ProRes as an input codec is fine (heavy on compute resources but who cares when you can pay $50k for a MacPro), just don't use it as a delivery codec.ĭNx is controlled by AVID (heavy on compute resources but who cares when you can pay $10-15k for a 3990x workstation+some RTX cards) and Cineform (runs on your grandma's laptop) is controlled by GoPro (SMPTE ST 2073 VC-5 video compression standard)ĪVID doesn't give a crap how you implement DNxHD/R in your app.Ĭineform is controlled by no-one. You can't necessarily say the same about eg. There is nothing wrong with it as it's good codec and most important all official implementations are solid. 80% work done to them will end up as ProRes as well. Just working on 1000+ master project and 80% are ProRes. Hard to ignore this option if now all major NLEs have it.Īndrew Kolakowski wrote:Not so easy. It's a business decision (may reduce sales of Linux top version), but I think we will see ProRes export in Studio soon. ProRes on Windows may never come to free Resolve, I don't see any reason why it can't be in paid version. It's not true anymore, but Apple still may have a say depending on your application usage. In the past to was crazy hard to get license for ProRes on Windows (for start it had to be only Windows Server). Otherwise I could say that me not buying Photoshop is a decision of Adobe or someone not buying Resolve is the decision of BMD. And this is up to other party, not Apple. People who do have licensed prores for their software instead argue that it is free of charge to use prores encoder, one must simply comply with specific licence agreement. Where do you get this info? It is repeated time and again with no plausible source. For reasons known only to them, they won't allow Windows Resolve to render Prores Marc Wielage wrote:This is a licensing decision by Apple.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |