The BRAW Studio plugin for Premiere Pro from the AUTOKROMA team is available for free for full-fledged work with frames obtained from Blackmagic cameras. I advise you to test from the official website of the company for stability. Thanks to the developers of AUTOKROMA company 👏
The Autokroma BRAW plugin has always been far more reliable than the BlackMagic one, has had more options like for presets, and is actually SUPPORTED. Well, they've actually supported the free BM plugin better than BM did!
So ... yes, folks ... go get the Autokroma plugin. Amazing tool!
Has anyone tested the new plugin in operation? Share your opinion
Forget about more options the latest BRAW plugin from BMD has a bug. I will have a video tutorial soon.
I didn't say anything about BRAW from Blackmagic. We are talking about a plugin from Autokroma.
I understood you 100% Baffy! Neil stated AutoKroma had more options. More options are not what matters to me. The BMD BRAW has some bugs! I may download the AutoKroma plugin because BMD's BRAW is flawed. Are we on the same page?
as soon as you make the link, drop it here. Thanks
I upgraded to the latest version of Premiere Pro and as always I found some bugs : (
Film at 11:00 Monday the 4th : )
Errors persist in all versions.
I know. Adobe should scrap Premiere Pro and make Adobe Edit 1.0.
If you saw my words on the forum, then I fully support you. This is not a professional product with such errors that are not corrected, but only added.
I advise Adobe to lower the price for the product. If they can't fix errors from six months ago in the upcoming update, they can give users free use until the error is fixed. I hope they will agree with me.
Adobe is not the same company it was just 15 years ago. Premeire Pro used to be very innovative. Premiere Pro is getting buggier and buggier as time goes on. Resolve and FCPX support hardware encoding and decoding for more variations of H.264/265 than Premiere Pro. Adobe does not seem to care. It is 2022 and not all the effects and transitions are GPU accelerated. Why is that? Do we have to request all transitions and effects become GPU accelerated? Surprise us Adobe and ad a few new transitions and filters. They finally started adding some nice features to the Essential Graphics but that should have been done a couple years ago. We should not have to request stuff like this. Things should get better on their own.
Here is the video I promised you. I doubt the BMD plugin is to blame. I hope the CEO and Project Manages at Adobe can accept responsibility. As of now Premiere Pro is pure crap! The idiots at Adobe keep adding new feature when Premiere Pro is unstable and full of bugs. Premiere Pro is a sinking ship and Adobe has no life preservers for us. It would be better to build a new ship than try and patch all the holes.
The last words in the video are the most correct, which should encourage developers to reconsider their attitude to the product. It really has to compete with other NLEs. For example, the same FCP wins over Pr with speed and undemanding resources. 4K is played easily and without lags. When compared with Davinci, Premier also loses in performance in H.264/265 decoding. I'm not talking about the 4:2:2 subcreditation, which is simply not suitable for Pr editing. I don't say anything about color at all, in Pr it is not possible to work at a professional level with color correction. I will repeat it on a professional level. There is nothing to fine tune and this has been going on all these years since the product was developed. I don't understand the marketing approach to this product. If they position Pr as a professional tool in cinematography, then I strongly disagree. Today Pr is a program for novice users and those who make videos for home viewing. I know good reasons for what I'm saying. If someone wants to challenge, go ahead, get tired. Now Pr is losing out to the other products I have named, and it will continue to get worse if you do not reconsider the policy of the approach to product development.
I was expecting a review of the plugin in this topic, but, apparently, you have a cry of the soul and I understand you.
Well, here's a clip for y'all ... I've got two UHD BRAW clips from a BMPCC4K, stacked, one turned into PIP in the upper left corner as in Andy's vid. Timeline is UHD also, in Rec.709 color space. 25fps.
And the dropped frames indicator showing green all the way ... both clips have multiple controls of the Autokroma BRAW plugin, [and multiple instances of Lumetri on each clip] (edit: this sequence doesn't have the Lumetri, I copied the one without. The other sequence has them and plays back the same).
There's resizing going on for the PIP pic also, of course. My Ryzen 3960X CPU was averaging about 17%, my 2080Ti GPU about 27%. (edit: playback on the sequence with multiple Lumetri was about 22%/31%)
I don't see the imminent demise of PrPro ... it's got the widest usage ever at the moment. There are some issues that every one of us would want changed of course. I'm no different. I'd love a complete rebuild of the color system and the color workspace, I've posted that with the developers.
