Description image

Working with Canon C500 RAW and the Convergent Design Gemini 4:4:4

With each new camera comes a slightly different workflow, and the situation is no different with the Canon C500. We already talked a bit about the interesting way in which Canon is producing a RAW image with that camera (aside from being completely uncompressed), but we didn’t get into what you’ll actually need to do in order to begin working with this footage. Click through to check out a great video from Andy Shipsides of AbelCine on importing footage that has been recorded with the Convergent Design Gemini 4:4:4.

First, if you haven’t seen it, we’ve got a nice overview of the actual device itself using the Arri Alexa:

Here is Andy talking about the C500 RAW and the Gemini:


Each time you work with a new device there will always be considerations about the actual workflow you’ll need to use to get your footage in working order. Unless you’re recording to ProRes or DNxHD, most cameras have their own quirks about the way the footage needs to be ingested, but as we’ve seen lately, newer NLEs are actually getting better and better at natively supporting any codec out there, so that you can drop them right on a timeline. At the moment, the data rate for the Canon C500 RAW 4K mode is extremely high, so if you want to shoot RAW with that camera, you’ll probably have to convert to some other format to actually be able to play it back (just like with the Blackmagic Cinema Camera).

You may have seen it already, but this was the very first film shot on the C500 recorded completely in RAW:

The Gemini 4:4:4 is currently the least expensive recorder right now capable of handling the C500 4K RAW (whether you’re buying or renting the recorder), so for the time being, that’s probably going to be the way most people get their uncompressed RAW from the camera.

What do you guys think? Are you planning on shooting RAW with the C500 for a future project?

Link: Gemini 4:4:4 Workflow: Importing Footage — AbelCine

Related Posts

  1. What Good's a 4K Ready Camera Without a 4K Recording Device? Convergent Design's Gemini RAW Does 4K
  2. Canon C500 is Shipping, but Canon's RAW Implementation is Unlike Any You've Seen Before
  3. Convergent Design Announces Gemini 4:4:4 Uncompressed Field Recorder/Monitor for $6k

COMMENT POLICY

We’re all here for the same reason: to better ourselves as writers, directors, cinematographers, producers, photographers... whatever our creative pursuit. Criticism is valuable as long as it is constructive, but personal attacks are grounds for deletion; you don't have to agree with us to learn something. We’re all here to help each other, so thank you for adding to the conversation!

Description image 18 COMMENTS

  • Raphael Wood on 12.27.12 @ 5:55PM

    If only Canon didn’t overprice their cameras… It’s truly sad since this seems like a great camera.

  • RaphaeI is right…I don’t see the point of this Camera (for making movies – docu…maybe) at the price BHphoto sell it for. Sony’s forthcoming F5 and F55 and the current prices of the Red Epic seem superior.

    • Ug! You can buy the Sony F5 AND the external recorders and save yourself nearly $5,000 over this Canon.

      • But…but…it can do 50mbs MPEG2 internally! :P

        • lol

          • 50 MBps internally is a valid point for everybody shooting documentary. I wouldn’tt want a recorder with dangling cables hanging from my camera when I shoot docu!

            And about the price point: you forget that a lot of dops who are using a camera in this category will not use camera A over camera B because camera A is 5K bucks cheaper. They will say “I need the C500 because I love the look and I show you why” and then they will get the budget for it.

      • And pay Sony more than the $5000 in proprietary media…

        • Good point there – very true. But even if price became a wash – the F5 crushes the C500 in every spec.

          • As everyone knows specs dont make a camera or an image…and Canon is known for having a far superior image quality than Sony.

          • Raphael Wood on 12.28.12 @ 6:39AM

            At the risk of seeming like defending Canon, which I’m not, specs are specs, we still need to see more real user experience from the new sony cameras to make a verdict in my opinion. After all specs can be tricky, according to specs the Red One has 13 stops of Dynamic Range, it turns out that’s not true. One of the things that always surprised me with the C300 was it’s latitude, despite the footage being 8 bit , and the C500 seems to have built on that and improved, you seem capable to get a lot of different and beautiful color information out of it. Looking forward to the Sony cameras but the C500 really makes me regret that it wasn’t made by a company with better sales and marketing policies, like Sony or even Red. You probably already know this, just merely summarizing the obvious.

