Messages

Looks like you are not setting a proper white balance on your 50D or it could be the fact your just doing too much processing in post.  The last scene in the first video of this thread.  i can tell the white balance is off.  It's too green.

[\]

You are missing the "\" before "*.ufraw"
ufraw-batch C:\Users\Johnnie\Desktop\Timelapse\ufrawconvert\*.ufraw --out-type=jpeg

Still doesn't work.  i open the batch and it flashes for half a second and does nothing.

I cannot get the Batch to work at all.  I've done everything it said.  I just don't get it lol.  Here's what my batch says. and yes i have UFRaw installed.

cd C:\Program Files (x86)\UFRaw\bin
ufraw-batch C:\Users\Johnnie\Desktop\Timelapse\ufrawconvert*.ufraw --out-type=jpeg

Nice work but too long.  Speed it up 50%. also looks like there was too much sharpness applied in a few shots.

Looks decent,  that focus thingy is super annoying and unnecessary.  Use manual Focus.

sRaw helps with video memory but it may corrupt pictures. Make sure you set it back to Raw before taking pics.

That was the first thing i did.  It didn't change anything.  re installing ML fixed it.

[EDIT:]

I've been messing with ML Nightly Builds on one card and 2.3 on my main card.  I have a 600D and just now i noticed my CR2 files are not displaying a thumbnail in Windows and the file size is 10MB - 11MB on all the images.  I then uninstalled Magic Lantern and took a picture and now it shows the Thumbnail and the proper file size ie 20MB - 30MB.

Any ideas as to what is causing this?

EDIT:  I just uninstalled Magic Lantern then re installed it and that fixed the issue.   

Sharp enough or not, I still trade sharpness for dynamic range and the possibility to work on the footage the way you want:

Fair enough,  But i think sharpness and Resolution matters just as much.  That's why you shoot raw,  So you can see every little detail in someones eyeball.  Its like people saying it doesn't matter what camera you have,  As long as you capture the moment.  That's True,  But that moment would be even better if it was shot with lets say a 1DX vs a point and shoot. Meaning it looks great,  but imagine Higher Quality. 

A few thoughts on this subject. Keep in mind that these lower tier cams come with lower tier glass as well. A stock 18-55 will display a somewhat negligible difference, but L glass or equivalent will capture color and sharpness much better for raw to work with.
I've shot numerous h264 videos with nice glass, max bitrate and great picture styles. I still prefer working with raw footage for the simple fact that the color is so much easier to denoise, correct and grade. If its a serious paid project then h264 for stability. Raw for everything else.

The resolution is too small to upscale properly.  Of course shooting RAW gives you more Post process power for Rich nice Color.  But I'm still shooting H264 because it does look better in terms of Sharpness compared to the two.  A lot of people think because it's RAW,  you can do whatever you want to it.  You can!  But not upscale from 960x540 to 1920x1080p There's just not enough detail in that small 960x540 image even in RAW. Everyone is saying H264 upscales,  well it does a hell of a better job than RAW apparently right now.   The way the RAW footage is being upscaled just looks pixelated to me instead of being sharp or slightly blurry.  If we got it to like 1600xXXX than it would upscale to 1080p nicely,  but 960x540 just isn't going to work guys.  It sounds like the Camera just can't handle it.  Keep it up though.  I see 1280x720p atleast coming hopefully. 

Please consider my request for 720 x 640 (8:9)

With a 2x scope and 24mm lens should look good 720 x 1280

also its the best vertical resolution !

Why on earth would you want Vertical?  We have Pro Cameras,  not Cheap Cell Phone Cameras.

I'm not expecting anything close to mkiii perfornance from the 600D, but if we're going back to 8 bit, just use stock video with bitrate maxed and gop3 frames. Besides, mjpeg was a no-go according to the devs.

Although this new 12/10 bit topic might do the trick.

Fair enough,  I agree with what 1% said in another thread.  we should have the option to set the Bit.  whether its, 14, 12, 10 or even 8.

Mjpeg is 8 bit. Nah, I'll stick with 14 bit.

If you want bigger, just buy a mkiii.

Well there you go,  Your expecting the same performance of a $3,000 Camera on a $400 Camera.  Yeah 14 bit is more color,  but the Camera is just not fast enough to handle that Quality at the reslution you want.   Therefore you lower the Quality of the Dng than you can properly up the reslution.  It's that simple. 

