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 - fascina

Pages: [1]
1
Did I unterstand it right that MlRawViewer does support MLV to DNG conversion for single files, but no batch conversion for several files?

So "MLV to DNG Batch Converter" and "MLV BrowseSharp" are the only Windows GUIs available for converting several MLV files to DNGs, right?

2
General Help Q&A / Re: Chroma Smoothing
« on: May 26, 2014, 05:03:34 PM »
Hi a1ex,

yes, here are the samples with 5D mark III footage:

Chroma Smoothing Comparison:



Raw File (processed without chroma smoothing):

http://www.webpage-design.org/010.dng


MLVs processed with MLV_dump and MLV Converter 1.9.2.

JPGs processed and sharpened with Adobe Camera Raw.

3
General Help Q&A / Re: Chroma Smoothing
« on: May 26, 2014, 11:51:19 AM »
Hello Audionut, thank you for your detailed answer.

I have now made several conversion tests with my 5D Mark III footage, with chroms smoothing set to "none", 2x2, and 5x5.

Resulting that the image quality is by far the best when using no chroma smoothing. With chroma smoothing activated, diagonal lines are jagged.

So for my 5D MIII footage, I will definitely not use chroma smoothing.

4
This is a great converter, I hope it will be further developed! Actually it is the only working GUI for mlv_dump that really works for batch conversion. Thanks!

Just want to mention that when I change in the "DNG options" tab the chroma smoothing and then save the settings, it won't remember the chroma smoothing settings when I load the settings the next time.

5
Hello g3gg0, thank you for all your efforts regarding MLV.

Which graphical user interface do you personally recommend for mlv_dump on Windows for batch conversion? Do you recommend your MLV Browser?

6
General Help Q&A / Re: Chroma Smoothing
« on: May 25, 2014, 06:39:59 PM »
With the "Magic Lantern RAW Video converter" tool, I have to decide if I want to convert my MLV files with chroma smoothing or not: None, 2x2, 3x3, 5x5.

I'm using the Canon 5d Mark III. What chroma smoothing choice shall I choose, "None"?

7
Feature Requests / Re: RAW zebras in liveview
« on: June 03, 2013, 10:02:48 PM »
RAW Zebras in video liveview would be absolutely AWESOME!!!!

I personally even think they are more important than RAW histogram, because RAW Zebras enable you to know exactly which area of the picture will not be recoverable in ACR.

Very useful for ETTR in case that dynamic range of the scene is larger than dynamic range of the sensor.

8
Great Job, A1ex, banding in my two sample RAW footage is gone with the new RAW2DNGs.  :-)

I also tested them with some other footage and they seem to work without any banding problems (only time will tell if there are some subjects left which the algorythm does not recognize).

Visually, all 3 solutions are the same as perfect. My eyes cannot see any visible differences in those 3 solutions, they are all good.  :)

( By the way, when I drag and drop several RAW files to RAW2DNG (in Windows), it only convertes one of them. )

9
OK, shot with 5D Mark III, converted with latest RAW2DNG (30 May).

First, for clarification: The full frame RAW of my 5D Mark III usually shows 8-pixel-banding (unless corrected by new RAW2DNG), but the 5x magnification RAW of my 5D Mark III never shoes 8-pixel-banding.


Sample 1: When converting this full frame RAW shot, the RAW2DNG conversion log does not mention any stripe correction, therefore the stripes remain to be seen:

http://www.webpage-design.org/sample000001.dng

Maybe the algorythm became confused by the dark area in the lower part of the shot.


Sample 2: When converting this 5x magnification RAW shot, the RAW2DNG conversion log does perform stripe correction (1   1   1   1    1.006    1.008    1.0010    1.0012), although 5x magnification RAW never has banding. Thus it creates banding although this banding would not be there with old RAW2DNG conversion:

http://www.webpage-design.org/sample000002.dng


Unfortunately the RAW files belonging to this DNGs are way too big to upload.

10
There are some subjects where the RAW2DNG algorythm does not yet recognize the 8-pixel-vertical-banding and therefore does not substracts it out.

I was about to upload some samples, but have seen that there is a new RAW2DNG update (https://bitbucket.org/hudson/magic-lantern/commits/97d9ed828854ad0d9376dd8e0917db51f3ee6df9) which is not yet available to download for Windows.

So I'll wait to check my RAW footage with the new RAW2DNG (once it will become available for download) before I upload the RAW samples.

12
Zebras at overexposed areas are gone with the newest RAW2DNG, thanks A1ex!  :)

The footage is so amazingly clean now that the 8-Pixel-Vertical-Banding is gone. I can't believe it, it's so breathtaking. So sharp, such a unbelievable dynamic range, exceeding the best photochemical film in dynamic range.

13
There is a bug in the new RAW2DNG. When I convert RAWs with it, there are black vertical lines in those areas of the photo with are strongly overexposed.

This doesn't happen with the old RAW2DNG, however old RAW2DNG has vertical banding. Vertical banding is completely gone with new RAW2DNG. The footage looks soooo clean now without old vertical banding problem.

Please download and use Windows RAW2DNG to see the problem (vertical lines):

http://www.webpage-design.org/M30-1805.RAW

Problem occures both with Global Draw Off and On.

14
I can't believe it, but banding is really completely gone with newest RAW2DNG tool! What a historic moment, now we can shoot RAW FullHD even under the most demanding situations without color pixels or banding or whatsoever.

