Magic Lantern Forum

Using Magic Lantern => General Help Q&A => Topic started by: Milk and Coffee on May 09, 2020, 08:09:40 PM

Title: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 09, 2020, 08:09:40 PM
On the 5DMKIII, ssing the experimental 10/12-bit RAW video: "magiclantern-raw_video_10bit_12bit.2019Mar24.5D3123" build.

I can get 1920x1280 (3:2) 12bit continuous RAW/.MLV with sound

That said, on my 5DmkIII, it’s getting the full width of the sensor (I believe? Yes?).

Is it pixel binning/skipping to get the full width? Or is it super sampling the whole sensor?

Also, with the "mlv_snd" module, do I still get sound if I’m doing a FPS override at an even 24.00fps? (FPS override says that it disables sound.)

Thanks all!
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: yourboylloyd on May 09, 2020, 10:49:29 PM
It's getting the full horizontal width (and height). I think it divides the sensor by three with the 3x3 binning.

5760 total horizontal pixels/3 =1920
3840 total vertical pixels/3 = 1280

And why not just use canon's 24p? You wouldn't ever have to worry about that. Use the RAW calculator to learn what you can record continuously. I would stick to 10bit honestly.

Raw calculator = https://rawcalculator.netlify.app/calculator_desktop
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 10, 2020, 06:37:44 AM
Thanks for the response! I like to shoot a flat 24fps because I want to follow proper film standards and because I also create my own music and can cut perfectly to 72bpm, 96bpm, 120bpm.

In some examples, I’ve seen 10bit get quite noisy in the shadows and thus results in lost dynamic range. Have you had good results with 10bit?
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Kharak on May 10, 2020, 12:10:34 PM
Yes, full width and height 1920x1280 3x3 Pixel Binned.

With FPS override you get sound recording in RAW, if you have sound enabled in RAW options.

FPS override disables sound of h264 recording.

And if you use canon “24p” its 23.976 and crop mode will be recorded at 29.976.

And i easily have continues 14 bit 1920x1280. If you have problem with getting continues at 14 bit, you might need a faster card.
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 10, 2020, 05:51:55 PM

And if you use canon “24p” its 23.976 and crop mode will be recorded at 29.976.

I’m a little confused. If you use Canon “24p” you get NTSC 30fps?

When you say “crop mode,” is that the “crop_rec“ experimental build?
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Walter Schulz on May 10, 2020, 06:10:11 PM
24p = 23.976 fps

"Crop mode" is what you get by pressing loupe/zoom/magnify button. It's included in nightly builds, too. This mode doesn't use sensor's full width
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 10, 2020, 06:56:51 PM

And if you use canon “24p” its 23.976 and crop mode will be recorded at 29.976.

Is “29.976” mentioned above a typo? If your set to canon’s 24p (23.976,) and when using crop mode, you get NTSC 30p instead?

Or it’s a typo?
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Walter Schulz on May 10, 2020, 07:23:01 PM
No, that's what the man said.
In crop mode it doesn't really matter which video mode you selected. You are doing 29.976 fps anyway. You can tune it, though.

Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Kharak on May 10, 2020, 08:45:19 PM
Crop mode as in pressing the loupe/magnifier, not “crop_rec4k” modes, you need fps override to “tame the beast” when you crop. Because in canon firmware, when you press loupe x5/x10, the liveview fps rate goes to “30p” regardless of your canon fps settings.

But as a rule of thump when shooting raw just use fps override all the time, except when shooting in some of the crop_rec modes. Like 50/60p 3x3 crop_rec freezes camera when using fps override, but 1920 1:1, 1920x1920 1:1 and 3.5k center can handle fps override. The others i dont use, so dont know.
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 10, 2020, 08:47:55 PM
In all modes, when using FPS override: Is FPS override a 'true' frames per second? If I set it to "24.00fps, Exact FPS" is the camera actually recording a proper 24.00 even frames in a second? Or is it interpolated/faked? IE: If I set FPS Override to "24.00," is the camera really recording a 29.976fps and dropping frames from 29.976fps resulting in 24.00fps?
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Walter Schulz on May 10, 2020, 08:51:44 PM
You can come very close. And remember that 24p is 23.976 fps.
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 10, 2020, 09:04:13 PM
You can come very close. And remember that 24p is 23.976 fps.

When I refer to "24.00fps," im setting FPS override at exactly at "24.00fps." I DONT want 23.976. I want an even 24.

Also, generally, when using FPS override: Is FPS override a 'true' frames per second? If I set it to "24.00fps, Exact FPS" is the camera actually recording a proper 24.00 even frames in a second? Or is it interpolated/faked? IE: If I set FPS Override to "24.00," is the camera really recording a 29.976fps and dropping frames from 29.976fps resulting in 24.00fps?
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Walter Schulz on May 10, 2020, 09:31:23 PM
Frame dropping: Strange concept.
Could be easily done in post and what can be easily done in post isn't worth the effort to implement it. Devs are not marketing driven...

You will however see a slight change in fps drifting around your setting if you dare to test it for yourself.
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 10, 2020, 09:44:23 PM
Thanks for the reply! I think you may have misunderstood me. What I meant was --- Does Magic Lantern record REAL/Exact FPS from "FPS Override?" Or is magic lantern achieving custom frame rates by dropping frames from canon's standard/default frame rates? Does that make sense? (It's just a general question about how magic lantern achieves FPS Override frame rates.)
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Walter Schulz on May 10, 2020, 10:04:56 PM
See answer above. First sentence.
Please take your cam and dive into it.

https://wiki.magiclantern.fm/camera_help#fps_override (needs some work/redo).
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 11, 2020, 05:29:05 AM
Thanks! But I still think I’m not articulating my question well enough! Anyway, I tested, and I’m getting a good 24.00fps sync with audio!
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 11, 2020, 05:44:01 AM
Is the 5DmkIII the only camera capable of capturing 1.00x crop RAW because of the sensor pixel dimensions?