          • Kind of a sweeping statement Peter. Image quality being the subjective thing that it is. All the comments on here these days seem to be about one camera crushing another for image quality, for specs, blah blah blah. If we only ever used cameras by proxy through other people’s reviews or footage we see on Vimeo the world would be a very strange place but that appears to be the way now. The only thing getting crushed now is any sense of reality. The end user doesn’t give two craps what camera you shot on. When did we get so mind numbingly obsessed with specs and prices? I love the debate I genuinely do but with manufacturers leasing a new camera every five minutes it’s all getting a bit crazy now. Can’t we just celebrate the best work created and stop obsessing over how many stops of compressed 4:2:2 ergonomic RAW carrot juice went into each shot?

          • Raphael Wood on 12.28.12 @ 6:02PM

            Robin Schmidt, yours is a valid point but this is part of this industry, does Christopher Nolan do any different for instance? He defends film almost in cult fashion without actually being a DOP or anything camera related for that matter, when diehard famous DOP fans of film have moved on and acknowledged it for what it is, merely another tool. My point is simple, this happens at every level of the industry and actually moves it forward, that’s just how it is, if it wasn’t the case you would still only have film to shoot with and therefore no choice whatsoever. So yes, now you have many choices that allow you to create the beauty that is cinema, on any level, but don’t forget that it was this competition that allowed you to have a choice in the first place.

          • Interesting point and very true, for the most part. I’ve onl shot a few projects on film but I still felt like we had plenty of choice in terms of which camera we used, which stock, 16 vs 35 and that was a different game altogether. It should also probably be mentioned that almost everything shot on these new cameras won’t ever appear in the cinema. We’re all just pushing for everything to be more cinematic. The beauty that is cinema is the cinema experience and that’s about audiences and screenings more than it is about cameras. Documentary can be as dramatic as fiction so really what I boils down to is that feeling you get when something’s done really really well. I’ll still stick my neck out and say that, for the most part, that can surmount any perceived weakness in acquisition. I’m a fan of technology, it’s opened so many new doors and helped me fall in love with my job again for which I’m massively thankful. It’s also a fidgety little bitch that won’t sit still and chatters in your ear clamouring for attention the whole time while you constantly worry that it’s doing something you’re not aware of but very much should be. As a new father that feelings is all too familiar!

          • Raphael Wood on 12.29.12 @ 10:03AM

            Couldn’t have put it better myself, and oh yes you’re right, I was merely generalizing, you have a lot of choice within the film format, as you probably understood I was merely saying we now have a new choice of format, which is digital and that leads to many more choices of equipment.
            I guess that what is sad is that people bother with format wars, cameras vs cameras, etc, it’s good to know the cabability of your equipment but defending it almost dogmatically shouldn’t be necessary at all, a tool is only a tool and the most important of all is creativity.
            Congratulations on becoming a father mate!

      • Or you could not buy a camera at all, and just rent the tools that work for the job. 1)canon 4k raw is available today for cheaper than sony (f65). 2) some dp’s prefer canon’s gamma profiles to red (because skin tones suck from red). 3)The 50 mb/s on board recording works at the same time as the gemini, so you can record 2 copies of your proxies (with luts) while you record your raw (you can cut out resolve from the dailies process). 4)The c500 delivers great low-light performance. 5) you’re a scrub.

  • (Jaguars) that’s a lovely film.

  • The Tom Cruise upcoming release ‘Oblivion’ was shot with this amazing future is here now monitor with built in SxS card recorder. What a thing! Just two years ago this technology was all but unachievable for any but the highest budgets. Archiving and workflow and rough edit files are the elements lagging behind this amazingly fast moving quality oriented technology innovations. I believe we have achieved the quality standards anyone needs for projection quality, driven by non-proprietary innovations like these following the original path set by S2 / Codex so many years ago.