It's also been very clear on the forums here and elsewhere I've not been thrilled (ahem) with the rollout of the new underlying color system in Pr2022.
And I'll be talking with the developers at NAB in a couple weeks also.
Premiere doesn't have the full color tools of Resolve, and geez ... much as I'd like to have all that, Resolve started as GRADING app! Now they've cadged on a couple edit pages, some of the Fairlight audio DAW, a (sort of usable) version of Fusion as the graphics/fx page ... and that aglomeration of tools has its own issues. If you follow the BM forums as I do, it's notable the number of stability/bug issues has risen with the changes making Resolve into an Adobe "clone" as some put it.
Thanks for Neil's work.
Try to convey the idea at the upcoming conference to the developers to improve the product. I hope this is the time when you should be heard directly. Provide them with some user statements about what they would like to see in the product. It is important. And be sure to pay attention to the Color page.
This is an important tool against the background of no less important stability. In general, the product needs to be upgraded a bit. For example, I face the inconvenience of working with key keys. There are no advanced settings in key management. For example, as in AE. You're not going to AE to reverse the keys with one click and go back to Pr and continue to mount. Flexibility is needed in some tools. Mark it Neil.
Oh, I'll be pressing some engineers & supers ... I'm well known "there" as an open advocate for many user ideas & requests, even ones that don't impact my workflows.
Perhaps it's from being on the autism spectrum ... but I have no problem with looking someone directly in the face and politely but clearly stating that answer is of no use whatever. (I also expect them to be able to do the same thing of course.)
So when an engineer explains that X is "there" rather than "here" because of the proper organization behind the veil of the UI ... I'll just re-state: "That's NOT how we use it, and makes no sense whatever for a USER. The UI only exists for us to ... USE IT. Not for engineers."
But at the same time, I've been told they really like my bug reports. Too many UserVoice bug reports are simple "X is broken. Fix it." Which was a total waste of time on the part of the person posting it.
Why? There's absolutely nothing there for an engineer to even START with. Mine ... give context, including hardware, effects, media, program version, and the last few steps before X happened. Makes it easy for them to peruse the post, set it up on a machine, and see if on their hardware it happens.
So they do like to see me coming, mostly ... 😉 ... but they know they're going to get several earfulls also.
And this time ... that we NEED that separate color managment panel so we can have something UP and visible to check CM settings/defaults/overrides. For proxies to reflect mods to clips.
I want a P3/D65 "working space" in the timeline, period. All media transformed to that large color space for working/processing, with options for display space and export space. This way all color controls will behave the same no matter what the media is.
More options for the captions process ... including multiple tracks for things like multiple languages. That doesn't affect me, but for so many others, they have to publish with mulitple captions for various languages.
And always stablity ... consistency ... well, yea ...
It should get off the ground. Neil, of course, would like to see a more improved product, including working with keys, additional features with color, etc. As far as possible, put it on the agenda when you are at the conference. Of course, the product requires a good update from all sides, including the shell. I would like to see a little modern design and flexibility in settings. Now the design is outdated
You are very confused. I did not use the Autokroma BRAW plugin. I used Blackmagic Design's BRAW plugin. I also used the Lumetri Color Effects on every clip. As I stated it could be the plugin and if I wipe and reload Windows everything might get corrected. The problem is we should not have to wipe and reload after every update. Kevin Monahan stated BRAW is not supported. I say BRAW is supported because the staff at Adobe stated the cloud implementation is better than buying DVDs because when new codecs hit the market they can be implemented into Premiere Pro ASAP. Remember when Adode told use that? Premiere Pro had support for Quick Sync before Resolve but in the year 2022 Resolve supports more variations of H.264/265. Have the Adobe Staff at NAB explain how that happened.
Because of the CC rental method I don't expect Adobe to keep up with the competition. I expect Adobe to be far ahead of the competition and so should everyone else. If Adobe decides to give us the CC for free then my expectations would be different. Tell that to the Adobe Staff at NAB.
I will wipe and reload Windows soon and opt to use the Autokroma BRAW plugin as opposed to BlackMagic Design's plugin. I imagine everything will work OK after that. The problem is Adobe should be implementing BRAW support directly into Premiere Pro as opposed to making us use plugins. Let the folks at Adobe know that it is 2022 not 2019.
