Cutsio Blog

ARRICORE vs ProRes 4444 XQ on Alexa 35 Xtreme: Which Acquisition Format Should You Choose?

Compare ARRICORE and ProRes 4444 XQ on the Alexa 35 Xtreme for fast-turnaround productions — data rates, grading flexibility, metadata handling, and post pipeline implications.

Should you shoot ARRICORE or ProRes 4444 XQ on the Alexa 35 Xtreme?

Shoot ARRICORE when you need flexible exposure index, white balance, and tint adjustments in post with a lower data rate than ARRIRAW, and when your NLE and dailies pipeline have verified ARRICORE decoding. Shoot ProRes 4444 XQ when you need maximum compatibility across post software, immediate editability without transcoding, and consistent performance in fast-turnaround workflows.

The Alexa 35 Xtreme offers both ARRICORE and ProRes 4444 XQ as acquisition formats. ARRICORE is ARRI's RGB codec for ALEXA 35 Xtreme: 18-bit linear ALEV4 sensor data stored in a 13-bit RGB logarithmic Sensor Log file, with a lower data rate than ARRIRAW. ProRes 4444 XQ is Apple's highest-quality mezzanine codec, offering excellent image quality with broad software compatibility. The choice between them depends on your post pipeline's need for ARRI metadata flexibility versus the simplicity of a widely editable format.

Working with raw camera footage? Check out How to Build a Searchable Library From ARRIRAW, RED R3D, and ProRes Footage.

How do the data rates and storage requirements compare?

ARRICORE and ProRes 4444 XQ have different data rate profiles. ARRICORE is approximately 50% smaller than ARRIRAW but still larger than ProRes 4444 XQ at equivalent resolutions.

| Format | Resolution | Data Rate (24 fps) | Per Hour | Per 10-Hour Day (3:1 ratio) |

| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |

| ARRICORE | 4.6K Open Gate | ~0.38 GB/s | ~1.35 TB | ~2.4 TB |

| ARRICORE | 4K 16:9 | ~0.28 GB/s | ~1.0 TB | ~1.8 TB |

| ProRes 4444 XQ | 4.6K Open Gate | ~0.30 GB/s | ~1.1 TB | ~2.0 TB |

| ProRes 4444 | 4.6K Open Gate | ~0.20 GB/s | ~720 GB | ~1.3 TB |

| ProRes 422 HQ | 4.6K Open Gate | ~0.12 GB/s | ~432 GB | ~780 GB |

ARRICORE files are approximately 25% larger than ProRes 4444 at the same resolution, but approximately 50% smaller than ARRIRAW. The data rate difference between ARRICORE and ProRes 4444 XQ is relatively small — approximately 25% more data for ARRICORE at Open Gate resolution.

For a 20-day feature with a 3:1 shooting ratio, ARRICORE at 4.6K Open Gate requires approximately 48 TB of raw footage. ProRes 4444 XQ requires approximately 40 TB. The 8 TB difference is meaningful but not a deciding factor for most productions.

How does the grading flexibility compare?

The fundamental difference between ARRICORE and ProRes 4444 XQ is post-production parameter control. ARRICORE retains non-destructive ISO, white balance, and color tint as metadata adjustments applied through the REVEAL color pipeline. ProRes 4444 XQ bakes the camera's debayer and color processing into the file.

| Grading Property | ARRICORE | ProRes 4444 XQ |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Exposure index adjustment | Flexible post adjustment | Baked into the recorded ProRes image |

| White balance adjustment | Flexible post adjustment | Baked into the recorded ProRes image |

| Color tint adjustment | Flexible post adjustment | Baked into the recorded ProRes image |

| Exposure recovery | More decoder-level flexibility | Limited to image-level grading |

| Color science | REVEAL / LogC4 workflow | ARRI LogC4 ProRes workflow |

| Bit depth | 13-bit RGB logarithmic Sensor Log | 12-bit (4444 XQ) |

| Look file support | ALF4 metadata support | Look handling depends on recording and post settings |

For colorists, the practical difference is most visible when exposure index or white balance was not perfectly set on set. An ARRICORE clip gives the post team more decoder-level flexibility through ARRI's REVEAL pipeline metadata. A ProRes 4444 XQ clip is still high quality, but white balance and exposure changes are image-level corrections rather than capture-parameter adjustments.

For correctly-exposed footage with accurate white balance, the visual difference between ARRICORE and ProRes 4444 XQ in a standard Rec.709 grade is minimal.

Which format offers better NLE and post software compatibility?

