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 - Ilia3101

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 19
There's been some mentions of a magic lantern film on the forum lately, or some kind of collaborative project... a bit of this definitely needs to be included

What came to my mind is if MLVapp is scriptable?

Would be if I'd kept this promise...

Would be great to see it used with your scripts! I'll add a command line version that will work similar to mlv_dump, which would be useful for integrating with scripts (and would work on Windows and Linux!)




ML-Forum" border="0
<a target='_blank' href=''>craps 6 and 8 strategy[/url]

The rocks on the one below, looks brighter because for me it was easier to grade with Shadow Adobe PS RAW slider. Maybe using the same equivalent slider withing ML App I can achieve the same result. If it looks kind of noisy is because I filmed 1080p 1:1 for an 200mm equivalent from a 24-70mm Sigma Art.

Thanks for the comparison.

What MLV App does is the same as Adobe camera raw, it processes raw images, except straight from MLV instead of through DNG.

So a fairer comparison would be one of these:

1. Convert to LOG in MLV app and to LOG in ACR (can use andy600's log product), then grade both versions in Vegas, then compare
2. Grade in MLV App and in ACR, then compare

But out of the comparison I like both results. The rocks are nice and contrasty in Adobe, but I think MLVApp version is more warm and "cinematic" (my fav word).

Help does anyone know where I can find an exceptionally cheap 5D mark 2 in America??? I broke my 5D with an accidental smash on a rock, so now I'm stuck with a Sony RX100 taking boring pics :(

I'm at Moab Utah, small place so unlikely anyone is from here, but I'll be at Las Vegas in a couple of days.

I would really happy if someone knows where I can find a terrible condition, super cheap, maybe even partially broken 5D mark 2 (as long as it has enough functionality left to shoot raw video)

Or if anyone has one to sell.


General Chat / Re: Guessing 1st April for 2019 - Share your thoughts
« on: April 04, 2019, 12:50:09 AM »
Z cam image looks lik e crap. Similar to mlv app at max chroma blur.

The post that was a reply to has disappeared??? What happened on this thread ???

Thanks a lot. I will see if I can find a way to convert that to a matrix.

Unclear which ACES gamut :/

General Chat / Re: Guessing 1st April for 2019 - Share your thoughts
« on: April 03, 2019, 10:07:47 PM »
Z cam image looks lik e crap. Similar to mlv app at max chroma blur.

:o Can't wait for it.

Code: [Select]
    { /* GAMUT_Rec2020 */
         1.72466, -0.36222, -0.25442,
        -0.66941,  1.62275,  0.01240,
         0.01826, -0.04444,  0.94329
    { /* GAMUT_ACES_AP0 */
        1.0498110175, 0.0000000000, -0.0000974845,
        -0.4959030231, 1.3733130458, 0.0982400361,
        0.0000000000, 0.0000000000, 0.9912520182

Hope I'm not spoiling the surprise. But, according to Walter Arrighetti, AP0 is mostly used for archival of footage, while AP1 is the one used for color grading (normally ACEScct).
Looking foward to version 1.7!

Spoiling is fine.

And thanks, I have heard about AP1 before from Andy600, but he said the AP0 gamut would also be good for internal processing as it is very wide. I would add the AP1 gamut too if it weren't so difficult to find the matrix online. Maybe you know where it is ;)

General Chat / Re: Guessing 1st April for 2019 - Share your thoughts
« on: April 02, 2019, 12:56:55 AM »
It's still not very clear to me what path I'll choose - in any case, it has to be one that all other developers are OK with. For now, I'm welcoming your suggestions!

I can't speak for everyone, but I support any of the ideas you mentioned.

I am sure I have said this before, my idea was a Magic Lantern page on Patreon (or an alternative), that way it's easy for people to do recurring donations.

Also because Magic Lantern has helped me a lot , MLVApp too , I have started to search to a Cuda programmers for making MLVApp GPU Accelerated.

