Messages

Very slick with really well thought-out transitions.

Great stuff. :-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

i rendered a uncompressed avi file. So no codec / compression algoryhtm which
changes the colors or something.

Ah, kemosabe, but even an uncompressed avi has a color space - even if it's "undefined".

My money is on mixed or unassigned color spaces or your player gamma. I know on a Mac that there's a "feature" in Resolve called "use Mac display color profile". If there's a similar thing on Win then I'd uncheck that for starters.

Find out what color space your exported AVI is in (sRGB / Adobe RGB / Generic RGB / Rec.709 / Undefined etc). If it's undefined then perhaps the Windows playback program you're using is _assuming_ it's in X color space (probably sRGB?) and is interpreting it as such even though it's in Y?

On a Mac I know that the Quick Time player will playback MOV files in the wrong gamma. It's a known problem that's been around for years. Not sure what playback app you're using but if it's QT player you could look into playing your footage through some other player such as VLC to check.

Just some ideas. No idea if they're applicable as I haven't been on Win for years I'm afraid.

Mark.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MLVFS Version: 6cf1742 Mar 4 201617:23:30]

MLVFS Version: 6cf1742 Mar 4 201617:23:30

Not sure if this has been reported, @dmilligan, or even if it's a bug at all and just my crummy system (8Gb RAM) but...

Copying out cDNG files from a 7.5Gb MLV takes around a minute, but... copying out cDNG files from a 30Gb MLV (I know, it's crazy) takes over 6 HOURS.

The reason I was copying out cDNG files at all was because that 30Gb MLV file wouldn't load in After Effects. MLVFS would run at 100% and after an hour, still no joy, so I thought I'd copy out the files (as it's quite a large one) to see if that would make a difference and that's when I noticed the same problem - MLVFS runs at 100% and the process took over 6 hours to complete, yet for a file a quarter of the size it takes around a minute. Naturally I was expecting it to take around 4 minutes.

Let me know if you need me to run any specific tests. I think I still have the original MLV file somewhere but I'm not sure. This happened 2 weeks ago and I completely forgot to report it back then I'm afraid. 

Cheers,

Mark.

The next latest chimney clip from the end was epic.

+1. Loved the closing chimney shot.

Very lovely. Thank you for sharing.

Mark.

Some really beautiful sequences there, @Tao. You did a great job of adding audio into the mix in post too. A very appropriate music track as well. Fits it perfectly. Great stuff.

My only 2c would be that the cutting on the notes at the beginning is a little jarring. I mean, it's not a music video after all ;-) so it would flow better if those shots were a little longer there IMO.

Lastly, have you considered letterboxing it to 2.35:1 or even 2.39:1? I felt that some of the compositions really cried out for a longer landscape crop rather than 16:9, but obviously that's just my opinion.

Lovely shots though. Must have been a real adventure as looks like a place full of photographic possibilities!

Incidentally, did you shoot RAW? You must have taken a bajillion CF cards with you! :-D

Thanks for sharing.

All the best,

Mark.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Handheld

Nice job. Did you use ML's intervalometer?

Thanks!
It's was a small hyperlapse

Cool. On a slider or hand-held?

This is a short movie about my trip to the south part of Iceland

I really like how you cut the plane footage. Out of interest was the shot around the plane a sped-up glidecam or a time lapse on a slider?

Cheers,

Mark.

Really nice.

I've been thinking this for a while that it's funny how slightly over-cranked footage looks "normal" speed to my eyes now and straight 23.976 looks almost too jarring - too "documentary" almost. It gives it a nicer look IMO when it's slightly over-cranked I think, but not so slow that it doesn't look real - if that makes sense?

@DeafEyeJedi I'm sure there must be some post color work on that footage. Surely. Perhaps Mr. @beauchampy can shed some light on his color settings? :-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Very polished and professional looking. Aside from the lovely lighting and grade, good acting and sound too.

Looking forward to your next post! :-D


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Same for Germany. Known problem here.
Use proxy in US (ProxTube add-on for Firefox or similiar for your browser) or something like HideMyAss.

Ah, thanks for the tip, @Walter Schulz but for some reason I just revisited this thread and the video played just fine. Yey! 

Hello! Last month I have graded this magnificent footage from my junior student for Movie for music production subject.

@wangtrirat, this is beautifully graded. Really, really nice - even if it was with "random curves"  May I ask why you did a round-trip back to Premiere from Resolve instead of rendering out the finished EDL from Resolve?

Really enjoyed this. Thank you for sharing. Looking forward to seeing more from yourself and your students! 

All the best,

Mark.

[YOU]

You won't tolerate? What does that even mean exactly? I don't make personal attacks lol trust me that was intended to be an "attack". Learn to accept what might be the truth even though you might not like it.
Again how ironic of you "mr. Nice and Respectful" you think just because YOU put something like "no offense" that what you said can't be taken offensively or be disrespectful?

