Messages

1

Reverse Engineering / Re: Reverse Engineering Picture Styles

« on: October 28, 2020, 02:58:00 PM »

I'm afraid as we've pulled apart the files, there isn't anything which can capture more dynamic range than the stock Neutral profile already does with its true bare-bones matrix. What you're seeing in those boosted styles is not more dynamic range but simply a reallocation of the range, typically brightening shadows up (hence why you're seeing more noise) at the expense of cramming the mid tones further together. There's actually a good example of this type of 'expansion' much earlier in the thread. If you look on page 5 you'll find Danne trying to work out a more linear DCP profile and thinking they may have seen more dynamic range (but to their credit, acknowledging they may have been imaging it) and dfort following up a few replies further down pointing out that after careful inspection there wasn't more range, it's just that the peak brightness was a little lower so it made the same detail look slightly better-defined. What you're getting with your noisier Cinetech profile is the same thing at the opposite end of the scale, as I said before; the same range, just gaining definition in one area at the cost of definition in another.

Canon's own plain ol' Neutral is the matrix that renders the widest range and the most detail. Not necessarily the most clearly-defined detail and range, but the most in a total sense. You simply can not get purer than that 1/1/1/0/0 matrix.

But, as I said as part of my much longer comment above, if what you're using is working for you and getting you the results you like then don't worry about whether or not some other method is or isn't technically better, or easier, or more popular, or whatever. If the final image you get is how you wanted it to be and you like the workflow then just keep doing what you're doing.

Interesting stuff. At least the Cinetech gives me a faster workflow with colour grading in post compared to Neutral. The noise doesn't bother me as it's very easy clean up with a plug-in like Neat video. Thanks for the explanation.

2

Reverse Engineering / Re: Reverse Engineering Picture Styles

« on: October 27, 2020, 09:15:11 PM »

I really like the Cinetech picture style for my shooting style from Visioncolor for shooting 8 bit .h264. More dynamic range compared to neutral (prolost settings). Maybe a little bit more noise but you can clean this up in post.

3

Camera-specific Development / Re: Canon EOS R / RP

« on: October 07, 2020, 03:09:12 PM »

Lookup your fallacy here. Poll result: https://mobile.twitter.com/autoexec_bin/status/1182941915337150464

To lazy to read it all. Based on what I know about fallacies. I would assume you mean faulty generalization. Good one, it was my own opinion and shouldn't sell it as the opinion of a larger sample

Your comments make me laugh sometimes on the forum here. To the point although a bit cocky. Maybe it's the result of all the noob questions here. Maybe it's the way you are as a person. Or both?

4

Camera-specific Development / Re: Canon EOS R / RP

« on: October 07, 2020, 01:40:38 PM »

Good to clarify this up indeed. Work on the project whenever you want and try to enjoy it as much as possible. If you and others ever succeed to put ML on this camera that would be amazing! And if it doesn't get to that stage. Well at least you had fun in it if you work on it when you want and you also learned something along the way.

BTW is there a reason why ML is free? Has this something to do with Canon to avoid any law suits?

If it takes so much work for developers I think it would be fair to compensate them for firmware that works properly. (if it's stable and sort of reliable). Maybe people don't like to donate in advance in the hope there ever will be ML on a cam. Although for 'stable firmware' I think people would like to pay some money? This would be nice for developers to earn a bit of money by doing their hobby. It's probably not enough for all the hours that go into it. But it's always nice to gain a little bit of money by doing what you love.

5

Camera-specific Development / Re: Canon EOS R / RP

« on: October 06, 2020, 11:38:08 PM »

I don't get the colors right yet, but I can draw proper shapes on the screen. We have debug output now.

Great to see progress. As a noob I am wondering. In terms of any basic first version that requires testing. Is the current stage at something like 5% progress, 20%?
Is it possible at all to tell?

In no way I'm trying to push just curious how to interpret some posts over here as a noob. I will just think like there will never be a ML on this cams Thanks for the hard work.

6

Camera-specific Development / Re: Canon EOS R / RP

« on: October 02, 2020, 08:54:42 PM »

Amazing keep up the good work!!

7

crop_rec and derived builds / Re: Danne's crop_rec_4k experiments for EOS M

« on: October 02, 2020, 07:15:35 PM »

Couple of questions about this amazing little beast thanks to all the developers

1. Is there a way to get a useable 16mm equivalent field of view (FF) with the canon 10 - 18 @ 10mm with EOS M with Magic Lantern Raw? With the 1736x976 16:9 mode maybe?
2. Is it correct if you shoot the 2.5k raw mode that you will end up with a (canon 10-18 @ 10mm) 10x1,6 (APS-C)x3(ML)x0,71 (speedbooster) = 34mm field of view FF?
3. Any other modes with good quality for 16mm (FF) FOV?
4. Is the 1736x976 raw mode with no additional crop beside the 1,6 APS C crop? Is this mode useable in terms of aliasing (especially because this is an UWA lens), what is the max ISO that is useable with noise reduction plugin like Neatvideo? With my 200d I can clean up to ISO 3200 pretty well, but like to stay <1600.
5. What is the max focal length I can reach with a 60mm macro lens in raw with all the different modes on the EOS M. And if there is a huge crop option this also makes it harder to use in low light right? What is the useable ISO in the highest raw crop modes.
6. Is it possible to shoot 25fps with EOS M in raw?
7. Are there any 16:9 aspect ratio modes with higher resolution / quality then 1736x976?