How you're considering me confused, I have no clue. Not whatever. I didn't say you used anything ... period. Just gave my results. That's all. So ... what the hay anyway dude?
Any of us conflating our own rig's performance over enough other users to make claims about the usefulness of any of these apps ... Premiere, Resolve, Avid, whatever ... is skating on thin ice. Comparing the performance with different media, or the same media, with different hardware or steps can be very useful for the data involved.
You are very very confused but Baffy is not. Allow me to demonstrate. For starters you claimed you used the Autokroma BRAW plugin. I Used the Blackmagic Design plugin but plugins are a non issue. Baffy knew it without being told!
The correct response from you would have been "it is 2022 and Adobe is still using 3rd party plugins for BRAW support".
Keep in mind I stated not all systems will experience the same issues I am having. That being said I think it is important for the programmers at Adobe to see my video. Perhaps Adobe will finally support BRAW without plugins. I 'm hip! Baffy is hip and now you're hip!
In 2022 Adobe should have full support for BRAW. Adobe is not giving people the CC for free. We pay good money each month to have full support for new video codecs when they hit the market. We pay good money to Adobe not 3rd party plugin developers.
Adobe had support for Quick Sync before Resolve but in the year 2022 Resolve supports more variations of H.264/265. How did that happen? Resolve is free or $300.00 one time fee. We pay Adobe good money each month. I don't want excuses anymore. I want results ASAP! Maybe my video will inspire the Adobe programmers but I highly doubt it.
Moving forward I hope you will have a more open mind set and focus on the bigger picture. When we pay an expensive monthly fee compared to the competition we should not be using software that competes with the competition. We should be using software that is miles a head of the competition. Keep in mind Adobe can and should end the monthly rental fee if they cannot remain cutting edge. Adobe used to be a great company 12 years ago but those days are long gone. I am glad I know how to use Resolve. Adobe has a great GUI and great support for 3rd party hardware but when an Adobe Employee tells me the Premiere Pro does not support BRAW in the year 2022 is time to move on.
Keep in mind in the year 2022 we still have filters and transitions that are not GPU accelerated. Rather than forcing the users to make a feature request to have them GPU accelerated wouldn't it be better for the Adobe employees to do their job? Premiere Pro used to get great upgrades 12 years ago. What happened? I will tell you! When you get money each month there is no need to push yourself to make good upgrades that are worth buying.
To make matters worse I have been told Resolve has better support for the M1 chips. I like the Premiere Pro's GUI but Premiere Pro is a sinking ship. Adobe is not going to repair all the little 3" inch holes. That being said even a 3" inch hole will sink a ship if given enough time.
That word you keep using ... I do not think it means what you think it means ...
The only thing confusing here is trying to track all your statements. And claims.
First, for everyone to remember : these apps are all tools ... fancy hammers. That's ALL they are. And they are all different. Use whichever one works for your needs. Period. I've got good friends who love Resolve and totally diss Premiere. Fine and dandy, and we laugh about our different views.
Personally, I'm always irked when working in Resolve by the UI, and by the way my hardware is simply limited by BlackMagic ... intentionally. But again, that's how BlackMagic pays their bills. Providing Resolve to help sell hardware.
There is freely available use of BRAW clips in Premiere, provided by the BM 'freebie' plugin. So yes, without paying extra, you can get BRAW support in Premiere. Not particularly confusing. What's perhaps informative, is the best support for the freebie BM BRAW plugin ... isn't provided by BM, but by Autokroma.
But then, BM has dissed Adobe for years anyway. Not a lot of love there. Go to NAB ... the Adobe people don't talk much about Resolve, but they don't diss it either. It "is", and that's about it. But in the BM booth ... the distaste for Adobe is worn on the shirt sleeves.
As I spend a fair amount of time in both places, yea, I get that. Have for years. And will be checking out any new camera announcements they make during NAB ... I figure my GH3 is coming up on an EOL as my b-cam, with it's total Rec.709/1080 limitations. And I might get another BMPCC4K, or maybe a 6k. But ... gotta see what they come up with. They have other options that might become ... useful for the price.
The Autokroma BRAW plugin provides better stability and more functionality for BRAW, within Premiere, for a very small fee. No brainer for me, it works better. Done. Don't wanna spend a small one-time fee? Don't. Use the freebie BM plugin.