You've just been negative this whole time some would even consider you as a troll.
It may be fresh information to you but you could of just asked what resources I or anyone else have instead the first thing you say is "count me out your idea is STUPID"

And don't think for one second that I wouldn't say any of this and if needed more to your face. Don't be a hypocrite, I'd suggest you grow up take your own advice because there's a lot you don't know about me but you've made a lot of assumptions. You've read a few articles and watched a few YouTube videos and assume you know the structure of film productions and we don't. Making me laugh.

I think we can all agree that you "don't like the idea" it's your God given right to do so if that's what you choose to I respect your decision, but unless you have any way of contributing in a positive way I'd suggest you be on your little way so the rest of us can have positive and respectful discussions on what we love to do as filmmakers. Your negativity is needed or wanted here.

Wow. Just... Wow.

Before I leave this discussion (although I thought there were two sides to a discussion? Hmm.) I'd just like to set the record straight...

1. Yes, I thought (and still do) that the IDEA is bonkers and I then went on to explain WHY I thought that the IDEA was stupid in what I believe was a concise, rational and logical way. At NO POINT did I say that YOU were stupid. Not once. Nor did I make any assumptions about YOU as a person in either your skill or personality. Unlike yourself with me.

2.  You asked for an opinion on your IDEA and I gave one - albeit, a negative one - which started an avalanche of personal attacks from you and many assumptions about MY skill and/or personality. Clearly the fault is mine here as I didn't know that you were just looking for positive opinions. Perhaps next time you should specify that.

3. "You've read a few articles and watched a few YouTube videos and assume you know the structure of film productions and we don't. Making me laugh." Actually I've worked in the TV industry (on programmes that actually got, you know - broadcast) as an Editor, DP and a Director in my day so again, please stop with the personal attacks and assumptions. I've made none about you.

4. "Your negativity is needed or wanted here." Holy moly, this is the icing on the cake (although I assume you mean that it's NOT wanted). To give a negative opinion about an IDEA is a natural part of debating. If you've ever worked in TV (and I don't know if you have) you'll know that what you consider to be your best IDEAS are frequently shot down and binned. But, when they are, the director will usually (although not always) give his/her reason why. Of course, you don't have to agree with their decision or their opinion but you certainly don't start calling them all the names under the sun and slandering their character. As I said before, it's unbecoming.

So now the record is straight (as far as I'm concerned, at least) I clearly have nothing to offer this thread and clearly I am not welcome, so I'll get my coat.

Best of luck with your projects - and incidentally that is not said with any sarcasm. I genuinely mean it. Just because I personally think it's a crazy idea doesn't mean it won't work. I hope it does! I shall be more than happy to eat humble pie in that instance.

Goodbye,

Mark.

Sounds like you are stuck in amateur hour. <snip> You clearly lack in being a visionary which makes me question why you even bother with cameras and filmmaking. I'd suggest you do a whole reset in your thinking.

I won't tolerate personal attacks on forums. Period.

If you think that my POV was skewed then put my argument straight - I'm more than willing to listen and rethink my stance (for example, in your last post you mention that you DO have a script and talent at your disposal and a makeup artist. Great! That's fresh information) - but don't think for one second that you somehow have the right to attack me as a person (when you don't know me from Adam) just because you think I don't like your idea or because it's "just the Internet" or because you end your post with a pseudo-goodwill gesture. It's unbecoming.

You know nothing about me and I know nothing about you. I offered my opinion about your suggestion (not about you as a person) because you requested it:

Anyway, this was just a thought and I'm curious to know what you all think. Suggestions? Improvements? Ideas? comment PLEASE!

So let's keep things amicable around here and not resort to playground attacks, shall we?

Mark.

Says "this video is not available" for me. Is it restricted in the UK?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[markodarko]

markodarko - first of all, If I had a "better" or "more capable" camera than the one I have(5d) then obviously I would use it but I don't.

I can't help but feel that you missed my point. It's not that you'd be shooting on a 5D. I'd have no problem making a feature on my 5D III using ML at all. My point was, and still is, that you are trying to create a collaboration to make a short by including only those who own Canon cameras running Magic Lantern as the requirement.

The equivalent would be for someone who uses Final Draft to try and create a collaboration for a short with only people who use Final Draft, or, for an audio guy on the Zoom forum to try and create a short by using only people who record with a Zoom H6.

Just because people on here have a Canon camera running ML doesn't mean they have any skill or desire to be a boom operator or a sound guy or a makeup artist or a script consultant or a director or a focus puller or an actor or a location scout or a screenwriter or a grip, or a lighting guy etc. etc.  Hence why it's a backwards idea in trying to go forwards. You need to collaborate with people who already do and want to do those things, not with people who JUST own canon cameras.

As for not wanting to do a "Hollywood" project, I never mentioned such a thing, but all those roles I mentioned are needed for ANY scale of project - even if some roles are done by the same person.

More than likely, if / when you come to shoot it you'll need one camera for the majority of your shots and one camera operator / DP and one director. So what will the other people (who have turned up with their ML equipped cameras) be doing when this one person is shooting?

Start with a script. Do you have a script?

I am editing in Resolve .

Cool, everything else still applies up to point #6 though unless you don't have access to After Effects IMO.

Cheers,

Mark.

Hi Danson,

I've watched up to 1' 19" but thought it best to stop to air my critique thus far.