8

Raw Video / Mixing ML 14bit raw footage with internal 8bit .h264 no ML in same sequence

« on: October 02, 2020, 12:24:58 PM »

Did anyone ever try to mix ML 14bit raw footage with internal 8bit .h264 no ML in the same sequence?

9

Camera-specific Development / Re: Canon 70D

« on: October 01, 2020, 03:15:01 PM »

The RVM is a full sensor readout mode with no crop factor but it is a 3x3 mode meaning that you may end up with some aliasing in that mode.  If you learn how to avoid it, you can get stunning quality RAW video that upscales nicely to 4k for Youtube.

For gimbal work, the EF-S 10-18/IS is your lens. 

Oh yeah I have the 10-18, 60mm macro and sigma 18-35 1.8 already. Love this glass collection from uwa to macro abilities. The ML crop mode with my canon 60mm is also very nice for super close up footage. What I don't like about the 10-18 sometimes is the large dof. For my kind of shooting style (indoor and more close ups as well) I love to have the sigma 18-35 on a gimbal and play around with small DOF. This is where DPAF really helps or all shots will be like rack focus.

10

crop_rec and derived builds / Re: Bilal's crop_rec_4k experiments for 700D / T5i

« on: September 30, 2020, 08:53:56 PM »

Amazing to see all the developments on this camera.

I have a few questions does the Eos m offer a lot more features than the 700d for magic lantern raw recording or quite similar now a days? I like the form factor of the 700d more and my EF-S collection fits directly on it.

Beside the 1,6 crop factor of the 700d. Are there any high quality raw recording modes with no additional crop on top of the 1,6? For example would I been able to use my canon 10-18 @ 10mm and get a 16mm equivalent look in any raw video modes? If it's possible at all, is the footage usable as I read that ultra wide angle lenses can suffer from aliasing.

Are there any higher frame rates than 25 for example 50 possible for raw video recording?

Is single autofocus by touch possible to grab focus?

11

Camera-specific Development / Re: Canon 70D

« on: September 30, 2020, 03:14:06 PM »

I'm a Canon 200d shooter and it looks very interesting to swap to the 70d to shoot 1080 raw and upscale it to 4k at the end for YT. I also use my gimbal quite a lot so I also need 1080p 50p raw. I do love DPAF on my 200d and the tracking feature is very handy. Is that possible at all with 1080 raw to have good continous AF on a gimbal and tracking features? Then it would be the perfect cam for me at such a price point.

In short is the 70d with magic lantern able to give me continous AF / DPAF, higher framerates like 50p and raw with much higher quality than standard canon 8bit .h264 footage of my 200d?

I was looking into the EOS M but the lack of DPAF and flip screen makes it hard to use on my gimbal. 

How stable is the 70d? I don't need to record long clips. Just a lot of short clips to make a cinematic sequence.

Regarding the 1832x1024 resolution. Could I just make a timeline in Premiere pro based on 1832x1024 and when I edited the whole sequence upscale it to UHD before posting to YT?

Any other issues need to be aware off? Let me know.

My plan is to use a preset to get a reasonable base in MLV and then make prores files and edit and grade further in Premiere.

12

General Help Q&A / Re: Which APS-C camera for 1080p 25 / 50p Raw camera with ML and useable AF

« on: September 30, 2020, 02:35:38 PM »

what about reliable continuous AF and 50p but no flip screen?

 I guess mixing the footage from 200d 8 bit on a gimbal (dpaf) with canon eos m raw on tripod and slider will be quite jarring in a sequence no? Any options to make this work?

13

General Help Q&A / Which APS-C camera for 1080p 25 / 50p Raw camera with ML and useable AF

« on: September 30, 2020, 12:59:52 PM »

Currently shooting with the canon 200d and since I have a lot of APS-C glass it seems a cheap way to jump to a ML camera that can shoot raw to boost my IQ.

I am okay with the slower workflow as in using a preset in MLV APP and wait for the files to be transfered to Prores before using into Premiere.

Couple of questions.. since I use my camera also a lot on a gimbal it is a bummer that the EOS M doesn't have a flippy screen and DPAF. Are there any APS-C Canon camera with stable reliable magic lantern raw firmware 1080p with flippy screen, useable continous AF and tracking AF features? Higher res than 1080p is also fine as long as it doesn't cut on 50fps recording and AF features.

In short is there any reliable ML camera that supports good continous AF / DPAF and higher framrates like 50p with higher quality than standard canon 8bit .h264 footage?

The Eos M doesn't have a flippy screen. How is the continous AF with 1080p raw?
What about  the 7d and 70d?