs for stills only. I'm betting that the needs of video shooters are pretty low on Canon and Nikon's priority list.

What I don't get is why these companies limit their stills only customers to raw 8 bit images (what?)... HDR capture should be relatively simple to do from a stills perspective. Second, I'm wondering why the video divisions of Canon, Sony, Panasonic, et al aren't getting the message that digital cinema shooters want lightly compressed, high dynamic range images in a small, 'inexpensive' form factor... seems like that should have been obvious years ago... but they're still giving us $10k 8 bit MPEG 4 cameras... why!

Shawn

What I dont't get is why Nikon is not doing this. Can you imagine a D5200 (14 stops of DR on an S35 sensor) recording uncompressed RAW to SSD drives?

Then again, you have to wonder why the "C" series cameras don't have Raw recording built-in, when we now know it's possible. My guess is that Magic Lantern may have forced Canon's hand to enable Raw on the C series.

"Why is there a price difference outside US?
I haven’t seen this, but seriously? Didn’t we learn anything from that whole Australia thing?"

I thought I'd check via Adobe's CC website price list:

Basic Cloud membership in US = $49.99
Basic Cloud membership in UK = £46.88 (or $71.51)

The current exchange rate of the pound to the dollar is 1.52 (and has stayed pretty steady between 1.52 and 1.70 for the last 2 years.)

So why do I pay 43% more for a digital product than a US user?

Theres no additional distribution cost with a digital product - no trucks on the road or ships in ports. Theres no translation required, we speak the same language (least I think we do). Theres no additional retail cost - no extra charge for high real-estate cost here in the UK. Both are developed countries.... Um, I'm struggling now...

In fact I can't think of good reason why Adobe would charge me more, apart from that is a bad habit left over from physical product days, and they think they can. But we're doing subscription now - its a brave new world. So let me pay the dollar price like I do for most software I buy on the internet.

Wait, I've got it - I'm British.

I have that strange accent... I sound like Bond villain to a californian. Thats why I should pay more.

Understood. It's good to be humbled from time to time....take stock on my online babbling.

@Stu - I was a good point, but now I feel old and sad. I'm off to sulkily play on my SNES, or whatever us 30 something digital dinosaurs do.

If they can continue delivering along these lines, we will be in love forever and I will be happy to shell out my monthly stipend. But that's an IF. Microsoft Office and I were in love for a long time too, but then it lost its way.