ProRes has the broadest compatibility of any professional codec — every major NLE, color grading application, and VFX tool supports ProRes 4444 XQ natively. ARRICORE is newer and requires ARRI SDK support in each application.

| Software | ARRICORE | ProRes 4444 XQ |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| DaVinci Resolve | Verify current ARRI SDK support | Yes (native) |

| Avid Media Composer | Verify current AMA/plugin support | Yes (native) |

| Adobe Premiere Pro | Verify current ARRI/plugin support | Yes (native) |

| Final Cut Pro | Limited | Yes (native) |

| Baselight | Verify current SDK support | Yes (native) |

| Nuke | SDK-dependent | Yes (native) |

| After Effects | SDK-dependent | Yes (native) |

For fast-turnaround productions where multiple post vendors may handle the footage, ProRes 4444 XQ eliminates compatibility risk. Every post house can open ProRes files without installing additional plugins or SDKs. ARRICORE requires each vendor to verify that their software version includes ARRICORE support through the ARRI SDK.

How does each format fit into a cloud dailies pipeline?

Both formats can be ingested into Cutsio's dailies pipeline, but through different upload paths.

ARRICORE requires the enterprise raw ingestion add-on because it is an ARRI RGB codec that needs format-specific decoding on the server side. The native .mxf files are uploaded and transcoded to streamable review assets with Visual Intelligence indexing.

ProRes 4444 XQ can be uploaded through Cutsio's standard upload pipeline because ProRes is already a playable, edit-friendly format. The files are ingested directly as streamable review assets without additional transcoding.

The pipeline comparison:

| Workflow Step | ARRICORE | ProRes 4444 XQ |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Upload method | Enterprise add-on | Standard upload |

| Server-side transcode | Yes (ARRICORE decoding) | Optional (direct streaming possible) |

| Original file retention | Yes (attached for download) | Yes (attached for download) |

| Visual Intelligence | Available | Available |

| Time to first review | Minutes (post-upload transcode) | Near-instant |

| Conform source | Download original ARRICORE .mxf | Download original ProRes .mov |

The practical difference is time to first review. ProRes files are available for streaming almost immediately after upload because they do not require format-specific transcoding. ARRICORE files need a brief processing window for the cloud transcode. Once streamable review assets are generated, both formats can deliver a consistent review experience if the input color transform and look metadata are handled correctly.

When should a production choose ARRICORE over ProRes 4444 XQ?

ARRICORE is the better choice when:

• The production needs non-destructive parameter control for ISO, white balance, and tint
• The post pipeline already supports ARRICORE through verified SDK integration
• The production is shooting on Alexa 35 Xtreme and wants the smallest raw-like file footprint
• ALF4 look metadata must be preserved non-destructively through the entire pipeline
• The DIT workflow benefits from the MXF-based metadata structure

ProRes 4444 XQ is the better choice when:

• Fast turnaround requires immediate editing without any transcoding
• Multiple post vendors with different software configurations handle the footage
• The production is shooting for broadcast or streaming delivery with tight deadlines
• The post house has not yet verified ARRICORE SDK support
• The production runs on Final Cut Pro, which has limited ARRICORE support

For productions that cannot decide, a hybrid approach is practical: shoot ARRICORE for primary A-cam coverage and ProRes 4444 XQ for B-cam or quick-turnaround scenes. Both formats can be ingested into the same Cutsio library and indexed by the same Visual Intelligence engine.

FAQ

Is ARRICORE visually distinguishable from ProRes 4444 XQ in a blind test?

In a correctly-exposed Rec.709 grade, most viewers cannot distinguish between ARRICORE and ProRes 4444 XQ in a blind comparison. The difference becomes visible in extreme grading adjustments — aggressive exposure recovery, highlight reconstruction, or heavy color manipulation — where ARRICORE's non-destructive parameter control provides cleaner results.

Can ARRICORE and ProRes 4444 XQ clips be mixed on the same timeline?

Yes, once the software stack has been verified. Both formats can sit in the same LogC4/REVEAL color-managed project, but test the ARRICORE decode path and ProRes color tagging before shoot day.

Does Cutsio support both formats in the same library?

Yes. ARRICORE files ingested through the enterprise add-on and ProRes files uploaded through standard upload can coexist in the same Cutsio library, indexed by the same Visual Intelligence engine, and available through the same share links.

Which format is better for archival masters?

ARRICORE is better for archival because it preserves non-destructive parameter control and uses the MXF container with embedded metadata. However, ARRICORE support must be verified for future software versions. ProRes 4444 XQ has a longer track record of archival compatibility. For long-term archival, consider retaining both the ARRICORE camera original and a ProRes 4444 XQ mezzanine.

Is ARRICORE available on cameras other than the Alexa 35 Xtreme?

ARRICORE is an ALEXA 35 Xtreme recording codec. It is not available on the original ALEXA 35, ALEXA Mini LF, or earlier ARRI cameras. Productions using those cameras continue to choose between ARRIRAW and ProRes.