Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Tai.Fighter

Pages: [1] 2
1
Raw Video Postprocessing / Re: The CinemaDNG Discussion (raw2cdng)
« on: December 22, 2016, 08:42:16 AM »
+1 for metadata. Knowing the ISO, focal length, and aperture would be very helpful and seems to be the only thing missing that I can think of. Thanks again!

2
Raw Video Postprocessing / Re: The CinemaDNG Discussion (raw2cdng)
« on: December 22, 2016, 02:53:39 AM »
Wow what a Christmas gift of an update. This came JUST in time for a little holiday personal project! Thank you so much!!!

3
Wow thank you so much for that information! Really helpful. That PDF is a goldmine.

So if I were to use HDR video for raw video instead of Dual ISO, is this the best resource to process that?

http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=13512.msg130562#msg130562

4
Thank you guys so much, you are hero wizards. I finally managed to get it working and processed. You were right on both accounts, the typo caused the mlv_dump error, and the other one because I was using the bad DNGs.

Just one last question. I noticed strange things going on, like details "jumping" or "shimmering" but I'm not sure what is going on/how to fix it and thought you guys might.

I made a small clip here that shows it (ignore the before/after comparison). You can see it mostly on the white text on the black box on the right, and on the curtain in the back:


5
Thank you for the help guys, I promise I'm not trying to be dense.

I tried again, but it still was giving me errors:

Quote
C:\Users\USER>cd desktop

C:\Users\USER\Desktop>cd mlv_dump (2)

C:\Users\USER\Desktop\mlv_dump (2)>mvl_dump.exe --dng M26-0224.MLV
'mvl_dump.exe' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file.

C:\Users\USER\Desktop\mlv_dump (2)>

And then when I tried uisng CDRHR:

Quote
C:\Users\USER>cd desktop

C:\Users\USER\Desktop>cd New CDRHR

C:\Users\USER\Desktop\New CDRHR>cr2hdr.exe M26-162600000.dng
cr2hdr: a post processing tool for Dual ISO images

Last update: ab1e90c on 2015-11-24 09:50:19 UTC by a1ex:
cr2hdr: moved safeguard from median_int_wirth to kth_smallest_i...

Active options:
--amaze-edge    : use a temporary demosaic step (AMaZE) followed by edge-directed interpolation (default)
--cs2x2         : apply 2x2 chroma smoothing in noisy and aliased areas (default)
--wb=graymax    : set AsShotNeutral by maximizing the number of gray pixels (default)

Input file      : M26-162600000.dng
Camera          : Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Full size       : 1920 x 1080
Active area     : 1920 x 1080
Black borders   : N/A
ISO pattern     : ddBB RGGB
White levels    : 10000 5000
Noise levels    : 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 (14-bit)
Doesn't look like interlaced ISO
ISO blending didn't work

C:\Users\USER\Desktop\New CDRHR>

6
[Post deleted by author]

7
I tried MLVProducer but cannot figure out for the life of me how to export raw DNGs.

MLV_Dump I have no idea how to use, it doesn't appear to do anything when I run the command line and drag MLV_Dump in. It gives me something about all these variables but I don't know how to use them either. I tried following whatever vague instructions they give and nothing came of it, just errors.

C:\Users\USER\Desktop\mlv_dump (2)>mlv_dump.exe -0 rawstuff --dng -9 level m26-0224mlv
mlv_dump.exe: unknown option -- 0
Usage: mlv_dump.exe [-o output_file] [-rscd] [-l compression_level(0-9)] <inputfile>
Parameters:
 -o output_file      set the filename to write into
 -v                  verbose output
 --batch             output message suitable for batch processing

-- DNG output --
 --dng               output frames into separate .dng files. set prefix with -o
 --no-cs             no chroma smoothing
 --cs2x2             2x2 chroma smoothing
 --cs3x3             3x3 chroma smoothing
 --cs5x5             5x5 chroma smoothing
 --fixcp             fix cold pixels

-- RAW output --
 -r                  output into a legacy raw file for e.g. raw2dng

