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 - Protoltype

Pages: [1]
1
@protoltype
I,d be interested in a comparison between red epic and ml raw in let,s say 50fps and 1920x606. Could be done in 5 seconds clips.

Here,s a comparison between two aspect ratios on a 5d mark 3 and a tutorial how to restretch several clips in 50fps in after effects.
Conclusion

(16:9) 1728 x 606 50fps works continuous and works fine interpolated to 1920x1080

Other fine alternative aspect ratio continuous is 1920x544(2:20:1)


Thank you I'll check that out.
As for the comparison between Red Epic and 5D Mark3 ML Raw, maybe in a few month I can get my hands on the Red Epic than I'll definately do a image quality comparison.
But not only the image quality. The post production workflow with r3d files is so easy and smooth. R3D is also RAW but here you can go in and define the compression strength.
The files are supported by almost any NLE. It is GPU accelerated and the rendering is muuuuuuch quicker than 5D Mk3 RAW DNG Files. Although the Red shoots with higher resolutions.
But I think in maybe 1 year the ML RAW DnG files will be supported aswell and render GPU accelerated. This would be a great feature !

2
Thank you again, this kind of information was hard to find. I'm so into slow-motion because I'm hoping to use the Mark lll's raw for music video production. Creating fake frames using Twixtor is either a big "no-no" or really time consuming in its full version. You would need to mask everything, etc. Unnecessary hell. 1728x606 looks promising :) Kudos for doing all these benchmarks for us!

Of course you are right it is always better to shoot slow mo straight away :)
No problem I am happy I could help.

3
Have you seen the quality of unsqueezed 50fps? It is beautiful. I, d revommend using it any day of the week.

Yeah you are right.
I am just spoiled because I did shoot with a Red Epic recently, but it is not fair to compare both cameras because of their huge price difference  ;D
I fell in love with it. But of course I cannot afford it  ::) The 5D Mark 3 with ML RAW is coming reaally close to it's image quality (in non-slow mo).

4
Thanks, it helped. So is there one more 16:9 resolution available between 1600x560 and 1920x672? If so, how long can you record 60p and 50p with this CF at it? I know it's not going to be continuous, but how many seconds would I typically get? Thank you again!

Yeah there are 2 more resolutions betweeen these:  1728x606 and 1856x650

1600x560 @ 60fps = 13 seconds
1728x606 @ 60fps = 5 seconds
1856x650 @ 60fps = 3 seconds

1600x560 @ 50fps = continuos !
1728x606 @ 50fps = continuos !
1856x650 @ 50fps = 9 seconds
1920x672 @ 50fps = 5-6 seconds

All tests with:
SanDisk 160MB/s 64GB CF
ML Build Aug22 (raw_rec module)
Global Draw = Off
Small Hacks = ON
Preview = Canon


I think the bottleneck here is not the card itself.
It is the Canon 5D Mark3 or Magic Lantern.
The Canon 5D Mark3 is probably overloaded with processing when it records with 60fps so there is not enough processing power left to write the RAW data with ML fast enough.
If I am wrong, please someone correct me.

But why are you so hungry to record with 60fps raw.
I think even 50fps is not worth it shooting raw because the quality is not so beautiful like the 24fps raw 1920x1080.
The vertical resolution is squashed hardly so you loose information which you have to stretch in post....

For slow motion I would better shoot with 24 or 25 fps raw continuosly and slow the footage down in post with the plugin twixtor or the foundry's kronos.
Glad to help you out ;)

5
i only payed attention to the 3584x :P  darn!  so 2.5K (2432 x 1366) work's continuously?


So 2560 x 1024 (2.50:1)@ 24fps is working sometimes continuosly but sometimes just one minute.
I think it depends on how much color information is send through the camera's sensor...
But that is just my estimation.
The developers can maybe give a more detailed explanation of that.

If you want to shoot for production with 2560 x 1024 (2.50:1) @ 24fps shots that are longer than one minute I would not recommend it.
But anything below that is fine ;)

I think a common good movie will not have shots longer than one minute except it is a prepared steadycam shot without any cuts.
But it depends as always :D

6
One thing I was looking for in your SanDisk 160MB/s CF benchmark was the recording time one can get at various 60p resolutions allowing post-stretching to 16:9 aspect ratio. These resolutions should be something like: 1920x672 (16:9), 1600x560 (16:9), 1472x516 (16:9)...

I'm not sure if these resolutions are accurate and I believe that there is also another 16:9 resolution available between 1920x672 and 1600x560. Could you please test most of these (especially the highest 3 or 4) at 60p and post the recording times you get with this CF?