You mean you are looking for someone (who knows how) to help make MLV App GPU accelerated with CUDA?

I have actually had an idea for some time on how to do this. My idea: convert the whole processing, excluding black/white level/shadow/highlight/denoising things, to a single LUT. All processing would then be done with an OpenGL fragment shader (with the help of that LUT to make much of it extra simple and fast). I've been wanting to do this for ages, but I don't have the time.

And sorry everyone there wasn't an April fool joke. it's coming a few days late. Github contains some spoilers (it's real funny)

Thanks for all the efforts in this project. MLVApp is amazing. I use it in every production to convert MLV to ProRes in Log-C.

A higher color space is the only thing holding me from using MLVApp exclusively to process MLV files.
It would be great if you actually achieve that. Is there any specific problem you can't solve?

We already convert to sRGB correctly, other colour spaces like ACES are just need a different matrix. But thanks for all the interesting links you sent. You may be pleased in a few days ;) ;) ;) ;)

Would having chroma blur only for dark areas help ? Is it currentlyu for entire image , darks,mids and highs ?
It is currently for the entire image. Are you able to compile the app? as @masc has added really really good denoising that you could try, it can do what chroma blur does without ruining colour at edges.

Also do we have control over h.264 compression ? I could use more detail when exporting.Theres huge detail gap between mjpeg and h264/265 export

I think some progress may have been made with this since last release.

General Chat / Re: Guessing 1st April for 2019 - Share your thoughts
« on: March 25, 2019, 10:22:13 PM »

@Jonit thanks for the comparisons!

I will try and grt MLRV set up to do my own tests. I wonder how much closer they would or would not be with adjusted balance/exposure

Ok then this issue will need some more work. Maybe wait until I add a white balance slider.

Took me about an hour to fiddle with the sliders and curves to match it relatively close to that MLVRawViewer C-Log  :D.
Ah right...

Can you please elaborate a bit on this statement? I'm not very knowledgeable in that area so would be cool to understand a bit more :). Thanks!

Well, MLV App's C-Log doesn't use the C-Log gamut yet, it only matches the C-Log log curve. Proper log profiles are coming with the colour space improvements mentioned earlier.

My assumption was based on how similar they look... so it's possible that only MLV App is wrong, or both are wrong in different ways. Maybe @andy600 about if MLRV does log colour right?

I don't know if this is too much ask, but could you make a direct comparison of MLV App and MLRawViewer in C log and rec709? I just want to see how different they look... also see if unchecking use camera matrix in MLV App brings them closer or anything.

Andy600, we missed you and colorspace discussions 8). Ilia3101 been working on aces transform for a while. Seems hard.

Idk if what I'm doing is an 'aces transform' - the main goal is just to use a bigger gamut for processing. I am also considering ProPhoto RGB, it seems like the primaries on that colour space may be more close to our perception of 'red' 'green' and 'blue' so it would be better for RGB curves and things like that.

Those discussions were fun but I was so clueless back then :D

@Jonit This is due to how white balancing is done before debayering, MLRawViewer seems to do it better for that shot. Could you see if MLV App 1.4 is different or better please? there was a small change made between the two in debayer white balance, that improved things, but sometimes didn't.  I want to add an option for debayer white balance, hopefully that will fix your issue.

Also I'm shocked how close the two look... but they're both wrong, as they use sRGB ;)

There's no new code yet , I'm doing everything though
Now that should clear up things about code etc. ....

Thanks it does clear stuff up. Then could we just have the code for the build that can do 3008x1080 resolution? Last time I checked, the uploaded code was the 2880x1080 version.

and the 1x3 files display correctly in mlv app when exported to compressed format

Good to hear it works.

No bug. metadata has to be set in code, so where┬┤s the code?

@reddeercity if you released code when you come up with more changes, all of your presets would be added to the menu by now, and the camera would set stretch metadata correctly. Danne is very keen on helping.

I appreciate that you have the original code uploaded, but it's important to have modified newer versions too.

I now implemented a label which shows what you'll get.

Tip: if you set metadata in camera correctly, MLVApp shows the right AR automatically, and you also can fast export to DNG with correct AR. Adobe programs show correct AR out of the box then.

Thanks! I like this

How large is the crop factor? I love the high resolution 5x stuff but the closer we can get to full frame with higher rez is obviously desirable.

Divide 5616 (sensor width) by the video width, for example: 5616/3008 = 1.86x crop

@reddeercity, I know you have been increasing the width mostly, but would it be possible to increase the height and ignore width? something like a 2000x1500 preset for example, instead of 3008x1080. It would be nice for anamorphic lenses or people who just enjoy aspect ratios.

Thanks, actually looks much better than I expected! Can't say it's sharper than the 3008x1080 preset, but close, will be useful as it has less crop factor.

The only way to process this is in Adobe After Effect , non of the app on the form do 3x horizontal resolution I've only seen 2x , I did make a  request on the mlv app thread
but got no response .

You did get a response...

But now back to your request: 3.0x horizontal stretch is there since v1.5. If the file has the right metadata the setup works automatically. If not, you have to setup height stretch factor to 0.33x. MLVApp always upsamples since v1.5, so a height stretch factor of 0.33x is realized as width stretch factor of 3.0x. In older versions you can do this manually for ffmpeg export by entering your desired output resolution (frame is stretched once only on export, so no quality loss). Maybe we should add a information label somewhere, which shows the resolution after stretching.

Basically do this: set the vertical stretch factor to 0.33x in Transformation section, and MLV App will upsample horizontally by 3x.

I will admit that is confusing. @masc could we make it nicer and have it as horizontal 3.0x? Or even allow the user to enter custom value?

Also an shortened MLV would be nice if you could? to test out in MLV App :)

Really exciting,

But it should be compared to the original '3.5K' preset (3008x1080), to make sure it actually gives a more detailed image. I'm still uncertain about 3x squeeze.

Can we see some samples maybe?

Share Your Videos / Re: Canon EOS M - raw video tests - March 2019
« on: March 03, 2019, 10:35:25 PM »
I like the drone shot. What version of MLV app and what settings?

Tip: I don't recommend rec709 processing mode, what it does is give you the closest to exact real world colour and output in rec709 colour space, but it doesn't look great because it doesn't take in to consideration the fact that rec709 has small dynamic range and small gamut. Tonemapped/standard/film also output in rec709 colour space, but have smooth roll off and allows you to adjust stuff, I see no reason not to use these instead ;)

Camera-specific discussion / Re: Canon 5D Mark IV
« on: March 03, 2019, 02:47:16 PM »
Reddeercity has been able to achieve those kind of frame rates on the 5D mark 2

Hi yes I agree its a upside with raw, but I talk more specifically between ML raw and Canon RAW or ArriRAW were every profile you see has been carefully made for that sensor or when the sensor has been made for that profile.
I would say that its more the characteristics of color of the sensor that matter more then whats emedded in the raw file. Otherwise BMD, Canon C200 raw, ArriAlexa or Red would use the same color profiles and settings when shooting raw and in postprocessing?

This way of thinking implies photographers have worse colour management as it is mainly based on using a colour matrix to convert camera gamut to XYZ or whatever software has internally, and from what I've seen raw files from different cameras look very similar when opened in raw converters so I think it's actually accurate.

I think camera specific profiles by the companies are mostly made to give their cameras a special look. But there will be small differences (errors) in camera colour because of the red/green/blue filters on the pixels, maybe the profiles try to correct for this, but it's not physically possible to make most cameras have truly correct colour. According to what I've read, to achieve true accuracy, the filters would need to transmit light in a way that each channel is a mixture of the XYZ functions:

Can't remember the technical word for it though.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 19