-- MLV output --
 -b bits             convert image data to given bit depth per channel (1-16)
 -z bits             zero the lowest bits, so we have only specified number of bits containing data (1-16) (improves compression rate)
 -f frames           frames to save. e.g. '12' saves the first 12 frames, '12-40' saves frames 12 to 40.
 -A fpsx1000         Alter the video file's FPS metadata
 -x                  build xref file (indexing)
 -m                  write only metadata, no audio or video frames
 -n                  write no metadata, only audio and video frames
 -a                  average all frames in <inputfile> and output a single-frame MLV from it
 --avg-vertical      [DARKFRAME ONLY] average the resulting frame in vertical direction, so we will extract vertical banding
 --avg-horizontal    [DARKFRAME ONLY] average the resulting frame in horizontal direction, so we will extract horizontal banding
 -s mlv_file         subtract the reference frame in given file from every single frame during processing
 -e                  delta-encode frames to improve compression, but lose random access capabilities
 -X type             extract only block type
 -I mlv_file         inject data from given MLV file right after MLVI header
 -c                  (re-)compress video and audio frames using LZMA (set bpp to 16 to improve compression rate)
 -d                  decompress compressed video and audio frames using LZMA
 -l level            set compression level from 0=fastest to 9=best compression

-- bugfixes --
 --black-fix=value   set black level to <value> (fix green/magenta cast)
 --fix-bug=id        fix some special bugs. *only* to be used if given instruction by developers.

8
I'm just now learning what MLVProducer is. I'll try that, thank you!

And I was not shooting with any ETTR or anything. Just dual ISO.

9
My google-fu sucks, but I can't find MLV_dump for windows anywhere...  I'd be willing to take an old official one if you have it!

10
Thanks dfort. I got the binaries from the ML downloads page, which is about as official of a source I could find... I'll take a shot using your bitbucket download and report back before investigating those other options, thank you so much for helping!

UPDATE:

I took screenshots of the cr2hdr that I tried before, and your bitbucket download. The one from ML download page gave me this:



I tried your bitbucket, and got this instead:

Input file      : C:\Users\USER\Desktop\New CDRHR\M14-201600066.dng
Camera          : Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Full size       : 1920 x 1080
Active area     : 1920 x 1080
Black borders   : N/A
ISO pattern     : BBdd RGGB
White levels    : 10000 5000
Noise levels    : 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 (14-bit)
Doesn't look like interlaced ISO
ISO blending didn't work

screenshot:




11
I'm shooting a 5DmkIII with nightly Build 2015Dec20.5D3123

Shooting .MLV. (Non-lite, and not .RAW)

And I downloaded cr2hdr off the ML downloads page.

Screenshot of the cr2hdr I tried:



Today I tried again today with a cr2hdr from a different source and got a different result:

Input file      : C:\Users\USER\Desktop\New CDRHR\M14-201600066.dng
Camera          : Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Full size       : 1920 x 1080
Active area     : 1920 x 1080
Black borders   : N/A
ISO pattern     : BBdd RGGB
White levels    : 10000 5000
Noise levels    : 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 (14-bit)
Doesn't look like interlaced ISO
ISO blending didn't work

Screenshot:


12
Hi everyone,

I am having a lot of trouble with this dual ISO in raw video. I was wondering if anyone knew the solution!

I'm shooting a 5DmkIII with nightly Build 2015Dec20.5D3123. Shooting .MLV. (Non-lite, and not .RAW)

I am processing using raw2cdng.1.7.5 to turn MLVs into DNGs, and then cr2hdr (downloaded off the ML downloads page) to "process" the dual ISO to get rid of banding. Exiftool.exe and dcraw.exe are in the path.

Before processing, the DNGs look banded as they should:



But after cr2hdr is done with them, why are they turning out like this:



The directory they're in looks like this now:



Thank you!

13
Hi everyone,

I am having a lot of trouble with this dual ISO in video. I was wondering if anyone knew the solution!

I am processing using raw2cdng.1.7.5 to turn MLVs into DNGs, and then cr2hdr to "process" the dual ISO to get rid of banding. Exiftool.exe and dcraw.exe are in the path.

Before processing, the DNGs look banded as they should:



But after cr2hdr is done with them, why are they turning out like this:



The directory they're in looks like this now:



Thank you!