Alex, I think you (and the rest of the team) will really make filmmaking history with this. FullHD raw from a superb fullframe sensor, without any negative sideeffects whatsoever. You should get the Technical Oscar for this. And the resolution is the maximum one can get out of FullHD. What an amazing time to live in. Thank you so much!

15
I reshot today with newest build (5419e04). I used manual lens (Nikon 50 mm). ISO 100, 1/50th shutter. 8-Pixel Vertical Banding is still there:

http://www.webpage-design.org/M30-0948.RAW

Thanks Alex so much for updating the RAW2Dng, but I just tried and 8-Pix-Vertical-Banding is still there. Please also try with the RAW file above.

8-Pixel-Vertical-Banding is not FPN and is not coming from the sensor, because at RAW Type 19 it completely disappears (but color pixels appear).

Those who don't see the 8-Pixel-Vertical-Banding in their footage maybe don't shoot the right subjects in order to see it. One has to slightly underexpose an even background (like sky or even wall) to see it.

Luma denoising slider to 50 indeed makes the banding less visible, but it also takes away a lot of grain and shadow details, making the footage much more look like compressed.

16
Raw Video / Re: Dead pixels - Hot pixels - Banding in RAW recording
« on: May 29, 2013, 11:31:11 AM »
Jonzero made a good job with his color pixels / banding analysis. I've just also done the complete test twice (though I only come to RAW type 74 because my camera always hang up at raw type 56 or 74). I made the test with 5D MarkIII and 8ba641e build. I also reseted all canon settings and turned of all other ML settings and played around with FPS.

However, results were always exactly as in Jonzeros list: Either color pixels, or vertical banding (repeating exactly every 8 pixels) or both.

For me, that is so tragic. I really hope Alex finds a way to fix the banding OR color pixels.

From all RAW types, mode 19 had fewest color pixels. But still too many color pixels.

Alex, do you think you might find another way to get out the color pixels OR banding, or do you assume that we will be stuck with it for a long time?

17
Raw Video / Re: Newest compiled builds for RAW recording
« on: May 28, 2013, 09:19:06 PM »
I'm really sorry, but I still get banding with the 28th (7fdfc08) build on the 5D Mark III. I don't understand why this banding isn't a problem for others or why the others don't see it.
But for me, this banding would make it impossible to use the RAW footage for pro use.

Don't misunderstand me, the RAW footage is the best and sharpest stuff I've seen for a long time (color pixels are also gone), but the banding is still there and really distracting.

Photo at ISO400 with 7fdfc08 built at 200% magnification:

http://webpage-design.org/000379.dng



18
Raw Video / Re: Many dead pixel show in the DNG file
« on: May 28, 2013, 05:54:46 PM »

I would love to help with the pixel beeping test but I don't know how it works. I downloaded the autoexec file from this post and combined it with 28th build,  but my camera hangs up when I try to load the modules. Maybe someone can please explain more in detail about how to make the pixel beeping test.

19
Raw Video / Re: Many dead pixel show in the DNG file
« on: May 28, 2013, 09:14:15 AM »
With the newest build (7fdfc08), color pixels are gone, but same old banding is back.

http://www.webpage-design.org/000000.dng

DNG 200% magnified:



Great new feature that the files are named by date and number!  :-)

20
Raw Video / Re: Many dead pixel show in the DNG file
« on: May 26, 2013, 08:25:35 PM »
I've attached a 400x magnified picture crop of a developed RAW DNG (5D Mark III, developed with Adobe Camera RAW).

Here one can see that it is actually not a "hot pixel" problem: Because those faulty pixels are only in those areas where there is a transition from dark to bright (see the radiator in the lower half of the photo).
There are no pixel problems on the wall, because on the wall there are no transitions from darker to brighter areas.

You can download the original DNG here: http://www.webpage-design.org/000003.dng



21
Raw Video / Re: Many dead pixel show in the DNG file
« on: May 26, 2013, 06:25:40 PM »
Thanks for the awesome RAW hack! I really hope this hot pixels isue can be solved, because there are so many of those hot pixels in my 5d MIII footage that they make it unusable.

As far as I can assess, the hot pixels problems started from 19 May, exactly since the banding problem was solved.

I really wish you guys luck with solving the pixel problem so that the 5d Mark III can film perfect professional footage without picture isues.

Thanks for your work.

22
Thank you very much for your fast answer.

Also I have to thank a lot to the developers for putting so much time into developing this amazing Magic Lantern. I'm using my 5D Mark II since four years for video work and I've just yesterday installed Magic Lantern for the first time. It's so amazing, I should have installed it long before!

23
I would like to have a memory card which is as "clean" as possible and therefore I would like to erase all unnecessary ML files.

So I would like to ask which ML files - after successful ML installation - can I erase from my SD / compact flash card without worries?

For example, in the main directory of my card there are still 6 different ***.fir files for the different camera models. Can I delete all this files?

I'm shure there is the answer to my question somewhere in the forum, I tried to search for it, but I couldn't find it.

Thanks for your help!

24
I'm looking for an answer which david61 also asked in his first post: Do the manual audio settings of the canon classic menu have any effect on the Magic Lantern settings?

I hope somebody can please answer that question.

I have a Canon 5d Mark II. If I change the audio gain in the traditional Canon settings, will it override or influence the ML audio settings in any way? Or does ML deactivate the traditional Canon audio settings?

Does it make a difference if I choose in the traditional audio Canon menu "automatic" or "manual" or will it be overrided anyway?

I'm asking because if I change ISO, aperture, shutter or picture style in the traditional camera settings, they immediately change the ML settings an vise versa.

Pages: [1]