Can we get perfect 1.00x crop on the 6D? 5DmkII? Since their sensor pixel dimensions don’t perfectly divide by 3 (for 3x3 pixel binning?)

According to this (https://rawcalculator.netlify.app/calculator_desktop) the 6D and 5DmkII sensors aren’t perfectly divisible by 3 resulting in 1.06x and 1.09x crops.
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: masc on May 11, 2020, 12:05:25 PM
You can have 1.0x crop with any ML camera (digital crop). Don't understand your calculation. Just the resolution differs slightly.
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Walter Schulz on May 11, 2020, 02:05:16 PM
I think he has another misconception about ML and "stock" using different sensor areas in non-crop mode.
And I think there is some misunderstanding about the term "1.00x crop" ... He is talking about native video resolution and I suppose you are talking about 1:1 crop mode.
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 11, 2020, 04:00:06 PM
Sorry, yes. I am referring to using the full sensor width. So 1.0x crop would be full frame/no crop.
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: reddeercity on May 12, 2020, 08:37:41 AM
Each camera has it own native resolution according to the sensor size and may be up-scaled to 1080p or not in h264 (.mov) canon firmware.
Magic Lantern does not upscale to any set size (e.g. 1080p) but just records the native raw resolution .
In non crop mode , or what we call it here on the forum 3x3 or FHD (Full HD)
e.g. 5D2:  the sensor size is 5616x3744 by canon info , do the math and you get 5616/3=1872 , but this is not right .
Canon also crop's the full sensor a little bit , the real size of the sensor is 5632x3750 wide! magic lantern unlocks the extra pixels .
So with the real size 5632/3=1877 ML report this as 1880x1250

So yes MLV record the full width of the sensor in 3x3(FHD) but that doesn't mean it records 1080p in raw !
The only camera that records a true 1920x1080(1280) is the 5D3 because canon made the sensor divisible by 3 to make 1920x1080p (so no up-scaling true 1920 etc. )
‎the 5D3 sensor size is 5760 × 3840 , 5760/3=1920 .

I hope I didn't confuse you .
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Levas on May 12, 2020, 10:15:57 AM
Edit, just saw this post of yours later, after I typed the response. So I guess it is caused by the ruleset in ML.
Edit2: I'm wondering though, where those lost 16 pixels are, ML rules calculates 1856 pixels for the 5d2, but those 16 pixels are not gone, they are either on the left side or the right side.
Maybe you can get those 16 pixels back by altering the black border offset for the 5d2, see post below. (those 16 pixels must be somewhere, either on the left or on the right, or both  :P)

https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=15487.msg227048#msg227048 (https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=15487.msg227048#msg227048)

@Reddeercity

Standard cr2 files and jpg's from the Canon 5d2 are 5616 pixels wide. (according to the internet, I don't have a 5d2 myself to verify  ???)
So the pixels and the image data are there to get 1872 pixels of wide resolution.
I could think of 2 things that prevent from getting 1872 resolution in ML.
Black borders are set too tight on the 5d2 in ML.
As you probably know, all camera's have some (covered) pixels on the borders off the sensor, probably to calculate noise or black level.
In the 'raw.c' file in ML, there are hardcoded offsets for each camera.
You could try lower the ' skip_left       = 160; ' to a value of 144 and see if you get real image data or just 16 more black pixels on the side.

Code: [Select]
        /**
         * The RAW file has unused areas, usually black; we need to skip them.
         *
         * To find the skip values, start with 0,
         * load the RAW in your favorite photo editor (e.g. ufraw+gimp),
         * then find the usable area, read the coords and plug the skip values here.
         *
         * Try to use even offsets only, otherwise the colors will be screwed up.
         */
        #ifdef CONFIG_5D2
        skip_top        = zoom ?   52 : 18;
        skip_left       = 160;
        #endif
       
        #ifdef CONFIG_5D3
        skip_top        = zoom ?   60 : mv720 ?  20 :   28;
        skip_left       = 146;
        skip_right      = 2;
        #endif

        #ifdef CONFIG_6D
        /* same skip offsets in 1080p and 720p; top/left bar is the same in x5 zoom as well */
        skip_top        = 28;
        skip_left       = 80;
        skip_right      = zoom ? 0  : 10;
        #endif

Another thing that could prevent the 1872 resolution from being available is that there are some rules build in ML that horizontal pixels must be dividable by 8 I think and there are some other rules that horizontal x vertical resolution must be dividable by 16 bytes.
Not sure why, could be that hardware needs it to be that, or that it is just faster because the hardware can move the data around more efficiently when it is dividable by 8 or 16.

If this parts prevent 1872 from being selectable, then I don't know how to fix it.

In mlv_lite.c it's this part about ruleset to get available resolution:
Code: [Select]
static REQUIRES(settings_sem)
void update_resolution_params()
{
    /* max res X */
    /* make sure we don't get dead pixels from rounding */
    int left_margin  = (raw_info.active_area.x1 + 7) & ~7;   /* ceil rounding to multiple of 8 pixels */
    int right_margin = (raw_info.active_area.x2 + 0) & ~7;   /* floor rounding */
    int max = (right_margin - left_margin);
   
    /* max image width is modulo 2 bytes and 8 pixels */
    /* (EDMAC requires W x H to be modulo 16 bytes) */
    /* (processing tools require W modulo 8 pixels for struct raw_pixblock) */
   
    max_res_x = max;
   
    /* max res Y */
    max_res_y = raw_info.jpeg.height & ~1;

Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 12, 2020, 04:18:57 PM

Canon also crop's the full sensor a little bit , the real size of the sensor is 5632x3750 wide! magic lantern unlocks the extra pixels .
So with the real size 5632/3=1877 ML report this as 1880x1250


So ML “reports” as 1880, but it’s actually 1877? Does that not cause an error with the file?