In general, Resolve has smoother playback on some computers with certain codecs and tools than others. Premiere has smoother playback on some computers with certain codecs and tools than others. I work with both, and participate on the BM Resolve forums. And see the joys & frustrations with both apps. They both have strengths and challenges for users.
Resolve has a much deeper color toolset, naturally, as it's a grading app that has cadged on graphics, editing, audio, and fx. Although every colorist I know has a ton of high-cost plugins added to their Resolve installation.
Premiere has a deeper editing set, as it is at heart an editing app. And most pros I know of have a series of plugins that fill all sorts of needs or simply do things fast.
Nothing particularly confusing there that I can see. And again, to make it very clear ... most of the people I know working in these apps have plugins, no matter whether it's Resolve or Premiere.
Resolve doesn't allow much customization of workspaces and tools. It is also a marketing tool to get us to buy BM hardware, as they intentionally throttle non-BM hardware within Resolve. This is a large part of the difference in the selling of the two apps. Adobe doesn't make money on hardware, only software.
Premiere encourages personalized workspaces. And allows all hardware makers to work with the API and map things as they choose. All Adobe is selling is software.
And Premiere's use numbers are going up rather markedly. So, as much as I'd LOVE to be able to put pressure on them to completely rebuild the color capabilities immediately, I can't see that much leverage to use against the M&E types, the folks well above the "mere" product people. M&E drives a company like Adobe from the top. And their M&E people look at the numbers and say ... it's all good.
Yea, I personally get a bit hacked at the M&E dominance, no question. It seems the teams clearly get irked at times also ... but they work for the company. You do as you're paid to do.
I know colorists that live in Resolve 12 hours a day and better ... they've got gripes about things going back to R14 or so "that still haven't been fixed" ... but that's the app they have to live in. It doesn't do everything as they want, but it does enough to get them by. It's still to them a useful tool, no matter that some things are broken.
So ... that's the app they need to use. Unless of course, they wanna buy a Baselight system. And ... you do NOT load Baselight on your computer. You buy a "turnkey" system from them, a computer with Baselight installed by them. For many thousands of dollars ... something like three choices, $12G, $15G, $18G. And they ship that computer to your door. Seriously.
And THEN you also pay a steep yearly fee past that. And yep, I know colorists who are working in Baselight, and love it. A different sales model, and probably the most stable colorist tool out there. Also about the most expensive except for a couple others that not hardly anyone even knows about.
I don't see anything confusing here. Are there things I want changed? Well, duh, in both Premiere and Resolve. So? Many of my colorist friends are really expecting "another bad new version" of Resolve, because they feel BM has been trying to go after the editing/YouTube crowd over the last version or two. And they feel BM has (almost) totally neglected the color page. Though that ColorWarper is a cool tool.
Some think that R17 was so clearly delivered for the social-media/YouTube crowd that BM has to give more 'love' to color in R18.
I dunno. No clue at all. We'll all find out what Adobe and BlackMagic are doing as it finally rolls out. As always.
You are still very confused. BRAW is not the issue and never was. You have a one track mind that is incapable of seeing the bigger picture. It is the fact that Adobe is not keeping up with the competition. There is a free plugin for BRAW but as Kevin stated BRAW is not official supported. I don't even use BRAW but unlike you I wanted to see if the complaints for the latest upgrade were valid. I can say without hesitation I am have some issues. I am not saying everyone is having issues.
The fact that Adobe's number are going up is irrelevant. I am sure Resolve's numbers are going up. Look at how many people on YouTube have switched from Premeire Pro to Resolve. Some of these people do post production work for a living. The question to ask if Adobe Premiere Pro is a better product than Resolve, Edius or FCPX. Stop defending Adobe by posting about Baselight systems that cost thousands of dollars? Those comments are easy to refute. Instead post a valid response to the paragraph below.
We pay a monthly fee for the CC products. Stay focused and validate or justify how paying a monthly fee is better than paying an inexpensive one time fee. Explain how paying a monthly fee for software that lags behind the competition is better than paying a one time fee for software that is cutting edge. That is the real issues. Does Adobe offer a better product at a better price than the competition? Please address the question at hand and please stay focused when responding.
I want Adobe to make money but I think a one time fee of $49.99 for the entire CC followed by a yearly fee of $19.99 a year would be more competitive. Or simply charge $1.99 yearly fee for Premiere Pro, AE, Photshop Audition etc.