I want to stress once more that I am only interested in resolutions stretchable to 16:9 aspect ratio shot at 60p (not 1:2.35 or 3:2). Thanks...


So here are my new results with the SanDisk 160MB/s 64GB CF + ML Build Aug22 (raw_rec module):

Continuos recording with maximum resolutions @ 60FPS & Aspect Ratio 16:9 (Global Draw = Off, Small Hacks = ON)
  • 1600x560 (Stretch in post by 1.61x to get 1600x900) BUT ONLY WITH PREVIEW MODE on "HaCKeD" (so no live-view while recording)
  • 1472x516 (Stretch in post by 1.61x to get 1472x828) PREVIEW MODE "Canon"

Of course less than 1472x516 will also be successful :D
Hope this helped.

7
One thing I was looking for in your SanDisk 160MB/s CF benchmark was the recording time one can get at various 60p resolutions allowing post-stretching to 16:9 aspect ratio. These resolutions should be something like: 1920x672 (16:9), 1600x560 (16:9), 1472x516 (16:9)...

I'm not sure if these resolutions are accurate and I believe that there is also another 16:9 resolution available between 1920x672 and 1600x560. Could you please test most of these (especially the highest 3 or 4) at 60p and post the recording times you get with this CF?

I want to stress once more that I am only interested in resolutions stretchable to 16:9 aspect ratio shot at 60p (not 1:2.35 or 3:2). Thanks...

Allright I will do that tomorrow with the SanDisk 160 MB/s CF 64GB.
I did send the Lexar one back because for me SanDisk won this game.
But for now I can say that I did try 1920x672 (16:9) @ 60fps, it did not work for me either with the Lexar or with the SanDisk CF.

I decided to take the SanDisk one also because I never ever had any problems or fails with SanDisk CFs before.
All my CFs are from SanDisk. With this new one now I have 5 CFs from SanDisk (2x 16GB 60MB/s; 2x 32GB 60MB/s; 1x 64GB 160MB/s)
Whereas I read about Lexar many people complaining that their Lexar CF 1000x 64GB failed after a few month or a year later.
I never had a Lexar so I didn't want risk anything as I do shoot weddings. I would go completely blank if this would happen.
It depends. But we will see how long my SanDisk can handle RAW shooting :)


Guys unfortunately I did not hear about the Lexar 1066x ones. But they seem to advertise the same speed and features as the SanDisk 160MB/s ones.
As soon I get my hands on new stuff I will make new benchmarks and post these in this forum to you and others who are thinking of buying the best for the price.
I'm glad that I could help at least some people ;)

8
so with the SanDisk Extreme Pro 64 GB 160MB/s it is possible to continuously record 3.5K til the CF card fills up?

Yeah you're right I did achieve this resolution in crop mode RAW:
3584 x 716 (5:1!) @ 24fps

But the important result was that I was only too achieve it with the raw_rec module (not the newer mlv_raw module)

9
It would be great if you could try to include the just announced 1066x cards from Lexar!

Also very interesting would be to find out, if the new sandisk and lexar cards higher capacities (>64GB) now perform at least as good as the 64GB cards or if theiy are even better. Because most 1000x cards have their peak performance at 32 and 64gb. Above the performance usually became worse.

Yeah you're right. Unfortunately my budget allowed currently only the 64GB ones. Higher capacities were far too expensive.
But I have to say that in general I like to work with lower capacity cards and more of them instead of just one 256GB one for example. Because if anytime a 256GB CF card fails all of your footage will be gone. But instead if you have got 4x 64GB cards and just one card fails then u got 3x64GB footage. Better than nothing :)

10
The link doesn't work  :-\

:o Link is working for me.
Guys is the link working now or really not.
Wait I will upload to another site.

Here is a new link:
http://www.docdroid.net/8813/cf-sandisklexar-ml-comparison.pdf.html

11

You were right Krane.
I contacted SanDisk Europe and asked them to verify that this CF card is an original SanDisk CF.
They did verify that this is their original SanDisk CF card.

Thank you, sometimes Google brings you to ideas that are completely wrong :)
Folks I will upload soon a PDF document where I did run lot of benchmarks with the Canon 5D Mark 3 and ML RAW Enabled.
I compare the SanDisk Extreme Pro 64 GB 160MB/s vs Lexar Professional 1000x 64 GB.

Just watchout here for another link I will create a new Topic.


Here we go, here is the comparison on a pdf document downloadable for free:
http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=9967.new#new

Have fun!

