Support AV1 Video Encoding and Decoding

@kalamazandy 

Regarding interperting the Frame Rate of an Image Sequence in After Effects, no still image format contains temporal information.  As such, all software that habdles time based media relies on the user to set the frame rate for Image Sequences.  

I find it helpful to include the frame rate in the name of the folder containing the Image Sequence.

If the After Effects preferences get reset and the user does not use 30fps, Settings > Import > Sequence Footage is one of the first things users should adjust.  Or if needed, File > Interpret Footage can be used to change the frame rate of an Image Sequence after it's been imported.  

Hey, totally agree on wishing they wrote the code so we could tell the proxy creating process to ignore "mismatched" audio channels. But ah well ...

Shoot, you're right. For some reason I thought I had hardware encoded that on my computer at some point, but I may have confused that with another experiment. I am currently using H.265 10 bit 422 for our proxies so that we are able to access them remotely easier. We are already shooting ProRes422, so only using it to lighten things up a bit. But I'm definitely interested in AV1 for the future since H.265 only works well encoded packaged as an mov at the moment since that allows for encoding with audio streams that match things like Red camera and canon's default 4 channel on the C series cameras. I wish Premiere would just let you ignore the mismatch and warn you every time or something, but I've only found one workaround and it is apparently not Mac compatible. 
AV1 could be a great potential for transparent proxies. Currently we have to use ProRes4444 which is larger than an image sequence, or I think CineForm has a version that works with alpha as well. I can't remember. It is handy to package image sequences as a video format, but not so much if the video is larger than the images. That's more of an AfterEffects thing, but I do occasionally use them in Premiere from 3D animation software. It's easier keeping track of a single file though. And if someone has to offline the sequence and find it again, AfterEffects is kind of dumb and sometimes changes the framerate because it's as if you have completely changed footage rather than just Finding the missing footage. So if your footage was 24fps but your machine's default is 30fps then it may change it to 30.

Actually, the RTX 30 series supports only hardware decoding for AV1. The RTX 40 series introduced AV1 hardware encoding.

AMD's RX 6000 series (except for the RX 6400 and RX 6500 XT) introduced that company's hardware AV1 decoding support. AMD's AV1 hardware encoding support is only available in the discrete RX 7000 series GPUs plus the enthusiast-level mobile Phoenix APUs.

Nvidia has hardware acceleration for AV1 starting with the 30xx series, and increased resolution on the newer and higher end cards. Intel also has hardware acceleration starting with Arc. I just wanted to throw that out there, that hardware acceleration exists for both encoding and decoding. It's just not in camera hardware yet, and the software to utilize the hardware acceleration is behind, which is where this request comes in.

Thanks man, no problem, I'm glad you found a way to work with your files. 81 upvotes for this thread is not bad, it may be that Adobe will look into it, but mostly it's a delivery format, and not really for editing.

Cheers! 🙂

@MyerPjdidn't mean it any bad.

I just didn't like the fact that you made PP/AE out to be so pro that a codec like AV1 isn't worthy of it. Of course they are pro programs - but then I expect them to support me as a pro user in as many situations as possible and at a professional level. It's exactly as @R Neil Haugen  says: "All pro video post apps have holes in them. Ain't none of them perfect."

I didn't mean to say that Resolve is better. I just don't understand why this simple task took me quite a while with Adobe without being able to achieve a result, while with Resolve it works with a mouse push. Pro programs are supposed to be intuitive and save the user time. In this case I was disappointed with Adobe (as I am with many of the sometimes massive performance problems across most applications - I'm actually only really happy with LrC at the moment - it's been running really well for a while, followed by PS which got a bit annoying in terms of UI lately).

So maybe as a non-native speaker I chose the wrong word with 'destroy' - no bad intention.
Just too much trouble with Adobe programs over the last few years regarding performance and features so I'm a bit frustrated about that. Was just that "once again" experience while others can do...

Ha, ha... I didn't realize @EXECdesign, that you were looking to 'destroy' my 'thin PRO argument', I was simply trying to help you. So, now you go another way, which as RjL and RNH just destroyed you BMR argument, is that how we should do it? Is that how we should respond, with the 'destroy' word? ...I guess that's what I've learned from you. ha, ha... 🙂

Edit:RJL beat me, has a couple solid comments. So mine is now "in addition".

Well, jeepers ... I work for/with/teach pro colorists, have been "in" that crowd over a decade, use Resolve daily, and teach it. So I think I can add some perspective to your comments.

Resolve began as a $250,000 per-seat grading app, right? And it was really about the best digital grading option in the early days, but Holy Antman, expensive. But the company still didn't make a good profit. Then after BlackMagic bought the failing company, they dropped the price, first to like $9500, then a year later or so to $300.

Why? Resolve is a total loss leader "product" for BM. Their company profit is based on selling hardware ... and I highly doubt they make nearly enough from selling licenses of Resolve, to pay the server space for downloading it.

For example, I've enough BM kit I've bought that I'm both running the Studio version, and have extra licenses sitting in a drawer. Good kit ... love my BM cameras, on my second Atem mini pro switcher ... those are pretty 'cheap', but last only 3 years or so before dying. Decklink & other stuff.

As far as Resolve being "heavy" in Hollywood, it's probably used as a grading app only by more houses than any other app. Next would be Baselight probably, then Scratch. So it's the standard app especially in the US for major TV and many long-form grading jobs. In Europe, Baselight is a lot more used than here, especially for nearly all long-form work.

For editing? No, Resolve is not heavily used as an editing app ... yet. Personally, I can edit in Resolve, at need to test something ... but it's a lot clunkier than Pr or Avid for that matter for many parts of editing still. Better than when I started working with it back around 15, but still ... not "here" yet, really.

Among other things, the available keyboard shorts for edit work are far less than Pr or Avid have.

And as far as codec support, that varies by app. Premiere has ProRes Raw, which ... do not EVER expect ProRes RAW to be supported in Resolve. Their staffers are very testy about even being asked about it.

Resolve has better support for a couple other codecs/log-forms, as of Premiere 24.x. But Premiere 25.x, shipping in a week from now, adds a ton of things including a lot of Sony, Canon, and Fuji log forms.

All pro video post apps have holes in them. Ain't none of them perfect.

So as a practical guy, use what gets your work out the door to your clients best for you. And don't waste emotional time on huge companies ... any huge company.

Just get work done. That's what tools are for. I don't care which brand of hammer I use, I only care how the blame thing works.

For me, Resolve introduced a completely different set of issues. For one, its free version neither has a software H.264 or HEVC encoder at all nor can one be added in (unless one pays for the Studio version), and since it does not have a GPU hardware encoder at all the Windows version must rely solely on whatever encoder Windows itself natively has access to (which may be none at all and therefore cannot export to H.264 or HEVC on its own on such a system), depending on the system's software configuration.

Secondly, Resolve (at least in its free version) does not support several older but still commonly used video and audio codecs at all, and therefore such media must be converted to another format using external third-party software before it can be imported into Resolve.