If the Camera Is not able to handle RAW 2k and up.  This may sound crazy,  But what about a 1DX style encode.  Motion JPEG?  It'll still be much higher Quality than what we get now from the 600D.

The Cards are just not fast enough to Handle the High Resolution.  I Can see 1280x720 Happening at the stable Frame rate but anything else is a stretch,  Also Upscaling the Video is a complete waste of time.  It just makes the Video look worse.  Yes it's a RAW Image but you cannot start with something Small and make it better,  You start with something Big and make it better.

Shot another Sunrise timelapse today & was very disappointed on how it came out.  It keeps  over exposing.  I get my Exposure,  which was 2 second exposure and take a picture every 3 seconds.  worked perfectly.  but once intervalometer & bulb ramping started,  after about 30 Pictures,  it starts to over expose. I tried EV 20, 10, & 5.  Didn't change anything,  than i set it to spot metering and focused for the Clouds.  Still didin't help.  The timelapse i shot before i started at night taking pictures at 5 second exposure and as sun rised,  my Settings changed.  It still started to over expose after a while,  but atleast it was working.  Idk it wasn't working right this time.  Yeah i'm shooting RAW but its so washed out in the clouds,  your not going to be able to recover that in Post.  I know once that sun peaks,  its going to be a little washed out.  But this was before it was peaking,  Also it doesn't correct the exposure.  You'd think it would correct the exposure in the next shot if the previous one was over exposed but it didn't so i had to keep stopping it after about 100 shots to fix the exposure which means on playback i'm going to have skips.  Any ideas?

It is off,  Would Auto Light Optimizer on Effect it too?

I did a search before posting.  Found nothing that related to what's wrong.  When in Video Mode on my 600D,  The Exposure never stays locked,  ill get my exposure and then it will Brighten like for example when i focus.  It's so annoying.  I know your supposed to Manually Focus in Video and i do but i do like to make sure im in Focus before turning it to Manual Focus.  and when i do Focus Automatically.  90% of the time it Over Exposes.  It's so Annoying.  Even during Video Recording,  Sometimes it will just go from a Perfect Exposure to an Over Exposed Image.  Any Ideas how this is happening?

I've been trying to Capture the Sunrise in my Complex,  and the Sun comes up right above the Complex Fountain.  So my goal is to Capture some Night Footage Timelapse then the Sunrise.  The Night shots came out great but when i did the Sunrise,  It started out nice but than i had to stop it because it got Washed out.  It kept over exposing.  and the sun wasn't even peaking yet.  So messing with that kinda messed up the Timelapse on playback.  There's no tutorial for this Feature so idk if i'm doing it right.   I set it to Sunrise and Rampspeed was set to 0.50 the first time,  than 0.100 the second after the mess up.  My settings went from 5 Second Night exposure to
1-3 Second Sunrise Exposures.   I Mean everything worked,  ISO,  Aperture,  and Shutter Changed,  but i just don't understand why it overexposed.  My other mistake was only doing 100 Shots at a time because i didn't want it to Overexpose,  But it did after about 300 Shots.  Any Tips?

ISO + Complexity affect the actual rate. That card probably doesn't have enough sustained write to keep up. 45MB/s is just a burst read speed for marketing.

You need something that can do 18-20MBytes/s sequential write to get the highest bit rates/qualities. Pretty much sandisk "pro" cards and a few other tested exceptions in the SDXC realm.

It will never be consistent. Some scenes MAX quality makes 70mbps, some scenes it makes 199mbps. Difference was worth ~$60 patriot card for me, $180 pro card... that I don't know. Good cards should be giving you "2.0x" at least under most conditions.

But.... MJPEG will need high rates too so you're kinda future proofing.

Ok,  So what kind of Card do you Recommend or think i should get?

Do a bitrate test and tell us what the results are.

You mean like Bitrate Info?

[95MB/s]

I have a T3i with a 32GB Sandisk Extreme 45MB/s Card.   I can Comfortably take it to 1.4x CBR, but i can also take it to 3.0x "Sometimes"...  Sometimes it stops,  Sometimes it will let me record for 5 Minutes Straight.  I Just don't get it,  All i know is if i take the ISO to 1250,  It stops immediately.  So keeping it at Low ISO's Obviously helps but it's still not Consistent like 1.4x even if i Disable Audio.  So my Question is,  Is it My Camera or the SD Card?  And would a Sandisk Extreme 64GB 95MB/s Card Help with this or will it just be a waste of Money?