So it seems that the 5DMKIII and 6D, utilize the full width of their sensors because of the sensor’s native resolution is divisible by 32? And the 5DMKII has to “crop” out 16 pixels because of the black pixels and it’s imperfect division of 32?
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: reddeercity on May 13, 2020, 01:05:50 AM
@Levas , I have a 5D2 and yes a cr2 is 5616 but the FRSP is 5632 , and there must be some padding in canon firmware .
Also I check the Image dump from my 5D2 & 3x3 raw image is indeed 1880 not 1872 or 1877 as I said ,
there's 3 pixel from somewhere , maybe some padding ?
In the zip file there is 3 files the 3x3 ml raw dump , DNG ,  the converted dng ->.ppm file from exiftool & the converted .ppm -> .png
5D2_True_3x3__Sensor_Size_5-12-2020.zip (https://bitbucket.org/reddeercity/magic-lantern_10-12bit/downloads/5D2_True_3x3__Sensor_Size_5-12-2020.zip)
Code: [Select]
File Name                       : RAW-001.DNG
Camera Model Name               : Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Software                        : Magic Lantern
Subfile Type                    : Full-resolution Image
Image Width                     : 2040
Image Height                    : 1268
Strip Offsets                   : 33792
Samples Per Pixel               : 1
Rows Per Strip                  : 1268
Strip Byte Counts               : 4526760
X Resolution                    : 180
Y Resolution                    : 180
Default Crop Origin             : 0 0
Default Crop Size               : 1880 1250
Active Area                     : 18 160 1268 2040
Image Size                      : 2040x1268
So if you pixel peep there no missing pixels that I can see .

In the Old Raw_Rec module (pre-2016) We had 1880 wide , before the speed penalty was found in D5 cam .

Found a CR2 and
Code: [Select]
Record Mode                     : CR2
Canon Image Type                : Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Canon Image Width               : 5616
Canon Image Height              : 3744
Raw Jpg Size                    : Large
Cropped Image Width             : 5616
Cropped Image Height            : 3744
Sensor Width                    : 5792
Sensor Height                   : 3804
Sensor Left Border              : 168
Sensor Top Border               : 56
Sensor Right Border             : 5783
Sensor Bottom Border            : 3799
Color Data Version              : 6 (50D/5DmkII)
Exif Image Width                : 5616
Exif Image Height               : 3744
Image Size                      : 5616x3744
Important info about Sensor
Cropped Image Width             : 5616
Cropped Image Height            : 3744
Sensor Width                         : 5792
Sensor Height                        : 3804
Sensor Left Border                 : 168
Sensor Top Border                 : 56
Sensor Right Border               : 5783
Sensor Bottom Border            : 3799

Magic Lantern uses less of a off set 160 compared to canon's 168 and the vertical canon does 58 where ML uses 18 offset
Also I did a OB Zone test here (https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=19336.msg208519#msg208519) and it's 1880 so
mainly a coding issue . With Crop_Rec it's really a non issue now , with 1x3 , 3x1 etc. ....  :)
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 14, 2020, 03:21:45 PM
So looks like the 5D2 technically records about a 1.1x crop (3x3) in mlv. Is 1.1x correct? Is it smaller than that? If you could physically measure 36mm x 24mm of the 5D2 sensor, the active pixels used for capturing MLV 3x3, would be slightly smaller? Is this a negligible crop? Even if we could add the extra pixels, would there be much of a difference?
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Walter Schulz on May 14, 2020, 03:24:55 PM
I think we are all wondering where the number 1.1 comes from. Please share the steps of your calculation.
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Levas on May 14, 2020, 04:00:29 PM
The crop is neglible. You can record 1856 pixels wide, while full width is 1872 pixels.
So you only loose 16 pixels, on a total of 1872. That’s less then 1%. Nobody will notice.
Cropfactor is 1872/1856 = 1.009
So tecnically you would not even be lying if you say the 5d2 has a cropfactor of 1.0 ;)
Your 35mm lens becomes a 35 x 1.009 = 35.3mm lens 😋
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 14, 2020, 07:34:21 PM
I think we are all wondering where the number 1.1 comes from. Please share the steps of your calculation.

Hey Walter. If you look on this site, https://rawcalculator.netlify.app/calculator_desktop listed at the bottom is "crop factor." The "1.Xx" factor i'm using is also listed in sensor specifications of common camera reseller websites. IE: APS-C= 1.5x crop. Does that help clear things up?

@Levas, thanks for helping clear that up for me!! So technically speaking in 3x3 mode, the 6D can achieve a wider field of view than the 5D2 (since the 5D2 has this "black pixel" phenomenon?)
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Walter Schulz on May 14, 2020, 07:43:21 PM
Sorry, but it is completely not transparent what this crop factor means. Never paid attention to it before. Looks like it's just taking 1920 as 100 percent and using the horizontal pixel count for liveview to compute it. And that's just wrong and doesn't make any sense in uncropped mode.
You should ignore this number for modes not using crop.

And APS-C factor in Canon realm is 1.62.
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 14, 2020, 09:38:01 PM


And APS-C factor in Canon realm is 1.62.

Yes, I know. 1.5x was just an example. In other words I am referring to “Focal Length Multiplier” (AKA Crop Factor.)

And I think the ML RAW Calculator’s calculations are correct. At least to my math, the Focal Length Multiplier (Crop Factor) is calculating correctly based on the selected resolution setting. 
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Levas on May 14, 2020, 09:41:55 PM
@Levas, thanks for helping clear that up for me!! So technically speaking in 3x3 mode, the 6D can achieve a wider field of view than the 5D2 (since the 5D2 has this "black pixel" phenomenon?)

