Camera: 5DmkIII
Lens: Mir-1B 2.8/37mm
MagicLantern version: magiclantern-crop3x.2017Jan13.5D3123
Shot at 60fps and 10bit
I hope you like it,
Thanks for watching.
pako bagur
http://pakobagur.com
Great choice of choosing M42 lenses! So particular soft and dreamy! But with dreamy stuff like that I would use stabilization, Warp or so. Best, David
Hello! Excellent color! Question, was this stretched in post?
Oh wait 1x1 mode, you didn't have to stretch. Sorry I didn't see that!
Nice video !
I would like to ask you, how did you adjust your 5Dm3 to slowmo without stretch ?
Hi,
Thanks for the kind comments.
This was shot full frame at 1920x648 and then stretched 167% vertically in post.
I had my camera set to 1280x60fps in the Canon menu. No crop, FPS override at 60fps, 10bpp, and 1920x648 resolution inside MagicLantern. This way I managed to record around 10 to 12 seconds of continuous footage in my old and trusty Komputerbay 1000x CFcard, before it stopped recording because of a dropped frame.
I used the crop3x build from the Experiments page (http://builds.magiclantern.fm/experiments.html), because it's the only one with the option of 10bpp recording for the 5DmkIII 1.2.3 (AFAIK, I might be wrong).
The ability to record at 10bpp is awesome, file size is much more manageable inside the camera, and quality wise I was quite impressed, and I didn't have any problems with it. I used the latest version of mlv_dump from the Utilities page (http://builds.magiclantern.fm/utilities.html).
Quote from: D_Odell on January 23, 2017, 01:14:09 PM
But with dreamy stuff like that I would use stabilization, Warp or so.
I totally agree that I should have warpStabilized all those shots.
Thanks again!
pako bagur
http://pakobagur.com
There is something strange.. the maximum (usable) height of 60 fps and 1920 x 632. It records at 1920x672 but there is a black border above making it usable only 1920x632.
This film shown at "full screen" has a dimension of 1920x800 (aprox). So I suspect that they actually cropped the 1920x672 in the center to 1516 x 632 and then stretched to 1920x800.
Oopps: ha ha the explanation was posted while I was typing.. I guess I was right.. Looks pretty cool!
edit: Just to clarify.. I thought that he had scaled from a crop recording but according to the explanation above he has just done a vertical stretch which means he did not use any crop and therefore the recording was not a 1:1.
Oh wow okay I was wrong! This looked really great! It didn't look stretched. Well Done