14
Raw Video / Re: 5D Mark 2 - Crop Mode? Digital Dolly?
« on: March 24, 2014, 11:48:02 PM »
So the 5x crop is actually only a 3x crop? (50mm becomes 150mm, not 250mm?)

15
Raw Video / 5D Mark 2 - Crop Mode? Digital Dolly?
« on: March 24, 2014, 11:16:36 PM »
Hey all, been experimenting with RAW video on a 5D Mark 2 and ML, however some things don't seem to work.

Crop Mode = When I try to zoom in 10x, it records a file that ends up looking like a seizure:


Recording in crop mode also only lets me record for 8 seconds before it "stops automagically".

As for digital dolly, how do I get it to work? I activated it in the ML menu, however when I use the joystick in crop mode and try to move the shot around, nothing happens. What gives?

Thanks!

16
Hi and Merry Christmas! Running last night's nightly build on a 5D MkII.

However when I try to load the mlv_dump module, I get a "file err" and "ret 0x", not allowing it to load. Does anyone know what's going on and how I can fix it? Thanks!

Also, the first post of this thread is extremely confusing for a MagicLantern newbie like me... Is there a comprehensive full guide/post that could explain clearly the steps to get mlv_dump working from shooting to processing? I'd really appreciate it, even willing to pay through PayPal! (The bit-depth/file-size reduction is so tempting)

17
Raw Video / mlv_rec vs raw_rec
« on: December 25, 2013, 08:20:47 PM »
Is there a comprehensive guide somewhere with the exact differences between the two?

Also I just tried shooting mlv_rec, but it leaves me with MLV files that I don't know how to process. I tried running searches but nothing really came up...

Thank you and Merry Christmas!

18
Feature Requests / Re: MJPEG
« on: December 17, 2013, 11:05:25 PM »
I also disagree, if you do some research the 5D2 out puts 1880x1250 raw 

It can be proven to you that a stock 5D cannot shoot any form of raw video. My research isn't the issue.

With an easy google you'll see that it only resolves to about 700-800p. I admit my wording of "capturing 720p and upscaling" was incorrect and terribly worded. Thank you for clearing it up. Regardless, the point still stands, Canon's video processing is subpar thanks to a greedy (but fair and logical) business model, and the ML team's hard work has taken long strides. True 1080p capture (non-RAW) would be an amazing option, if it is possible. That is all I am saying.

And yes, in terms of storytelling, I value things like motion rendering and dynamic range over resolution. However, the issue here is that the H.264 output is honestly far below standard in comparison to other, cheaper cameras. So while it is not paramount, to me it's a seriously and constantly lagging issue in my opinion.

19
Feature Requests / Re: MJPEG
« on: December 17, 2013, 07:46:31 PM »

i disagree.
 
regards chmee

You disagree? I'm pretty sure it's not opinion-based.

20
Feature Requests / Re: MJPEG
« on: December 16, 2013, 11:59:10 PM »
Yeah, C is expensive, but the sony is closer to 3k and BMCC is 2k and BMPCC is 1k, so there are options.  I guess my point is, when you can get a BMPCC new for the same cost as a used 5dII

Agreed. I was actually considering the BMPCC before I got the 5D2. I mean, ok, the form factor, no stills, really not ideal, I can live with that. But the crop factor was the dealbreaker. I love ultra-wides, and it seemed impossible to get a 14mm (full frame equivalent) on it. If not for that, I would've picked it up in a heartbeat. Also I use Windows so ProRes is useless to me.

21
Feature Requests / Re: MJPEG
« on: December 16, 2013, 10:13:33 PM »
I mean, I think your options are either deal with the "Bad" codec.  It is actually not that bad, really, tens of thousands of people use canon h264 every day for content that looks great.  It might not push or pull in post as much as you want, but for small file size, one man band or a small budget team, if you can't make a decent looking video in h264, raw isn't necessarily going to be the silver bullet that solves all your problems.