It's really nothing, it's less then 1%, it's a non-issue.
In real world, nobody could tell there are 16 pixels missing on the side.

But here some more to think about  ;D :
The 6d can use the whole sensor width, which is 1824 pixels in 3x3 mode.
The 5d2 can do 1856 pixels(without black border) in 3x3 mode.
So 5d2 has 32 pixels more in 3x3 mode...what do you want more pixels nobody will notice, or more field of view nobody will notice  :P
But there is more, search in google for the real sensor size of the 6d and you will find out it's not 36mm like the 5d2, but slightly smaller, the 6d has an 35.8mm wide sensor  ???
So we're missing slightly field of view on the full-frame 6d, have you ever heard anyone wine about that, exactly, it's so small, no problem  :P

But there is another catch here, what we call whole sensor width, is actually whole width of sensor used in photo mode.
But as we know, there are unused pixels on the side of the sensors, the black borders.
Canon 5d2 has a 160 pixels wide black column on the left side and the 6d 'only' has 80 black pixels wide column on the left side...

So if we all sum these up, I think it's fair to say they can both film in full frame a.k.a 1.0 crop factor  8)
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 15, 2020, 06:06:47 AM
@Levas thanks so much for all the great info! Very encouraging and relieving! As you can probably tell, I’m trying to figure out which camera to buy lol.

Out of further curiosity, you said “whole sensor used in photo mode.” Are the black pixels suddenly not black anymore? Is the FOV wider in photo mode? Or do you mean something like “full resolution?” (The ability to capture all 5000ish pixels in photo mode)

So with all the caveats that you listed, the crop factor (3x3 full frame mode) could loosely be called the same between the 6D and 5D2. NOW I think the winner is the 5D2 because if it’s faster write speed capabilities. We could pack in more vertical resolution on standard 24fps.

Would you agree?
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Levas on May 15, 2020, 04:36:54 PM
Black pixels are still black in photo mode.
I meant that we can divide the photo resolution by 3 to get the maximum video resolution in 3x3 mode.

Yes 3x3 full frame mode is the same between 6d and 5d2.
The faster write speed of the 5d2 makes it the better option for video.

But if money is no problem, and you want the best camera with Magic Lantern support, you should go for the 5d3.

 

Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 16, 2020, 07:00:38 PM
Thanks @Levas! I thought I read somewhere that there is a module that speeds up write speed on the 6D? Do you know what that is? I can’t find it anywhere.

Also Andrew Ried states here (https://www.eoshd.com/raw-video/magic-lantern-raw-video-current-camera-capabilities-updated-2017/) “ Note however, that older DIGIC IV (4) cameras like the 5D Mark II, 7D and 50D do not have 10bit-12bit capability, only uncompressed 14bit raw.”

Can the 5D2 do 10bit now? (That EOSHD post was from 2017)
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: masc on May 16, 2020, 08:43:55 PM
Can the 5D2 do 10bit now?
Yes, it can.
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: reddeercity on May 17, 2020, 02:52:52 AM
I did a quick test build with no image offset , in other words I recorded the whole sensor black border & all .

First 3x3 (FHD) 2040x1267 , this is the raw_image dump
(I didn't adjust the black level , sorry it 128 should be 112 for 10bit )
(https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/proxy.php?request=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ibb.co%2FS5sVcgF%2FRAW-002-small-2040x1267.png&hash=6824425605b282c2a5aaff89b6c10211) (https://imgbb.com/)

Here the 5D2-3x3-Raw_Dump_dng-ppm-png.zip (https://bitbucket.org/reddeercity/magic-lantern_10-12bit/downloads/5D2-3x3-Raw_Dump_dng-ppm-png.zip)
If you do a crop in IrfanView you get 1880x1250 ,
which the offset is correct in raw.c  160 pixels left & 18 pixel from the top
Though this would help people understand better how the sensor is configured  ;D
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Levas on May 17, 2020, 11:17:31 AM
Thanks @Levas! I thought I read somewhere that there is a module that speeds up write speed on the 6D? Do you know what that is? I can’t find it anywhere.

Yes, there's a module which improves the write speed of the SD card. (also works for other cams, not sure on which camera's it is used, but the eos-m builds from Danne use it too)
Here's a link to the topic of this module:
https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=12862.msg199224#msg199224 (https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=12862.msg199224#msg199224)

Without this sd_uhs module, the 6d has a write speed of about 39Mb/s and with the module it reaches about 57Mb/s write speed.
Doesn't work on all SD cards, you need one that is compatible with the settings. (Sandisk extreme pro 95Mb/s and 170Mb/s work)
So even with the module, write speed is still lower then 5d2. (Not sure what the write speed of 5d2 is exactly, but it's probably about 75Mb/s ? )

But besides 12 and 10 bit raw recording, there is also lossless 14 and 12 bit recording, only available on digic 5 cameras.
The amount of lossless compression you get depends on the scene, the brighter the scene, the less compression you get.
For normal, good exposed scenes you get probably around 25% / 35% compression.
So with this advantage of lossless compression, you can record about the same amount of raw data as the 5d2.

But to be able to do that, you need the sd_uhs module and a compatible card.

For plain, 3x3 mode, full-view, mode video recording I think you can get about the same results, resolution and recording time wise.
But with the 5d2, you're not depended on how good the lossless compression will be, which could be a lot less on very bright scenes.
Hard to choose, for raw video, probably very comparible camera's (5d2 and 6d)

The 5d3, has both, high compact flash recording speed (about 100Mb/s) and lossless raw compression.
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 18, 2020, 04:14:53 AM
I did a quick test build with no image offset , in other words I recorded the whole sensor black border & all .

