Topics

Just for fun, I started a new group on Facebook if anyone is interested. Here's the write up.

Low resolution? Compression artifacts? Clipped highlights? One person's image quality nightmare is another person's sought-after look.

This group is for filmmakers of all levels who want a little break from thinking about image quality -- or who never focus much on it to begin with. Whether you're someone who enjoys the challenge of trying to shoot something with less than adequate tools, or you just like the lo-fi texture of older point-and-shoots, early smartphones, CCD camcorders, or industrial/security cameras, this group embraces the cameras that serious filmmakers would NEVER use...

Or would they?

Spend as little as possible or use what you already have. Learn the quirks, make something interesting, and experience the creativity that comes from working within limitations.

I'm hoping that this group can be a soothing balm for those that feel like there's too much emphasis on new and better gear, or those who just want to shoot something for fun without worrying so much about image quality. It would be great to see some of you in there: https://www.facebook.com/groups/junkcameracinema

Let me know what you think:

https://vimeo.com/207563529

Note: I recorded over an hour of interview footage with ML raw to make this. I think my longest take was over 30 minutes. There weren't any glitches or pink frames to speak of!

Shot very hastily, but I was pretty happy with the way it turned out. ML raw continues to create a very pleasing image:

https://vimeo.com/206512845

Lenses used:

• Nikkor AIS 28mm f/2.8
• Nikkor AIS 50mm f/1.8
• Nikkor AIS 85mm f/2

https://www.youtube.com/embed/el3uVb5Mgko

Shot with an Olympus 35-70mm f/3.6 with all natural light and a few modifiers. Graded in Resolve 11.3.

Let me know what you think.

I need to get a second card for raw recording on my 5Diii. I've been happy with my KomputerBay 1066x card, but there have been some negative reviews regarding quality control posted on Amazon since I bought mine two years ago. The 1200x doesn't have any such negative reviews, but its write speed may be slower.

Since they are both priced about the same, which would you get?

[baldavenger]

My friend and I did a quick (and unscientific) side-by-side test between these two cameras with a single LED source shooting in through the window. I focused on matching the framing, focal length, and background rendering as much as possible. In a perfect world, the 5D could have used a little more light because it doesn't "see" as much light as the Sony, and it also needs to be exposed to right even more than the Sony for optimal results.

There's more of a write up over on Vimeo if you want to know more about my workflow.

Personal notes: The a7R ii is easier to use in almost every way, but I greatly prefer the image from the 5D3 shooting raw. SLOG (in this case, SLOG2) is well implemented in the higher-end FS7, but I struggle to get passable skintones from it in their mirrorless hybrid cameras, especially with fair-skinned subjects. Bumping up the saturation of gray just gives you more gray. I know it can be done, since I've seen in other examples. But I'm assuming that it takes a lot of work to get it there, and probably multiple windows. The irony is that the raw footage from the Canon is very flexible in terms of grading, but it needs very little (if any tweaking). I think that's worth a lot.

I'll be hanging onto my 5D3. It's a 2012 camera, which makes it a dinosaur, but with Magic Lantern's incredible hack, there's a lot of life in it yet.

Thanks to baldavenger for providing some useful guidance with the grade.

Particularly with Resolve 12, I'm finding that working with Raw DNGs really chokes my computer and I cannot scrub in real-time. I'll probably have to get a new one at some point, but for now...

If I want to use MLVFS and Resolve 12 to export ProRes (HQ/4444) for editing AND grading, what can I do to give my colorist (assuming that it's someone else) the best possible starting point?

Thanks.

I have been trying to convert my footage to LOG (either BMD or ARRI color managed) and then applying the corresponding FilmConvert setting (treating it like a LUT), but that's not giving me good results at all. I get an extremely underexposed image with that workflow.

I'm just curious what has been working for other shooters!

How does the 5D Mark III with ML raw stack up against a couple other popular cameras? I had an FS7 for a few days and compared the footage with that from my C100 and of course my 5D Mark III. I thought that it might be interesting to some here:

https://vimeo.com/119093979

Details are in the video description.

Does anyone have any profiles to share?

Specifically, I am looking for the percentage (trying to calibrate a light meter with my 5D3).

Does this number change when using BMDFilm color space in Resolve as a starting point for a grade and if so, to what percentage?

Thanks.

EDIT: Audionut's response here: http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=11331.msg110307#msg110307 answers the first part of my question, but I'm still trying to figure out whether I can calibrate my light meter according to BMDFilm.

A question for those of you who use light meters to shoot ML raw:

If I am calibrating a light meter with an 18% gray card and putting the line on the waveform at about 45%, how would this translate to situations in which I am shooting raw and then later applying BMDFilm colorspace (or one of the LOG 3D LUTs)? Do I still want to set up my meter so that my footage registers at 45% on the waveform AFTER I've applied BMDFilm/LOG?

I'd really appreciate any advice.

This was fairly non-scientific but might be interesting to some. I wanted to get an idea of how much light each camera was capturing. I don't really have a need for the super-high ISOs but I was curious how these cameras would compare at the ISO settings that I do commonly use:

Workflow and other info on the Vimeo page.

I made this one a while ago (when shooting in ML raw was still a recent development), but never got around to posting it:

It was a struggle to put this together back then (i.e. the preliminary workflows and more limited feature sets in ML), but now it would be a lot easier. Thanks a1ex, g3gg0, and the other devs for this wonderful tool!

My first real attempt at a comedy:

5Diii, MLV module, audio recorded in-camera (iRig Pre) with SND module, grade & grain from FilmConvert.

As a frequent anamorphic shooter, I am thrilled that the ML team has included the capability be able to shoot raw 4:3 footage with an anamorphic lens and view it with the anamorphic viewing feature. The only improvement that I hope to see is this: right now, my 4:3 footage with anamorphic viewing switched on takes up about the middle third of the screen. Would it be possible to have the image automatically stretch to fill the screen when shooting in anamorphic viewing? This would allow for easier focusing.

Thanks!

I have a 5D Mark III at home running the August build (I will refer to it as "Home 5D") and a 5D Mark III at work running the June build ("Work 5D").

I have disabled all modules except raw_rec from both cameras in case they are slowing write speeds. Global Draw is off on both cameras. Through the Canon menu, I have selected S3 as the photo size. LiveView is forced to be always on. Both are set up to record 1920x1080 24fps raw (not MLV). Cards are formatted in-camera (I have also tried formatting them in ExFAT on my Mac, but the write speeds do not seem to show any difference).

For my Home 5D, I have a single Lexar 128GB 1000x CF card (purchased used) that benchmarks at 81.21MB/s. It drops frames almost immediately after hitting the record button. However, the Work 5D benchmarks it at 72.39MB/s, but it can record continuously with this card. How can this be?

Also, I have four Lexar 64GB 1000x CF cards (purchased brand new from B&H) for the Work 5D. They all benchmark between 70.98MB/s and 72.41MB/s on the Work 5D, which seems quite slow for these cards. And yet I have been able to record continuously on them with the Work 5D at 1080P 24fps. Also odd: on the Home 5D, they benchmark at about 10MB/s faster, and allow for continuous recording.

I am very confused. Can someone please shed some light on this?