The editing is too much. Way too much. It's cut like a music video. Way too quick, and the jumping back and forth between two different mid shots is very strange. If these cuts have been put in to cut the dialogue then I'd insert some cutaways instead.

The other jarring thing for me was that your two mid shots of the lady near the beginning crosses the line. One mid is on the left side of her face, the other mid shot on the right.

So far, from what I've seen I'd say:

• Stick to one shot of the lady instead of crossing the line to the other mid shot
• stay longer in each subsequent shot of the man that follows and when you cut to the other shot, punch in tighter so it doesn't seem like we're going from mid to mid, and / or intercut some cutaways if you're cutting is due to dialogue problems.

Just my 2c of course. Feel free to discard as you feel is necessary. :-)

Cheers,

Mark.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Count me out. No offence but it sounds like a stupid idea. Surely limiting your creative input to only people who own a Canon camera and use Magic Lantern is, frankly, bonkers?

Now don't get me wrong, I love Magic Lantern and am on here most days to try and help the community in any way I can, if only in a small way, but if I was going to make a new film, top of my list wouldn't be to find other people with Canon + ML cameras.

If you really want to collaborate and genuinely want to make a short or a feature, make a list of the things you need, such as:

1. A good script

Don't move onto step 2 until step 1 is fulfilled.

So, if you're stuck on step 1 then perhaps look for writing classes in your area and ask the students if they'd be interested in collaborating.

Now, assuming you have a writer on board and the script is taking shape you can then look for other people to collaborate with, such as:

2. Actors.

If you haven't got a script and talent involved then all the ML cameras in the world will mean nothing. So, don't move onto step 3 until step 2 is fulfilled. Again, approach local acting classes / put out adverts etc, then move onto looking for crew.

3. Crew: Lights / DP / Director / Sound / Grips / Continuity / Makeup etc etc.

Unless I've completely misread your post, that's why I think it's crazy to limit your collaborations with people who only own Canon cameras running Magic Lantern.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unless you're editing in Resolve you really want to use Resolve as the last link in your editing chain, and hence you don't need to worry about color space.

Grading footage before editing is a waste of time and storage unless you know that you're going to use every bit of the footage you're grading. Also, Resolve's sharpen filter is very kindergarten. So, after many, many trials and tribulations I would recommend the following workflow for ML RAW:

1. Shoot footage in RAW
2. Use MLRawViewer to sort your clips into keepers.
3. Mount your MLV files with MLVFS. (If you've already converted your MLV files to cDNG then this step doesn't apply to you.)
4. Open the cDNG sequences in Adobe After Effects and use ACR to debayer, sharpen and apply a working primary grade to your footage.
5. Render as ProRes 4444
6. Edit in an editor of your choice.
7. Export an EDL / XML
8. Open EDL / XML in Resolve and do your color grading
9. Render as ProRes 4444 and your master file is done.

Additionally...

10. Open in Handbrake and convert for the web using x264 which gives faaaar better results than h.264 export from an editor.

HTH,

Mark.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

whats the formula for working out your 35mm equivalent with a 7d, and in x5 cropped mode?

35mm FF equivalent on a 7D is 1.6x bigger. So a 50mm lens on a 7D will give you an equivalent of 50x1.6=80mm.

If you're using the 5x crop mode then the difference will depend on the crop size you choose. It'll tell you in Magic Lantern next to the RAW image size what the multiplication factor is.

Lovely. My favourite shot is the man on the bus near the beginning.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks to @markodarko for this otherwise I'd be using CineStyle and force the client to apply LUT's on top of it but he firmly instincts not to and frankly he's the one that paid me so here we go.

<snip>

I knew in my head that with this deadly combo of 35/105 focal length would deliver magic

You are most welcome. Looks great! :-)

Funny you should mention the 35/105 combo too as I posted the very same thing about it here earlier. :-D

The crop mode recording is, as you say, fantastic. So versatile for a one lens setup.

I shot with my 70-200 f/4 IS the other day and essentially had every focal length between 70-600 at my fingertips!

I too would be interested if and when it'll be in the nightlies as I'm still currently rocking @a1ex's original build he posted up. Not that I've any problems with it though.

Anyway, I'm glad the shoot went well. Oh, and how's your poor 24-105L doing now?

Cheers,

Mark.

P.s. Have a look at the Canon 35mm f/2.0 IS, @DeafEyeJedi. The IS is great for hand held video work and from f/4 it's absolutely pin sharp. I use my Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art when on a tripod or for the extra light, but the Canon is a cracking little lens and cheap (relatively) too!

I like using a 35mm on a 5Diii because that gives me the option of shooting at 35mm non-crop and 105mm when in crop mode. Different on the 7D obviously as you're already cropped by 1.6x relative to FF.

If I had a 7D then I'd personally use a 21mm lens to get the 35mm FF equivalent as I think the 35/105 combination is hard to beat for a single prime lens setup.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You are most welcome. :-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

An excellent reply. Thank you @a1ex. A lot there for people to digest who may otherwise be on the fence about purchasing.

Cheers,

Mark.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk