Menu

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.

Show posts Menu

Messages - trial/error

#1
Quote from: Protoltype on January 19, 2014, 02:53:54 AM
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 ;)

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!
#2
Quote from: Protoltype on January 17, 2014, 02:30:29 PM

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.

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!
#3
Hello guys,
I'd like this topic to be a consistent space for slow motion video samples shot raw 60p at various 16:9 resolutions with the 5D Mark III and all your experiences with it.

The main problem I encounter when looking for these videos is that many people trade the 16:9 aspect for more recording time and thus shoot their slow-mo raw sequences at super-wide/anamorphic ratios (like 1:2.35). This is absolutely ok but I think that there are many people like me regarding the aesthetics of 16:9 to be more suitable for internet videos and most music videos.

Therefore, I'd love to see the real world video examples which would show how intercutting the 25p 16:9 raw footage shot at 1920x1080 with raw slow motion 60p 16:9 sequences shot at lower resolutions actually looks like! It would be good to find a good compromise between recording time at least 20-30seconds and resolution which would still look decent at 16:9 with the rest of the 25p 1080p footage.

I guess I'm not the only one considering the 5D Mark III for shooting music videos in raw. That's why I'm curious how incorporating slow motion in resolution lower than 1920x672 would go with the rest of the 1080p footage. At least 30 seconds of 60p 1920x672 would be the ultimate answer but as long as you get only about 6 seconds even with the fastest cards (because of the 5D's buffer), we have to go a step down in 16:9 resolution.

From what I've been able to find, you can record at different resolutions at 60p allowing the post-stretching to 16:9 aspect and each of these resolutions give you a different recording time depending on your CF. These 60p "16:9-doable" resolutions should go something like this: 1920x672 (16:9), 1600x560 (16:9), 1472x516 (16:9), etc... I'm not sure if I got the numbers correct and I think that there is one more 16:9 60p resolution between 1920x672 and 1600x560 but you get the point...

Seeing a video showing similar or same scenes shot with the above specifications would help a lot! I haven't seen any slow motion 16:9 intercutting with normal speed 1080p test on a 5D Mark III in raw yet.

Please, with your tests also specify the following: your CF card, 16:9 resolution used, frame-rate (mostly 60p please, although 50p can be interesting as well), recording time you achieved with your CF at given resolution and lenses/filters used.

Excited to see your results!  :)
#4
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...