First 3x3 (FHD) 2040x1267 , this is the raw_image dump
(I didn't adjust the black level , sorry it 128 should be 112 for 10bit )
(https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/proxy.php?request=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ibb.co%2FS5sVcgF%2FRAW-002-small-2040x1267.png&hash=6824425605b282c2a5aaff89b6c10211) (https://imgbb.com/)

Here the 5D2-3x3-Raw_Dump_dng-ppm-png.zip (https://bitbucket.org/reddeercity/magic-lantern_10-12bit/downloads/5D2-3x3-Raw_Dump_dng-ppm-png.zip)
If you do a crop in IrfanView you get 1880x1250 ,
which the offset is correct in raw.c  160 pixels left & 18 pixel from the top
Though this would help people understand better how the sensor is configured  ;D

So including the black pixels, the sensor is actually larger than 36mmx24mm, yes?
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 18, 2020, 04:36:18 AM
Yes, there's a module which improves the write speed of the SD card. (also works for other cams, not sure on which camera's it is used, but the eos-m builds from Danne use it too)
Here's a link to the topic of this module:
https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=12862.msg199224#msg199224 (https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=12862.msg199224#msg199224)

Without this sd_uhs module, the 6d has a write speed of about 39Mb/s and with the module it reaches about 57Mb/s write speed.
Doesn't work on all SD cards, you need one that is compatible with the settings. (Sandisk extreme pro 95Mb/s and 170Mb/s work)
So even with the module, write speed is still lower then 5d2. (Not sure what the write speed of 5d2 is exactly, but it's probably about 75Mb/s ? )

But besides 12 and 10 bit raw recording, there is also lossless 14 and 12 bit recording, only available on digic 5 cameras.
The amount of lossless compression you get depends on the scene, the brighter the scene, the less compression you get.
For normal, good exposed scenes you get probably around 25% / 35% compression.
So with this advantage of lossless compression, you can record about the same amount of raw data as the 5d2.

But to be able to do that, you need the sd_uhs module and a compatible card.

For plain, 3x3 mode, full-view, mode video recording I think you can get about the same results, resolution and recording time wise.
But with the 5d2, you're not depended on how good the lossless compression will be, which could be a lot less on very bright scenes.
Hard to choose, for raw video, probably very comparible camera's (5d2 and 6d)

The 5d3, has both, high compact flash recording speed (about 100Mb/s) and lossless raw compression.

So to summarize: the 5D2, CANNOT do lossless compression because of the DIGIC 4 processor, but can write up to 75mb/s with the CF card. And the 6D CAN do lossless compression because of the DIGIC 5 processor, but has limited write speed to the SD card (but can be sped up with the SD_UHS module, while still only reaching ~51mb/s?)

Is there any cautions using the SD_UHS module?
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: reddeercity on May 18, 2020, 07:12:06 AM
So to summarize: the 5D2, CANNOT do lossless compression because of the DIGIC 4 processor
No,  that's not right -- D4/5d2/50d can do lossless compression ,  there a bug in saving of the lossless dng/mlv that I'm still working on.
So it's about 90% implemented this where I left off here (https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=18443.msg198487#msg198487) , just haven't got back there yet wanted to have the 50d working in crop_rec before I continue on.
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Levas on May 18, 2020, 10:38:49 AM
Oops, didn't know that, sorry for the confusion.
In that case the 5d2 might be the better option, as it is now, it's about the same as the 6d.
But if lossless raw recording is achieved in the future, it has much better raw data recording capability.
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 23, 2020, 06:37:00 PM
I did a quick test build with no image offset , in other words I recorded the whole sensor black border & all .

First 3x3 (FHD) 2040x1267 , this is the raw_image dump
(I didn't adjust the black level , sorry it 128 should be 112 for 10bit )
(https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/proxy.php?request=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ibb.co%2FS5sVcgF%2FRAW-002-small-2040x1267.png&hash=6824425605b282c2a5aaff89b6c10211) (https://imgbb.com/)

Here the 5D2-3x3-Raw_Dump_dng-ppm-png.zip (https://bitbucket.org/reddeercity/magic-lantern_10-12bit/downloads/5D2-3x3-Raw_Dump_dng-ppm-png.zip)
If you do a crop in IrfanView you get 1880x1250 ,
which the offset is correct in raw.c  160 pixels left & 18 pixel from the top
Though this would help people understand better how the sensor is configured  ;D

So including the black pixels, the sensor is actually larger than 36mmx24mm, yes?
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Levas on May 23, 2020, 08:13:04 PM
No the sensor is 36x24mm.
The sensor has a lot of pixels, but doesn't use them all for actual photo/video.
Small parts at the sides/top/bottom are not used for the actual photo/video pixels, these are what we call the black pixels.
These pixels are probably used to reduce noise/calibrate column gain/determine black level and such stuff.

Did some more digging on the 6d, turns out there are some unused pixels there as well, just like with the 5d2.
6D can do, 5496x3670 (CR2 files are 5472x3648).
I think these pixels are available in CR2 files as well, but masked out with exif function.
Standard ML video on the 6d is 1824x1026.
But now with this new information, I created a crop preset which does 1832x1030.


Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 24, 2020, 05:28:22 AM
@Levas please see image below. (Let me know if it doesn’t work.)

https://ibb.co/SwZRjck

Looking at the green boxes, which image is the sensor’s 36mm x 24mm area?

If it is the left, then roughly 8% to 10% of the 36mm x24mm sensor is “cropped” by black pixels?
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Levas on May 24, 2020, 10:45:47 AM
I would guess, that the left image is right. I think camera brands report their sensor size on physical size and not on the amount of active pixels used for the photo size.
But I'm not 100% sure, if you really want to know you should ask Canon if the sensor width is for the total amount of pixels on the sensor, or is the sensor slightly bigger and is the 36x24mm the size for the active pixels.
 
But the frame you're looking at, is not what it looks like.
The black borders are readout pixel for pixel, there is no binning in the black border part.
So what you see is a black border made out of ~160 black pixels, readout one by one, no binning there, and the rest of the width is ~1872 pixels binned together(original read from 5616 pixels, each 3 pixels binned together to one)

So not by far 10%, but more like 168(black pixels) / (5792 total pixels((taken from the numbers reddeercity reported few posts earlier) * 100% = 2.9%
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 25, 2020, 09:06:19 PM
But the frame you're looking at, is not what it looks like.
The black borders are readout pixel for pixel, there is no binning in the black border part.
So what you see is a black border made out of ~160 black pixels, readout one by one, no binning there, and the rest of the width is ~1872 pixels binned together(original read from 5616 pixels, each 3 pixels binned together to one)

@Levas & @reddeercity thanks again for all the useful info. See the linked images below.

I mocked up a few images.

If the image @reddeercity was not 3x3 binned, and shot at full resolution - it would look like this? (Black borders are 160px from left. 18px from top.)

https://ibb.co/BsrZJq9

And to confirm I'm understanding correctly, ML handled the image this way? (Green pixels are full pixel readout, and pink area is 3x3 binned)

https://ibb.co/tPG900b
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Levas on May 25, 2020, 09:53:34 PM
Yep.

And to confirm I'm understanding correctly, ML handled the image this way?

Although it's not really a choice of ML to handle it like this, it is just how it is.
Canon designed the sensor or software on the Camera this way.
ML is making use of a raw data video stream already available in camera, and black borders are included :P
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on May 26, 2020, 06:34:49 AM
@levas thanks for all the info  :D
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on June 14, 2020, 10:57:54 PM
Thanks all for the tips! So I have been using the Magic Lantern RAW Calculator https://rawcalculator.netlify.app/calculator_desktop (https://rawcalculator.netlify.app/calculator_desktop) and I will be purchasing the 5d2 soon once I find a good deal.

I see down the page that there is a "Resolution Increment." I will be shooting full frame (1.0x) mostly, and I see that if I select "8px" under the "Resolution Increment," I get the full width binned by 3 at 1880px wide. Whereas if I select "16px" I get 1872px wide.

Can somebody explain a little more about what "Resolution Increment" is, and how it affects the image?
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: allemyr on June 14, 2020, 11:43:32 PM
1x and fullframe is different things. If you going to shoot fullframe i can recommed the M3, maybe its still expensice tho idk.
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Walter Schulz on June 14, 2020, 11:55:27 PM
M3 = Canon EOS M3 or Canon EOS 5D Mark III?
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on June 15, 2020, 04:14:29 AM
1x and fullframe is different things. If you going to shoot fullframe i can recommed the M3, maybe its still expensice tho idk.

I'm not sure what the confusion always is, but I thought it was standard to talk about crop factor/focal length multiplier 1.0x as full frame. As its commonly used this way with many other photography resources (and in ML menus.) Did you think I meant 1:1? I believe the difference (and correct me if I'm wrong) is a period vs colon ( . ) ( : ) The period is a factor, and the colon is a ratio.
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: names_are_hard on June 15, 2020, 04:37:48 AM
Part of the confusion is that standard photography resources rarely (never?) consider only "exposing" a portion of the film!  They certainly don't consider exposing every third pixel, etc.  Fullframe sounds like "the whole sensor" to me, in the world of digital...  is there even a traditional photography term for not covering the whole sensor / film?  When you can select arbitrary portions of the sensor to record, and still have a focal length multiplier of 1.0x, what does it mean?
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: allemyr on June 15, 2020, 01:26:44 PM
M3 = Canon EOS M3 or Canon EOS 5D Mark III?

Yes haha good confusion i made, 5D Mark III yes.

And on topic I would worry about upscaling small portion its a quality decrease to go from 1880 to 1920 width, isnt it better to upload with blackborders around?
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Kharak on June 15, 2020, 08:42:18 PM
Part of the confusion is that standard photography resources rarely (never?) consider only "exposing" a portion of the film!  They certainly don't consider exposing every third pixel, etc.  Fullframe sounds like "the whole sensor" to me, in the world of digital...  is there even a traditional photography term for not covering the whole sensor / film?  When you can select arbitrary portions of the sensor to record, and still have a focal length multiplier of 1.0x, what does it mean?

If you shoot with anamorphic glass, you can use the entire 3:2 / 4:3 sensor, what have you.

Personally, I feel that because the entire width of the sensor is always used, lets say from 5D3, 3:2 36x24 sensor. Be it 16:9 or 2:35.1, you have the entire width of the sensor giving that awesome space. It is not "Full" Frame, but its the entire width of it.

EDIT: regarding the anamorphic. Funny, you shoot Full Frame 3:2 sensor with a 1.5x Anamorphic only to squeze it down by 50% and plaster it on a 16:9 screen ;)
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on June 17, 2020, 06:17:44 AM
If you shoot with anamorphic glass, you can use the entire 3:2 / 4:3 sensor, what have you.

Personally, I feel that because the entire width of the sensor is always used, lets say from 5D3, 3:2 36x24 sensor. Be it 16:9 or 2:35.1, you have the entire width of the sensor giving that awesome space. It is not "Full" Frame, but its the entire width of it.

EDIT: regarding the anamorphic. Funny, you shoot Full Frame 3:2 sensor with a 1.5x Anamorphic only to squeze it down by 50% and plaster it on a 16:9 screen ;)

Kharak, what do you mean when you say “it is not ‘full’ frame?” Are you referring to the decrease in vertical resolution of 16:9 and 2.35:1 compared to 3:2? Or are you saying that 36x24mm digital sensors are smaller compared to that of 36x24mm film?
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on June 22, 2020, 10:35:13 PM
It's really nothing, it's less then 1%, it's a non-issue.
In real world, nobody could tell there are 16 pixels missing on the side.

