Thread: Thoughts on Slimraw

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 12 of 12
  1. #11  
    Alex, First of all thanks for all your thoughts. Super helpful and I really appreciate your attention to detail. I came to motion as a stills shooter. Prior to reliable digital cameras we traded shooting color transparencies to shooting color negative and scanning for a digital intermediate long ago. Having almost the latitude of Tri-X completely changed not only my shooting style but also the work I brought in. The freedom was incredible. We'd bring the negatives in and scan them as big as our drum scanner could do which was about 30X40" at 300 DPI. Then we'd go to work on those scans. Most of our outputs were much smaller but in the early days of photoshop the tools were not as developed so working large and bringing everything down is size worked really well.

    So fast forward 15-18 years and the thought of shooting a baked in white balance when there's an option of shooting something that's pretty much completely adjustable… well it's just not much of a decision for me. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to just waste file space. But I've found that how much film or data you need is a poor reason to not shoot it if you have the opportunity, and that includes retakes. I've also found that when I'm shooting good things happen. As I said having been working with the Micro, switching back to the BMCC has been great. It's a great image. Just want to use it more. Also lots more multi-cam shoots. Wish they'd consider a processor upgrade in a refreshed model. But happy with what I've got as well.

    Thanks for all your help, I'll give it a go and let you know what my results are in a few months.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by cpc View Post
    @Alex:
    It is worth mentioning that checksum verification is by its very nature a destination verification procedure: it ensures that something is identical to something else in RAM. To clear it up, this is what slimRAW's checksum verification ensures: that the output is correctly written out. The destinations being identical to each other is only a consequence of them being identical to their master image in RAM after compression, which is the primary goal. Now, if you want to confirm that the source RAM image is (very likely) the same as the source file, you need to read the source multiple times, there is no other way around this. From the backup software you mention, only one does this by default, and one doesn't have the ability at all.
    (The source verification option is coming in slimRAW 1.9, btw, I know you've been waiting for it ).
    These are some great clarifications! Thanks so much for taking the time to respond. I really appreciate you integrating source verification btw; it's going to be so awesome to have that as an option.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Thoughts on the GH5?
    By Ryanite in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 10-13-2017, 06:58 AM
  2. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 02-23-2017, 10:31 AM
  3. SlimRAW Losslessly Compress DNG's
    By caleb_camera in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-12-2015, 10:52 AM
  4. My thoughts on the BMD's so far...
    By Dreadas in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 06-04-2013, 09:55 AM
  5. Just some thoughts
    By Ervani in forum Cinematography
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 01-27-2013, 12:34 PM
Tags for this Thread

View Tag Cloud

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •