QuoteAudionut:
Is the code just truncating bits, or is it compressing them into the remaining?
edit: The OP states that the bits are being compressed.
Curious to know what kind of compression it is. Great work, I'm very excited.
Etiquette, expectations, entitlement...
@autoexec_bin | #magiclantern | Discord | Reddit | Server issues
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Show posts MenuQuoteAudionut:
Is the code just truncating bits, or is it compressing them into the remaining?
edit: The OP states that the bits are being compressed.
Quote from: ItsMeLenny on March 02, 2014, 01:43:09 AMThat's what I thought, but it's not.
Every resulting nonraw image is made of 4 bayer pixels merged into 1 pixel. A Red a Green a Green and a Blue.
Quote from: lomka on November 01, 2013, 01:39:03 PMIt exists and they call it "speed booster" but the flange distance is too big to do so on canons.
i think it would be cool if some of the companys made adapter for ml crop modes to match focal lenght of non crop one, like taking lens closer to the sensor with magnifying glass or something(like fx and dx lenses)
Quote from: Wlad81 on October 26, 2013, 07:35:49 PMThat multiplication looks allright.
What is the algorythm of calculating the size (in bytes) of the one minute video file depending on the video resolution? Is that, for instance, (1592*1062*14*24*60)/8?
Quote from: maxotics on October 07, 2013, 12:57:31 AM
@araucaria Please don't take this the wrong way. I am not knocking the GH2, GH3 or any other consumer H.264 video camera. I have a couple. For many types of situations they are perfect.
However, there are many people who have only shot with a GH2 and don't understand how RAW video is different, much different. Each frame of the 50D is say 1728x972, or 1,679,616 pixels. Each pixel (red, green or blue) has a value of 256, 1 byte. There are 24 frames a second, or 40 megabytes per second. That is all real color information.
Even when the GH2 is running the highest bitrate hack, it's at 175Mbits, that's BITs not BYTES. In bytes that 175/8 or 22 Megabytes.
How can a camera that saves 22 megabytes of color data per second match a 40 megabyte camera? There are many people that would argue that those numbers are distorted (the 50D can actually go quite higher). In any case, no one would question the dynamic range difference between the cameras.
Again, I'm not saying one can't shoot great video with the GH2. Many have. But it's dis-information to say one can get the same dynamic range with a GH2 over a 50D. You can't grade in color data that just isn't there. This is obvious to anyone who has shot both.
Again, not saying your advice, in general, isn't good. It may be the best advice for that reader.
QuoteBut it's dis-information to say one can get the same dynamic range with a GH2 over a 50DWhere is this coming from?
Quote from: tmte on October 07, 2013, 12:09:41 AM
Hey guys! Just joined to forum to say thanks to the guys who've been working so hard on the hacks. The developments are honestly amazing, I just sold me t3i and will be scooping up a 50d with some MF glass pretty soon.
I downloaded a 50d movie earlier called "kiss" off vimeo and played around with the CC to see what I could do. Even after compression the flexibility is nuts.
Here's the original https://vimeo.com/67351221
Quote from: FilmPerson on October 06, 2013, 09:43:49 AMYou can do that with all resolutions as long as you got a good 1000x card. So you can film in maximum full crop resolution which is 1584*1030 (or something like that) and 1920x1080, the first one is perfectly continuous and the second one is almost continuous. So you will get a lot more than 1.5minutes.
Thanks for the info on the other cameras, still researching my options. 50d grading is a dream though, so I'm really leaning towards that at the moment.
While I'm here, what's the highest resolution you guys have managed to record at if you had to record for 1min-1.5 min? I'm using this camera for narrative film and I'd like to have semi-long takes as an option. And could I possible change the aspect ratio from 16:9 to something like 2:39:1 so I could record longer, while still having it look like a film? Apologize if these are stupid questions, still making my way through the scattered documentation!
Quote from: Andy600 on September 21, 2013, 06:41:48 PMNot really, the only diference is that the noise in lineskipping looks more static to me (I refer to normal luminosity noise, not with high isos and darkness).
@araucaria thanks for heads-up and the pic. You got that lens for a steal of a price
Just out of curiosty, why did you shoot 1920 and not something closer to 1440 x 1080? Just wondering if that would change any of the characteristics of the unsqueezed imaged.
I'm a bit puzzled too about the noise you mentioned as it's still capturing pixels in crop and non-crop but one has skipping. Are you saying that lineskipping actually looks better than 1:1 crop video?
Page created in 0.096 seconds with 14 queries.