But here some more to think about  ;D :
The 6d can use the whole sensor width, which is 1824 pixels in 3x3 mode.
The 5d2 can do 1856 pixels(without black border) in 3x3 mode.
So 5d2 has 32 pixels more in 3x3 mode...what do you want more pixels nobody will notice, or more field of view nobody will notice  :P
But there is more, search in google for the real sensor size of the 6d and you will find out it's not 36mm like the 5d2, but slightly smaller, the 6d has an 35.8mm wide sensor  ???
So we're missing slightly field of view on the full-frame 6d, have you ever heard anyone wine about that, exactly, it's so small, no problem  :P

But there is another catch here, what we call whole sensor width, is actually whole width of sensor used in photo mode.
But as we know, there are unused pixels on the side of the sensors, the black borders.
Canon 5d2 has a 160 pixels wide black column on the left side and the 6d 'only' has 80 black pixels wide column on the left side...

So if we all sum these up, I think it's fair to say they can both film in full frame a.k.a 1.0 crop factor  8)

@Levas, Canon markets the 5D2 as 5616px full width/full res for stills. Plus it's black borders are thicker than the 6D's. Can you explain why Canon crops/pads the sensor in standard firmware? Doesn't the padding, and thicker black borders effectively make the 5D2 sensor 35.8mm x 23.9mm? Why would canon add this random padding?
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: names_are_hard on June 23, 2020, 12:04:25 AM
You'd probably have to ask Canon's engineers.  It won't be random really, there'll be some engineering reason.  Slightly better sensor noise, or perhaps higher performance due to some quirk of a bus (1824 * 3 is 64 aligned).  Or more prosaically, perhaps the spec sheet for the sensor simply says that's how you're supposed to read it, so when they integrated it they followed the instructions to the letter.  This kind of quirky looking stuff happens all the time when designing hardware.
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: reddeercity on June 23, 2020, 01:36:55 AM
The active area of the sensor on the 5d2 is 36x24mm with out the black broader , you are making this too complicated.
You are being confused by the 3x3 pixel format to get a full frame HD image and by "Full Frame" i mean the view of
the total width of the sensor . For the 5D2 it's 1877.33333333333333333 (5632/3) and it's reads out on 4 channel at the same time .
So there no crop factor in 3x3 on the 5D2 ,  the 6D has a 1.01 crop factor because canon decided to have it that way or the sensor
did not turn out as expected , maybe the photocell on the edge of the sensor or dead etc. ... so there trimmed it down ? maybe only Canon know for sure .
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Levas on June 23, 2020, 10:25:01 AM
@Levas, Canon markets the 5D2 as 5616px full width/full res for stills. Plus it's black borders are thicker than the 6D's. Can you explain why Canon crops/pads the sensor in standard firmware? Doesn't the padding, and thicker black borders effectively make the 5D2 sensor 35.8mm x 23.9mm? Why would canon add this random padding?

I'm not sure why you are worrying so much about such small details, I wouldn't base or let depend any camera purchase on such tiny small details.
But why Canon uses blackborders, we could only guess. (I think most, if not all, sensors out there for photography/video use this ).
It's probably a mix of technical and commercial reasons.
The 6d sensor is a tiny bit smaller, maybe for 6d they could fit one sensor more per silicon wafer, which makes it a little cheaper to produce.

To be honest, they could have go for 35.5 x 23.5 mm and still call it 36 x 24 mm full-frame. It's not lying.
35.5 = 36  that's how math works.

The black borders are there to improve your picture, if they had no use, they wouldn't put them up there.
The black border are probably used for calibrating stuff and so reducing noise.

Just for fun, how creatively manufactures can use megapixels and resolution.
The sigma Foveon camera's have sensors that are sort of 3 sensors stacked on top of each other.
The top level records only blue pixels, middle part records only green pixels and bottom part records only red pixels.
Now to advertise number of megapixels, they sum up all the pixels from all three layers.
So for example the Sigma Quatro is advertised as 29.5megapixel.
How does the sensor look, toplayer = 5440x3616 - middle layer = 2720x1808 - bottom layer = 2720x1808
So the highest resolution layer is about 20megapixel, but all three layers together are advertised as 29.5megapixel.
https://www.sigma-global.com/en/cameras/sd-series/specifications/ (https://www.sigma-global.com/en/cameras/sd-series/specifications/)

Camcorder manufacturers did the same for 3-sensor camera's. Once Full-HD became a thing, there were camera's out there with 3 sensors where each sensor 'only' had about 800.000 pixels. So each sensor was slightly more then standard definition. But since they used 3 of these sensors, each recording either red, green or blue. They could add the numbers and claim Full-HD resolution.
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on June 23, 2020, 10:14:27 PM
Sorry I'm getting so caught up in this! I guess my curiosity gets the best of me! Thanks for all the useful info, and well made points! @reddeercity, the highest 3x3 horizontal resolution in the 10/12bit build is 1856px. Is 1872px available in your experimental Crop_rec build?
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: allemyr on June 24, 2020, 10:09:03 AM
Sorry I'm getting so caught up in this! I guess my curiosity gets the best of me! Thanks for all the useful info, and well made points! @reddeercity, the highest 3x3 horizontal resolution in the 10/12bit build is 1856px. Is 1872px available in your experimental Crop_rec build?

