Messages

can't find this one. What build should i use? currently on crop_rec_4k.2018Jul22.6D116 + overwritten crop-rec module.

It looks old, you can try the on on this post:
magiclantern-Nightly.2020Jul16.6D116.zip

Thanks a lot for the info, Levas 
It would be great to have a build where this value is saved! 

I tested it further and the vertical pink lines that I was getting when recovering highlights seem to be also gone when this value is set to 0x12.
I cannot see a decreased dynamic range either, quite the oposite, given that shadows are cleaner and I can more easily recover highlights, so at least on my tests, the only reason to have 0x10 are the crop modes.
I don't use crop modes because they don't look good with the antialiasing filter installed, so is there a way to set this value permanently to 0x12? It's not part of the settings that can be saved u_u

Awesome work, sounds promising!

I did a quick test of the 6400 ISO "sparkles" and they are almost gone with 0x12 
What is the magic of this parameter? Are there any other useful values? It's a pity that the value cannot be saved, it seems to be back to 0x10 after turning off the camera

Example below, 0x10 top, 0x12 bottom:

Nothing is broken when crop mode is off, the naming is confusing.
I made this to so 1832 width was working again (was available in some older builds, without crop mode it goes to 1824 as maximum width).
Another thing I liked is that in the crop mode menu, you can set the shutter range option to 'full range'.
So when shooting 25 fps, you could use 1/25th shutter time in lowlight.
So I used the 3x3 1832x1030 crop mode for low light situations giving me 1/25th shutter time option.

For low light situations:
Not sure if you have the build with 'LV raw type' option in the debug menu ?B
By default it is set to 0x10, giving maximum dynamic range, but also gives vertical line noise in low light situations. 0x10 also makes it possible to use the high resolutions crop modes.
If you set LV raw type to 0x12 you get much more cleaner (noise wise) video.
But you can't use the high resolutions crop modes (giving corrupted frames with 0x12), but you can use the 3x3 1832x1030 crop mode.
So for ultimate low light situation use:
Crop mode 3x3 1832x1030 with shutter range option set to 'full range'. (And use 1/25th as shutter time)
In debug menu set LV raw type to 0x12.

Thanks a lot for the tips!! I didn't even notice that there was a difference in width...

I was testing a lot of thing for low light, I will test now this 0x12 value, maybe it also helps with other issues I'm having. Didn't notice the vertical lines noise but I have multicolor sparkles when using 6400 ISO and also thin vertical lines when recovering the highlights.

Yes, it was all RAW 14bits, crop mode off except for the high fps clips.
The filter is awesome, but the price they ask for is crazy. I much rather expend that amount of money on a BMPCC OG.
I found it cheap on a second hand local shop so I got it out of curiosity.

Just in case someone was wondering if the filter would make a big difference, here are some samples with the VAF-6D anti-aliasing filter installed. I recorded some tricky shots for the 6D in 1080p mode (normally lots of aliasing), but with the filter is totally artifact-free.

Cannot wait for the EOS M filter from ALT CINE! 

There are reports of cams locked in states like VGA. Therefore forcing 1080i makes sense.

Now that you mention, when I decided that I didn't need the module, after switch it off, the resolution was very low, like VGA.
After restarting the camera without the module, it was normal again (1080i)

Just tried the module on the 6D, crop mode disabled, and the "System" option works (switched between 1080i@60Hz and 1080i@50Hz), but my monitor loses the image intermittently when "Signal" is set to progressive.
No need to force 1080i because it seems to be the standard for the 6D

Hi, do anyone know what is the "3x3 1832x1030-fix for max width" meaning by "fix"? Is it something broken when crop mode is OFF?
I tend to leave it OFF when using external monitor, because the zoomed view is broken

I've noticed that the new 1620p mode doesn't show the image through the HDMI out, is it something fixable or is this mode too special?

Not directly related to this build, but another issue that I have is that the image through the HDMI port is blowing the highlights from a certain brightness, while they still look good on the camera display and the histogram is also not reporting any overexposed area.
I thought that it would be a setting on the monitor, but I cannot fix it.
Is it a known issue? Anyone else did also notice that?

