Messages

@bennyray1 - I reply to every inquiry but didn't receive your email  Can you resend?

The Log-C transform was part of the DaVinci Resolve LUT pack. As you were an early customer you should have received an email from us about a month ago with a complimentary copy of the Resolve LUTS. Let me know if you didn't get it.

Re: raw to log - The main benefits are in storage. The image information can be compressed into log encoded, visually lossless 10bit video. This can be expanded back to linear with very little degradation and is a fraction the size of the raw DNG files. Log encoding also replicates how film negative responds to light.

We include a Cinelog to Rec709 LUT which expands your Cinelog video to Rec709 colorspace. You can then grade under the LUT (i.e. the Rec709 is the final stage) for quick results. Conforming Log footage to a workable, contrasty look without a LUT is actually very easy. You only need to use contrast/pivot and offset controls (as in DaVinci Resolve's Log controls) but you can also use the Cineon convertor in AE (we included an AE preset that replicates the Rec709 LUT) or AE/PP's Contrast and brightness plugins.

We are finalizing the new release called Cinelog-C. It's taking some time to achieve but we can now map with good accuracy, any raw DNG to any colorspace including Adobe, Sony SGamut + Cine, Wide Gamut, SMPTE-C etc and/or gamma (S-Log, S-Log2, AlexaV3Log-C, Rec709, ACES, Linear). For instance, we just mapped the Sony FS700/Odyssey 4K combination for a customer who wanted to transcode his raw CinemaDNGs to AlexaV3Log-C Wide gamut RGB ProRes444 as the stock sony/slog luts were pretty useless. He now has Sony footage that looks and behaves more or less like Log-C ProRes from the Alexa. The Alexa color separation is there. Your 60D will be able to do this too within limits This may seem like a lot of jargon but it is actually a very powerful set of tools and to the best of my knowledge is the only LUT set that can do a reversible transform from/to Rec709/BMD Film. Essentially, we can take footage shot on your 60D and make it look like it was shot on a Sony, BMD, Alexa etc but obviously within the limits of your cameras sensor and DR.

Andy600, I didn't download the Resolve LUT until the update. When I downloaded the updated LUT it only had the BMCC>Cinelog LUT. How can I get my hands on the LOG_C convertion LUT?

*Edit* I'm actually going to email you guys through the Cinelog website, instead.

The colors are absolutely stunning. That's pretty much the look I'm going for. I agree with the other guys, can you please give more detail about your workflow?

My new video:
http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=11765.0
Workflow: mlv_dump > [ Davinci Resolve -> Cinelog -> Arri Log-C -> Prores 4444 ] -> FCPX

Marekk, how did you turn Cinelog to Arri Log C? Help?

Hi Chu,

Cinelog-C - It will be within the next couple of weeks

ACR version - I did send it but I will send it again

Did you receive/download the Resolve LUT update last week?

I would love to get my hands on that beta of Cinelog-C! Need any beta testers?

Since somebody asked for it, here is a link to v1.6 :

www.samuel-maurin.com/MLV-Converter-1.6.rar

Hope you won't mind Tony. In case you do, just tell me and I will delete it !
I've been using MLC converter to do this clip for french 80s pop icon Desireless (Voyage Voyage amongst others)

Does this version extract the audio as well? I love the 'batch' idea behind this, but I need my audio extracted and 1.8 didn't work well for that.

Also, keep in mind that the color temperature of the lights inside the library is a bit more orange-ish in nature, whereas the sunlight outside the window is cooler.  Problem is, if you white balance for the indoors, the window will look unnatural (as is the case with the referenced still). You have to take into consideration the color balance of the scene you're shooting. 

Ideally, you'd ND-gel that window to suppress some of the sunlight, or use color-balanced lights indoors (which is kind of impossible if you're shooting in a public place).  I would leave your scene temperature more towards the oranges. There is nothing wrong with that if the natural setting has orangish light.

We've begun developing an app we're tentatively calling 'Cinelink' that ingests, debayers, converts and renders to whatever codecs you have installed and it has plugin capability for better debayering algorithms, noise reduction, scaling, DCP Camera profiles (i.e. Cinelog) and LUTs etc all-in-one. Cinelog will also be ACES compatible and we will submit our 3rd party IDT's for the currently unsupported Canon DSLRs to the Academy for consideration. If we get the technical stuff and measurements right (and that is a big IF) it might even end up in Resolve at some point.

