I really see myself shooting prores with the log gamma curve most of the time. As long as banding isn't an issue I think it will be plenty for me.

Does anyone know what variant of prores BMD is using? 422 HQ? 4444?

If it's straight 422 then the file sizes will actually be smaller than what I'm getting out of my hacked GH2 right now!

deleted by user, will repost after some more research.

@Oedipax

According to Black magic specifications:

recording format/compression are

• Adobe CinemaDNG @ 2.5K
• Apple ProRes Log 4:2:2 HQ @ 1080
• Avid DNxHD @ 1080

ProRes & DNxHD can be recorded using either a "Film" (log) or "Video" (Rec. 709) gamma.

Known Issues: (Premiere Pro)

• The Importer only supports 8-bit frames. Frames with higher bit-depths are not supported.

• To process a sequence of DNG files, the user selects the first file in the sequence. It is not necessary to select multiple files or to import a folder. The Importer automatically looks for sequentially named files in the same enclosing folder and builds a sequence from the found files.

http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/cinemadng/releasenotes.html

Guys, can enyone make me list of NLEs that support Apple ProRes or Avid DNxHD?
For both Mac and PC?

It'll be interesting to see CinemaDNG support difference in new CS6

If you'd like an easier way to convert DNG to Cineform Raw and you have a copy of DPX2CF (you can also download trial of Cineform Studio Premium which includes it). I made a little scripted utility that makes it easier to convert if you aren't that great with command line utilities. I posted the details here: http://eyepatchfilms.com/?p=903

Adobe CinemaDNG is over kill in so many ways, where as ProRes HQ & Avid DNxHD will suffice for the majority of projects. On the Alexa not an issue using ProRes.

The data management costs and infrastructure needed for RAW is fine if you can afford the IT/Data management team to handle it, however independents or smaller scale commercial production/Efx's house's will drown very quickly with their data flow over time.

The great advantage to high end productions- the data team handles this, and you don't see it from the day to day work on production. That being if your the DP, Director, Producer type positions. You hire a team to manage all the data backups, transfers etc. Small scale productions already fight an uphill battle to get their production done, and at a good level of quality work. I see RAW at 2.5K good for green screen/efx's work. Now with 4K, 5K, 6k and up, that compression becomes much more important as it rises. More nuances to loose within the larger/denser image.

However 2.5K, it's over kill for a good majority of smaller productions. Just glad the BMC has the options, as I've been privately informed that it was only going to be RAW only early on. Luckily BM also added ProRes and DNxHD to the BMC. This is going to evolve over time. This is BMC v.1, over the next years there will be other cameras that eclipse this one from BM. It's all gravy to me now days. We have tools that cost a fraction of what it cost years ago, however we get much more for less money spent today.

I paid a deposit today for a BMD Cinema Camera, supplier is still expecting to deliver in July. Happy to work on FAQ once it is actually in my hands...

A RAW workflow asks a lot from those who would use it. Firstly, it pretty much demands an extra processing step. In the same way shooting on film meant you had to “process” the film. The same thing happens with raw workflows, and you can’t realistically use the RAW files to edit with. You have to transcode them into more edit friendly forms. There are two ways to approach this.

1. You can choose to do this step once and never return to the RAW files. In this way you’d apply either a “one light” grade, that is a simple grade that get’s you 90% of your look. You can then render or transcode to an edit friendly codec and do any final balancing in your edit suite using the NLE colour correction tools. You could even transcode a “log” version of your files and transcode to a high data rate, high bit depth codec like ProRes 4444 to ensure you retain all your colour information.

2. Or…. you can do it in a way that means you come back to the RAW files once you’ve finished editing to *re-grade and transfer the files. So you’d do a simple one light grade in Resolve first and then transcode to a edit friendly codec. Once you’ve completed your edit, go back into Resolve to do the final grade from the original so RAW source files. This way is arguably the way to get the utmost from the images, but it introduces a two process step with Resolve.*

Both workflow’s have their advantages and disadvantages.

Via: http://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/2012/09/03/in-the-raw/

I think that transcoding time is, generally, not big issue here.

Wouldn´t it be possible to do a "one step in principal" workflow? That is; encode for an edit friendly format. Lock down project when finished in editor and bring into AE, replace with raw and grade / color from the originals. Render out finished project.

@kavadni same here.. Curious to try it out. Re-linking should work ok in AE if memory serves me, but there are other variables to take into account.. And many of these potential choices would depend on the project, too.