I think I was misunderstood, I'm saying that yes, the RAW is incredibly hard to make completely reliable, and is often overkill. All I'm saying is that if we also had the option to shoot plain MJPEG, we'd get increased sharpness, detail, and noise performance, without the limits and file sizes of RAW. Also I have to disagree about the stock video quality. The Panasonic cameras blow the Canon DSLR's stock image quality far out of the water at the same bitrates and less than half the price, it's frankly embarrassing, especially considering that the GH2 came out 5 years ago and the 5D3 came out last year. The pushing/pulling isn't an issue, it's that even now, the only option to get true 1080p video is to shoot RAW (stock 5D can't shoot true 1080p, only 720p scaled up to 1080p). That is slightly frustrating.

As for using other cameras, the C100, 300, and Sony FS series, those are all like $5000+... Incomparable. The 5D Mark II can be found for $1000, and makes a hell of a stills camera as well, in a DSLR form factor. If it had the option for MJPEG, it would really be a jack of all trades for great value.

22
So I moved my question into that thread, could you (any of the mods) delete this post altogether? Thank you!

23
Feature Requests / Re: MJPEG
« on: December 16, 2013, 10:05:41 PM »
That's HDR MJPEG and almost ten months old. I wanted to see if there were any further developments, and just a year ago (I think) RAW video was just a fantasy  ;D

+1.

I'd like to see MJPEG, no dual ISO isn't such a big deal, I just want a happy medium, because while I really appreciate the increased sharpness and detail, noise performance, and dynamic range over H.264, the instability, file sizes, and max resolutions bog it down. Don't get me wrong, these are completely understandable given what it's trying to accomplish, I'm not asking for a magical fix on those. Thing is, right now we have the two polar ends of the scale. A really bad stock codec, and then the highest of qualities of one. I feel like a lot of us would be happy with a healthy compromise option.

What do I mean by that? What if we didn't have RAW, but instead had JPEG instead or something similar. 1/3 of the file sizes, so the camera, global draw, etc. would not have to work as hard. More stability, less storage space required, not as speedy cards required, and yet retains all of the detail image quality and sharpness of RAW. Yes we lose a lot on dynamic range, but think of it as basically a higher quality codec, a step up from H.264, the only difference from RAW being that 14-bit colour depth, everything else the same. Basically the ONLY change being the format of capture. Instead of RAW, it's JPEG.

Is this possible? I think this would be an amazing feature, and very usable as well. This might allow for non-H.264 true 1080p on the 5D Mark II (which isn't possible now) since it doesn't have to work as hard, as well as perhaps higher frame rates? I also feel like it would be possible because if you can get 24p RAW working, shouldn't it be easier/ a step down to get JPEG working the same way? I don't know, so if I'm wrong, let me know of course.

24
Duplicate, http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=8854

Oh thank you, and sorry. Though I believe that was addressing HDR MJPEG, no? I was wondering about just straight up JPEG, which there was no answer for...

25
Ok so let's face it, the RAW video is amazing, thank you ML team for this groundbreaking feature and all your hard work to get to it.

I really appreciate the increased sharpness and detail, noise performance, and dynamic range over H.264. However the instability, file sizes, and max resolutions not so much. Don't get me wrong, these are completely understandable given what it's trying to accomplish, I'm not asking for a magical fix on those. Thing is, right now we have the two polar ends of the scale. A really bad stock codec, and then the highest of qualities of one. I feel like a lot of us would be happy with a healthy compromise option.

What do I mean by that? What if we didn't have RAW, but instead had JPEG instead or something similar. 1/3 of the file sizes, so the camera, global draw, etc. would not have to work as hard. More stability, less storage space required, not as speedy cards required, and yet retains all of the detail image quality and sharpness of RAW. Yes we lose a lot on dynamic range, but think of it as basically a higher quality codec, a step up from H.264, the only difference from RAW being that 14-bit colour depth, everything else the same. Basically the ONLY change being the format of capture. Instead of RAW, it's JPEG.

Is this possible? I think this would be an amazing feature, and very usable as well. This might allow for non-H.264 true 1080p on the 5D Mark II (which isn't possible now) since it doesn't have to work as hard, as well as perhaps higher frame rates? I also feel like it would be possible because if you can get 24p RAW working, shouldn't it be easier/ a step down to get JPEG working the same way? I don't know, so if I'm wrong, let me know of course.

Thank you!

Pages: [1] 2