Just want to point that out since those wide pixels is on topic. First thing I would think that it doesnt matter for quality if its 1856 px or 1872 px you still need some upscaling in post and upscaling is a tiny bit of quality loss. I would watch videos and find a video you like the quality off and check that workflow and recording settings. The 5D3 records 1920 wide. But here in Sweden it looks like its still expensive almost twice as 5D2.
Title: Re: Is MLV using the full width of the sensor?
Post by: Milk and Coffee on June 28, 2020, 08:03:34 PM
@Levas , I have a 5D2 and yes a cr2 is 5616 but the FRSP is 5632 , and there must be some padding in canon firmware .
Also I check the Image dump from my 5D2 & 3x3 raw image is indeed 1880 not 1872 or 1877 as I said ,
there's 3 pixel from somewhere , maybe some padding ?
In the zip file there is 3 files the 3x3 ml raw dump , DNG ,  the converted dng ->.ppm file from exiftool & the converted .ppm -> .png
5D2_True_3x3__Sensor_Size_5-12-2020.zip (https://bitbucket.org/reddeercity/magic-lantern_10-12bit/downloads/5D2_True_3x3__Sensor_Size_5-12-2020.zip)
Code: [Select]
File Name                       : RAW-001.DNG
Camera Model Name               : Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Software                        : Magic Lantern
Subfile Type                    : Full-resolution Image
Image Width                     : 2040
Image Height                    : 1268
Strip Offsets                   : 33792
Samples Per Pixel               : 1
Rows Per Strip                  : 1268
Strip Byte Counts               : 4526760
X Resolution                    : 180
Y Resolution                    : 180
Default Crop Origin             : 0 0
Default Crop Size               : 1880 1250
Active Area                     : 18 160 1268 2040
Image Size                      : 2040x1268
So if you pixel peep there no missing pixels that I can see .

In the Old Raw_Rec module (pre-2016) We had 1880 wide , before the speed penalty was found in D5 cam .

Found a CR2 and
Code: [Select]
Record Mode                     : CR2
Canon Image Type                : Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Canon Image Width               : 5616
Canon Image Height              : 3744
Raw Jpg Size                    : Large
Cropped Image Width             : 5616
Cropped Image Height            : 3744
Sensor Width                    : 5792
Sensor Height                   : 3804
Sensor Left Border              : 168
Sensor Top Border               : 56
Sensor Right Border             : 5783
Sensor Bottom Border            : 3799
Color Data Version              : 6 (50D/5DmkII)
Exif Image Width                : 5616
Exif Image Height               : 3744
Image Size                      : 5616x3744
Important info about Sensor
Cropped Image Width             : 5616
Cropped Image Height            : 3744
Sensor Width                         : 5792
Sensor Height                        : 3804
Sensor Left Border                 : 168
Sensor Top Border                 : 56
Sensor Right Border               : 5783
Sensor Bottom Border            : 3799

Magic Lantern uses less of a off set 160 compared to canon's 168 and the vertical canon does 58 where ML uses 18 offset
Also I did a OB Zone test here (https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=19336.msg208519#msg208519) and it's 1880 so
mainly a coding issue . With Crop_Rec it's really a non issue now , with 1x3 , 3x1 etc. ....  :)

Just curious, but 1880 should technically be 8 pixels too much, 1872 pixels should be available.
So if you look real close, pixel peeping, you probably detect a very small border on the left or right, which exists out 8 pixels wide black border.

Just did a test. 5D2, 10/12bit build

I shot on a tripod, same exposure, lens, etc. Nothing changed but the MLV module.

MLV_rec has a maximum 3x3 resolution width of 1856px.
Original DNG here https://www.mediafire.com/view/6ziy3e7ajobq6we/mlv_rec-1856.dng/file (https://www.mediafire.com/view/6ziy3e7ajobq6we/mlv_rec-1856.dng/file)

MLV_lite has a maximum 3x3 resolution width of 1880px.
Original DNG here https://www.mediafire.com/view/taqdx0kfihpvv6a/mlv_lite-1880.dng/file (https://www.mediafire.com/view/taqdx0kfihpvv6a/mlv_lite-1880.dng/file)

Looks like the image offset has pixels missing on the right in mlv_rec.
See comparison here https://www.mediafire.com/view/xb7b6yy15k4tkzi/LITE-REC-Comparison.png/file (https://www.mediafire.com/view/xb7b6yy15k4tkzi/LITE-REC-Comparison.png/file)

mlv_lite looks like image offsets are set correctly!

Via MLV_lite, at 1880, I did a shot of blue sky, wide open 50mm lens, focused as close as I could. No black borders for me anywhere! This is cool!
Original DNG here https://www.mediafire.com/view/3e3l87lr0akvjkh/M27-1926_000080.dng/file (https://www.mediafire.com/view/3e3l87lr0akvjkh/M27-1926_000080.dng/file)

And then some pixel peeping screenshots of the sky linked below.  :)
Top left: https://www.mediafire.com/view/5pui0n2fmvzn1vq/Screen_Shot_2020-06-28_at_11.52.16_AM.png/file (https://www.mediafire.com/view/5pui0n2fmvzn1vq/Screen_Shot_2020-06-28_at_11.52.16_AM.png/file)
Bottom left: https://www.mediafire.com/view/f6m3hciq32s6gsp/Screen_Shot_2020-06-28_at_11.52.05_AM.png/file (https://www.mediafire.com/view/f6m3hciq32s6gsp/Screen_Shot_2020-06-28_at_11.52.05_AM.png/file)
Top right: https://www.mediafire.com/view/3woavny8mjs45k9/Screen_Shot_2020-06-28_at_11.51.44_AM.png/file (https://www.mediafire.com/view/3woavny8mjs45k9/Screen_Shot_2020-06-28_at_11.51.44_AM.png/file)
Bottom right: https://www.mediafire.com/view/jhs201hbgpiy3bg/Screen_Shot_2020-06-28_at_11.51.54_AM.png/file (https://www.mediafire.com/view/jhs201hbgpiy3bg/Screen_Shot_2020-06-28_at_11.51.54_AM.png/file)