Return-Path: Received: from spike.lmi.net ([66.117.140.17] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP id 5154233 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 17:55:45 +0200 Received: from [10.0.1.71] (c-71-198-249-239.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [71.198.249.239]) by spike.lmi.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3135C15407F for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 09:07:00 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085) Subject: Re: [AE] lossless codec in a container roundup From: Brendan Bolles In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 09:06:59 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <88C0A5EB-1B3B-4187-A75D-5F027FDF183E@fnordware.com> References: To: "After Effects Mail List" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) On Jul 24, 2013, at 2:42 AM, Perry Mitchell wrote: > I would argue that much of this work will in fact be shot onto RAW and = then transferred to the edit codec in the grading facility. Perhaps = therefore the first target for a prospective new codec should be the = likes of Blackmagic to add to Resolve. I agree that getting Blackmagic to add support to Resolve would be a big = deal. Resolve works in float, so I know that many users export OpenEXR = sequences to make sure they don't lose anything. They would probably = prefer to export to a movie format, but right now there are none that = can do float. Even if they don't want float, they probably want a = lossless format. Seems like a good match. We will need you guys to = lobby them. In my mind, the parameters for this project are: 1. Movie format designed for pro users. It will include codecs that can = handle higher bit depths (including float) and lossless compression. It = will also support metadata such as timecode, color space, and anything = else relevant. 2. Everything must be open source, including all the codecs. This = guarantees that the format can be supported on any platform now and in = the future. Users can be confident that movies created today can be = read many years from now with no problem. All code must use the BSD = license (or similar) so that commercial software may freely adopt it. 3. Everything must be patent-free. Otherwise someone supporting the = format would have to send a check to MPEG LA or whoever. As far as cameras are concerned, AVCHD and XAVC use patents (H.264), = DVCPRO HD and ProRes have no official open source library (although = maybe someone could create one). I think it'd be great if someone like = Blackmagic were to release codecs as open source and then we could = incorporate them. FFmpeg includes DVCPRO HD, DNxHD, and ProRes codecs, but they're = licensed under the LGPL. So close! Maybe I could be convinced to allow = LGPL, but it would mean commercial software would have to install an = FFmpeg DLL, which is a drag. I think we'll start with the available BSD = codecs and then debate the pros and cons of adding LGPL ones. If = someone could write a ProRes codec for FFmpeg, they can write one for = general consumption as well. Brendan