12
Hey guys and maybe 0,2% girls :D

I did put a pdf document together for all of you who are interested for the following Compact Flash cards with best results in Magic Lantern CONTINUOS RAW Recording:
  • SanDisk Extreme Pro 64 GB 160MB/s
  • Lexar Professional 1000x 64 GB
And it's of course for free ;)

In the link below you can download the pdf document.
First I did many benchmarks with Magic Lantern's CF Benchmarking Tool.
After that I tested both cards for continuos RAW Recording at different Resolutions and FPS which were maximum possible (at this time of Magic Lantern's possibilities).
What I also decided to do is comparing the two different RAW RECORDING MODULES (raw_rec & mlv_raw) at their top speeds.
Check out that document before posting too much questions ;)

Here we go (first click on the link, then right-click and save the pdf document to your desktop):
http://www.directupload.net/file/d/3502/kuyqmw8d_pdf.htm


If there are any suggestions to make that document more readable or include other things, don't hesitate to leave a comment for that.
Any other questions besides which are answered in the document itself are welcome :)

13
Of course Canon will shut it off for you if it's too hot.

Ohh ok.
I thought Magic Lantern turns this function off because I read something about shutting the camera off when it becomes too hot in their document.
Can't remember which document it was though.

So I don't need to worry bricking my camera because of high temperatures?
Generally, will higher internal temperatures affect the sensors quality let's say maybe after 2 years?

14
Hey folks,

since a few days I am constantly making benchmarks with ML on the 5DMk3 ML_Build28Dez.
And I did some of them also with Global Draw On.

I wonder somehow the temperature that is shown on the liveview (top section) is getting red fast.
What is the maximum temperature? So that I can turn off the camera if it gets too hot.
Or does ML shut the camera down automatically?

Thanks in advance.

15
Re-branding is a common business practice. For example, Samsung makes virtually all of the computer panel used in the industry even though you buy monitors from Apple or Dell.

The problem comes when you intentionally mislead or use someone else name without their permission. The unique thing about branding is it establish a reputation of quality. As you might guess, manufacturers are very guarded about what they put their name on.

The problem with those second tier cards is they typically lack strict quality control. These things are stamped in mass so some batches are good, while other batches are faulty but make it through. That's why many people experience this 50/50 good/bad from some card makers. Essentially making the consumer, their quality control. Which many people don't mind, if they can save money.


You were right Krane.
I contacted SanDisk Europe and asked them to verify that this CF card is an original SanDisk CF.
They did verify that this is their original SanDisk CF card.

Thank you, sometimes Google brings you to ideas that are completely wrong :)
Folks I will upload soon a PDF document where I did run lot of benchmarks with the Canon 5D Mark 3 and ML RAW Enabled.
I compare the SanDisk Extreme Pro 64 GB 160MB/s vs Lexar Professional 1000x 64 GB.

Just watchout here for another link I will create a new Topic.

16
Not. Those are valid readings. What were you expecting?

I was just confused about the name "CF SMI Corporation SDCFXPS-064G" and I don't have any clue why this name should be different than Alex's one.
If I was SanDisk I would just use one name for the same product. The values are just fine, though. But I personally bought SanDisk because I never had issues with their "original" CF-Cards reliability.

I googled "SMI Corporation Compact Flash" and found this:
http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/971601759/SMI_card_CF_Card_CompactFlash_card.html

And voila, there is the name "SMI".
I mean they seem to be really cheap and you can buy many of these fast cards. Probably same as fast as the SanDisk ones.
If I would want to make profit with this technique, I just would buy plenty of these cheap cards and replace the stickers with the SanDisk Extreme Pro 160MB/s ones.
Do you guys think this theory is crazy or do you think it is actually real? I am confused about that. The answer will not only help me but all others here in the forum and anywhere else in the world who are interested in the "original SanDisk" ones.

Thanks in advance !

17
Here are more benchmarks with Global Draw set to off.
With the mlv_rec module activated.
Preview = Canon
Extra Hacks = On
Buffer full method = 3
CF-only buffer = 3
Freshly formatted CF Card with exFat
Magic Lantern installed on a "SanDisk Ultra SDHC 32GB Class 10"
Original Canon Battery

Fake card or not?






18
Hey guys,

I just bought a few days ago a fresh "Sandisk 64gb Extreme Pro CF 160MB/s" from Amazon.
But as you can see in my benchmark picture, there is the name:
CF SMI Corporation SDCFXPS-064G

and not like Alex Stroud's benchmark picture, where stands:
CF SanDisk SDCFXPS-064G


Do you guys think I've catched a fake CF card?
What are your opinions?




Pages: [1]