I miss quite often the option to quickly react to a post, like giving a "thumbs up" without having to quote and reply with an "ok" or "nice".

Most of the time I choose not to answer to avoid having useless messages on the thread, but I still would like to show my appreciation for a reply.

Would something like this be possible? Thanks!

Very impressive...! 
I value portability more than quality for regular use, so even if it's just a test and never gets usable, I find super cool to see this tiny cam recording RAW video 
What was the actual video resolution for 1080p mode?

Thanks, that I can try and copy   Won't be for a while though, got a bunch of tasks queued up.

I'm curious to see if there is a visible gain or not with dual ISO on the 200D 

Thanks, but that doesn't really mean anything to me, and doesn't explain how I could test what difference dual ISO makes.

For testing what I do is framing a scene where half of the frame is a window with the sun shining outside and different illuminated parts (I have trees with shadows, houses...), and the other half is the much darker interior of my house, where I place objects with textures and colors.

Then I adjust the exposure to preserve most of the highlights at base ISO, and record clips without dual ISO, and with dual ISO on different combinations (i.e. 100/200, 100/400, etc.).

Finally in MLVApp I adjust every clip to have the same exposure, recover the shadows to the max, and visually compare the improvement in shadow details at different settings.

I saw some software that can tell the dynamic range based on numbers, but I care more about visible differences.

I'm a dual ISO lover, did this test with all my cameras one day and it was a great surprise to see the EOS M with dual ISO 100/1600 having visually the same dynamic range as the BMPCC original

I have a 200D.  What's the evidence that it's "ISO invariant"?  How would I measure this, and how would I measure dual ISO performance?

I have dual ISO working on 200D but don't know that much about photography, being more of a dev, so don't know how to test the results.

In this web you can check the shadow noise improvement when you rise ISO vs just adjusting exposure in post for some cameras. The flatter the curve, the more ISO invariant.

But why are you charting standard 200D vs Dual-ISO-enabled 6D and 7D?

Check this comparison of 200D with a bunch of ML-capable cams. 200D stems out at ISO 100.

I did it to compare the maximum dynamic range achievable with magic lantern, because 200D is basically ISO invariant and wouldn't benefit from dual ISO, but the older cams do

Only on the multi core for dual ISO, but then cedricp added a fix for the flicker. I think masc made the interface changes, so it took some work and it's useful, I'll take a look and see if I find the problem

Fix his code, that looked good while editing but not when exporting, and then test with all the supported cams and recording modes, focusing on Dual ISO clips.
I would narrow the test clips to those recorded with the latest versions of ML, otherwise it might be too much...
I have many old test clips that hopefully will cover old versions.

I'm using dual iso a lot when recording in 3x1 mode, but lately I lean more towards the 1620p 1x1 mode. Dual iso has too many artifacts in any other mode but 3x1 in my opinion

Would be nice to go over above build so it can get merged into master branch. What is needed?

cdric introduced a fix for the flickering in dual iso, but it was corrupting the exported video.
Tried to contact him but no answer.
I removed some bits of his code to get the export working, but ideally it should be fixed instead of partially removed, or removed completely.
We never merged the optimization because I got feedback asking for more testing, but didn't have much success when I look for testers 

Any metrics/benchmarks for Dual-ISO footage in 2160x1080 (1x1) conversion to medium quality H.264? OP (on discord) got about 90 minutes for 10 minute footage.
SSD, AMD 7745HX and according to OP no thermal throtteling.

Could you/OP please try this build and post your results?

Awesome work, thank you! The embedded videos work better now, before they were too big, taking the whole width 

One more: youtube embeds are broken.

Vimeo's too

I'm just commenting on the 1x1 images, to focus on sharpness.
Both samples (on your second post you swap 1x1 and 1x3) are as sharp as your lens is.
What I notice is that you didn't fix Focus Pixels and that all your samples are too dark, so there will be a lot of color noise.
If you want a moody look but not noisy, expose brighter and turn exposure down in post. Use the histogram to help you with exposure.
You can also apply the chroma noise removal in MLVApp.