I need this.

As I type this... I'm checking the Cinelog to Alexa Film conversion lut...


Um...


LOVE.  Brilliant. I can't wait for my short film shoot this weekend.

Really? In our tests VisionLog tends to crush shadows significantly and gamma is off. This is workable if you're still in the raw domain but once you go to an intermediate format you'll struggle to get anything useful back without introducing a lot of noise. Also, we measured black, white and grey points and they don't hit the mark without a lot of push-pull in post. It won't be hugely noticeable if you're just outputting for the web but for film or Rec.709 HD TV conformity you need accuracy (especially for the BBC).

You might still get good results with VisionLog if you stick to using their premium LUTs (BTW, they do make some nice looking LUTs from what I've seen) and this is understandable as they are developing their own system but the professional colorists we converse with all prefer to grade without LUTs (except when pushed for time) and for this they much prefer an unaltered linear or logarithmic base. They also work to strict standards for broadcast work and just because something may look nice on screen doesn't mean it meets these standards. There are limits to luminance and saturation values amongst other things that need to be adhered to. We aim to help colorists get to final output quicker and with less work. 

BTW You should check out the forthcoming free update to Cinelog. I think you'll be suitably impressed

Yeah. I tried with daytime ISO 160 and indoors at 1250 ISO and VisionLog gave me better shadows vs Cinelog 1.0 (though Cinelog gave much better mids).

However, I did download 2.0 and I AM MORE THAN IMPRESSED. Especially with the Conversion LUTs. This is a significant improvement over VisionLog and will be using Cinelog for all my upcoming projects.

Juan Melara's film luts SHINE with this new Log space.  Great work, guys. I'm very happy with the new version.

Recently purchased it. I'm still using VisionLOG. I felt that while Cinelog obtained more details in my mids, VisionLog preserved my shadows a LOT better.

With that said... I am TOTALLY in love with their Film Gamma 2 LUT. Especially when I apply it to my footage with VisionLOG.

I'm having issues with the newest builds. I keep turning on the RAW and MLV modules as well as the file_man modules, and they do not load when I restart my camera. Am I doing something wrong? I keep going back to an old build because it doesn't fail me, but I'm dying to try the new features.

Help?

The build I just installed was the 12/30 one.

[was great because]

Boring... Raw doesn't make a video Great... You can make a great video using Raw, and some other important stuff. I would filled that club with people ... Or used closer shots so the place doesn't look that empty or "fake". If only 1 location is avaible try changing angles .. Not always the same.

I never said the video was great because it was shot on RAW.  I shared it because it was shot on RAW.

Thanks for watching, and for the notes.  The customer was pretty pleased with the end product, but there's always room for improvement. 

Shot with Magic Lantern RAW

This was shot at ISO 2500eq and later pushed the exposure +1.00 in ACR, was just fooling around and was surprised at how little sensor patterns and other noises were visible before the noise reduction.

Used Neat Video Pro

More specs in video description.

God, this looks insane. I haven't pushed my camera beyond 1250 ISO, yet.

What kind of problem are you having?
Maybe I can help you solve the issue
You having

Well.. let me start by saying that I didn't completely follow Hunter's tutorial way of doing it.  After trying to render in AVI's and getting all sorts of problems (Perhaps because I didn't have the codecs installed!), I decided to use the Cineform files as proxies straight out of BATCHelor, then I imported the XML file and for a quick, 10-shot edit it worked.  When I imported the full music video, it started giving me all these 'missing scene' messages even though I had my DNG clips named exactly the same as the AVI proxies.  It's strange.   

So after it couldn't find the one proxy (and didn't give me an option to point manually like After Effects does), it replaced all the cuts with the first clip, followed by the next, and the next. 

I've color graded the last two videos in After Effects because I got so discouraged.

Very Good !
download the Blackmagic "Desktop Video for windows"
Link below
http://www.blackmagicdesign.com/support/detail?sid=3958&pid=3966&leg=false&os=win
It free, i have Ultra Studio SDI usb 3.0 for capturing & monitoring
and thats the one i downloaded.
you don't have to Register just hit the "download Now" tab
That should put All the blackmagic codec on your system

Awesome. I didn't know about this. Maybe that's the solution to the gap in my Premiere/Resolve roundtrip issue.

Yeah, exactly, with an optical element... I've read that kills some sharpness. But maybe it's not so crucial for video. What's your experience?

I've never compared sharpness between the lens with a Minolta camera and using the adapter on my 5DmkII to be able to tell the difference.  I've been using those exclusively for video, though, as they tend to give me a more cinematic look.  It's still sharp enough but not as crisp (razor-sharp has never been my personal preference... if there's one thing I like about cinema lenses is the softer-edge feel of them).

The JPG compression here doesn't really do it justice, but just to give you an idea.

Im using "5D2_WIN_raw2dng" to convert the RAW. file to a DMG. file. Then I take it into davinci resolve. As soon as I play the video in davinci resolve the video just looks like trash. Ive even Imported it in to After Effects and still looks like trash.




heres a tiff. I know its dark. It dont look as bad to me. I took it right from After Effects. Maybe its davinci resolve?

I'm not really sure what your settings are in Resolve (besides, I've decided to grade in After Effects after the roundtrip failed on me several times), but like I said before... your JPEGs look like they're too compressed.  That TIFF looks pretty clean to me.

Also, are you underexposing and then adjusting exposure in post? That can also cause artifacts.  One thing I've learned with the RAW files is that proper exposure is paramount.  As soon as you start pushing the exposure, the footage gets grainy (in my case, it's got some sort of grid-like noise pattern, not sure if anyone else is experiencing this?).

How do you use your Minolta MD lenses on the 5D Mark II? Do you use an adapter with optical element or did you convert the mount in some way? The flange distance for MD lenses is shorter than that for EF lenses so a 'normal' adapter wouldn't work, right?

I have lots of MD/MC lenses (used with my GH2) and I'm thinking of selling them cause they don't fit the EF mount...

I'm using this:

http://www.amazon.com/Fotodiox-Adapter-Minolta-Rokkor-Digital/dp/B003EB0AY8/ref=sr_1_fkmr1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1378562189&sr=8-3-fkmr1&keywords=opteka+md+to+ef

It works like a charm with my EF lenses. The adapter has a back element that corrects the focal flange.

I see all kinds of clean looking RAW video! But mine always looks so nasty! Ive try to use neat video on it to get rid of the noisy but it just seems to make it more of a mess. its super noisy. HELP ME PLEASE!

MARK II
SIGMA 35MM 1.4 DG
davinci resolve
iso @ 100

Can you export as an uncompressed TIFF instead and upload that? That looks an awful lot like JPG compression.  If you're exporting your frames as JPG that might be why you're getting these compression artifacts.

Here's another music video I shot with the RAW module.  Lenses used: Minolta MD 50mm f1.4 Rokkor X, 28mm f2.8, 135mm f3.5, 70-200mm f4.

Are you using Magic Lantern ISO's or Canon ? 
I use Magic Lantern ISO "-.03"
that pushes down the ISO or give you Negative Gain
From the image i see i would choose 200 ISO
use Negative Gain -.03 = 160 ISO .
I think that's should help with the noise problem you have .

Also, how are you importing your footage? When I import through Camera RAW I use a little of their NR to tame the grain, although my noise has never looked that nasty, more like film grain... hm.

I'm not sure about the capabilities of MKII... I will shoot a short film this month, and I really want to shoot RAW but nobody in my city (who I know, in Brindisi Italy) has got the MKIII; I can find only MKII.

Is it possible to shoot continuous 1920 x 800 @23.976 fps ? I read on the main topic about 1880x840 at 24 fps so I thought that [email protected] will be possible.

Anyone tried ?

I shot two music videos in 2.35:1 ratio, and while unfortunately 1920 is not possible, there is plenty of detail there for you to resize 1880.  I personally used Red Giant's Instant HD Resizer for it, and it looks spectacular.

RAW 1880 > H.264 1920. Any day.

Thank you!

I wanted to put the camera through it's paces and this video was perfect for it.  Dark scenes for the performance, daylight scenes for the story.  I LOVE the post flexibility of the Raw module.

Very nice indeed!

Thanks!

The teal/orange grade was applied in post. The Resolve round-trip workflow gave me problems with Premiere, so I ended up grading everything in After Effects.

Very nice!
Do you wanted that cyan magenta look specially or it is from Resolve?
Best regards