Menu

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.

Show posts Menu

Messages - Hazer

#1
Quote from: reddeercity on July 15, 2013, 08:57:46 PM
I was wondering it in Real world, do you notice these problems ?
Is the Sharpness lose a issue ?

There is no sharpness loss.  What you perceive as softness is actually the true resolution of the camera which is revealed by the filter.  Yes, it's that soft in H264 mode -- scary.  Aliasing creates false detail / jagged edges, which is why mark ii footage in raw sometimes looks a little "crispy".  The filter removes this.

With the filter the images are really nice, and very detailed.  I saw the charts before I bought one, and I was skeptical.  However in most *practical* situations, the jaggies are greatly reduced.  Hair is a great example.  Hair almost always looks terrible with no filter -- horrendous false color that is visible with the slightest motion of your subject.  This is nearly eliminated with the filter.  However if you shoot things with lots of geometric patterns, then a 5D2 is not for you, even with the filter.

Also, the filter does reduce the resolution of still images.  You must remove the filter for full resolution stills, and this can be a little annoying.  For things like taking a snapshot of lighting setups, I just leave it in.  The images are surprisingly useful.  In fact, taking a 21MP still with the filter installed, and zooming all the way in, is a good way to see just how good the filter really is.  The images are far more detailed than H264 mode.
#2
I have the Lexar and it writes high 60s, occasionally 70.  As has been noted, set the camera to jpg *stills* and turn off raw stills.  Turn off ML global draw.  And finally, turn off all on-screen Canon graphics.  i.e. Press the 'info' button until the display shows only the LiveView image, not the aperture, shutter, ISO, EV, or anything else.
#3
You should simply be able to upgrade to a newer version of raw2dng to get your .dngs to be recognized. so the profiles show up in ACR.  I'm on a 5d2 and those builds have had this straightened out for a several weeks now.
#4
I use FilmConvert and as noted above you can get in the ballpark by selecting a generic profile in ACR and selecting a "flat" profile in FilmConvert, such as VisionTech, Prolost, or Marvels.  But this is just an approximation.  Further, I don't know how reliable this will be moving forward.  "Embedded" as your only choice means that the name of your camera isn't correctly listed in the .dng image metadata.  You can use exiftool to list the metadata in one of your .dng images to see this.  Here's what I get on a .dng where the camera name is not correctly indicated:

Make                            : Canon
Camera Model Name     : Canikon
Orientation                   : Horizontal (normal)
Software                      : Magic Lantern

Later versions of raw2dng compiled specifically for the 5d2 list the correct camera name, like this:

Make                            : Canon
Camera Model Name     : Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Orientation                   : Horizontal (normal)
Software                       : Magic Lantern

As I understand it, ML raw does not currently embed the correct camera name at the time of recording, it is inserted afterward by raw2dng.  Someone can correct me on this.

Anyway, I don't know if there really is a profile embedded in the original dng image, or if this is simply a placeholder within ACR for some kind of default that it uses when it doesn't know how else to interpret your images.  A better route is to use a version of raw2dng which correctly identifies the camera model, so that ACR will supply a list of Canon-specific profiles, like Standard, Neutral, and so forth.  Bonus, this also means that you can use custom picture profiles such as those from VisionColor, directly within ACR.  I am beta testing VisionColor's Cinelook profile for ACR on ML raw footage, and it works well.

Currently, it would be great if FilmConvert could model one of the Canon-standard profiles within ACR, like Neutral, and use that as their starting point.  This should be reliably stable within ACR moving forward.

In the long run, it would be great to drop ML raw footage directly into Resolve or a timeline with no conversion, and have FilmConvert operate in its usual calibrated fashion on the raw files themselves.  It looks like Ginger HDR has direct-to-timeline working already in Premiere, so we're just about there.
#5
Yes -- this is an issue with ffmpeg.  I haven't tested After Effects, but Apple's Motion and FCPX reliably preserve the color of the original .tif images.  See my comments here:

http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=6276.msg49963#msg49963
#6
Ah, ok, thanks.  Do you mean in the file manager?  Because playback in the file manager wasn't working at all for me just now using a.d.'s most recent build -- totally garbled, like television static.
#7
Been out for a few days, just seeing the auto-save feature now.  Huge time saver, fantastic.

What is "fast preview" supposed to do?  I'm not seeing any difference in live view mode or recording.
#8
Quote from: Audionut on June 12, 2013, 04:40:19 AM
What's quicktime (an Apple product), got to do with photoshop (and Adobe product)?

He indicated he was choosing the "render video" option in Photoshop.  When I do that, I only have three options:  DPX, H264, and "Quicktime".  The "Quicktime" option lists a few of the usual suspects:  Animation, JPEG 2000, and Uncompressed.  They all introduce color shifts.

I'll be the first to admit that the details of YUV/RGB conversion are above my pay grade, so there may be a way to make these other options workable.  But from a simple user perspective, Motion and FCP X conversions work out of the box for me.
#9
As noted above, it's a color space issue and Quicktime has trouble with this type of conversion.  When you export via Photoshop, you're using Quicktime, and this is why you see the shift.  This issue also affects ffmpeg, an open source transcoder which many people on the forum use to make movies from image sequences.  I looked into this, and there is plenty of discussion on the ffmpeg forums about ProRes, and the issue remains unresolved.

The good news is that you can avoid the problem if you use FCP X or Motion to convert your image sequences.  With either of these, the resulting movie will look identical to your .tif source images.  It's easiest in Motion, since Motion natively supports image sequences -- you simply select all your files and drag them into the layers palette.  Motion will automatically display them as a movie, and not as hundreds of separate files.  You can then export as you please.  Just make sure to set up the project with the appropriate resolution, frame rate, and number of frames when you create it.  Image sequences are such a basic interchange format in film production, it's baffling to me that neither FCP 7 or FCP X has this capability.

I haven't tested After Effects for color shift, but that may also be an option.  Others with more Adobe app experience can chime in on that one.
#10
There's such variation card to card that I don't know that there is an answer to that question.  Personally, my Komputerbay 64GB 1000x is faster than my Lexar 32GB 1000x.  But for others it may be the reverse.
#11
Wow -- I'm seeing 70MB/sec on this build which is about 650 frames at 1880 x 1016.  Great work everyone.

a.d. / Alex, is there any way to enable 1806 x 1016 as a 16:9 resolution choice?  With the latest speed improvements, that might now be a continuous resolution for 16:9 on the 5d2.

Edit:  Ok likely not continuous -- I'm seeing 2300 frames at 1880 x 940, which is great.  If 1806 x 1016 is 1000 frames or better, that would be a great option.

Again, great work.
#12
John-  I'm just seeing this now, but your work on this is fantastic.  Do you do any Mac development?  FxPlug for FCP X/Motion integration would be super.  I've hacked up an effective yet ugly combination of bash, sed, and php to get .RAW files into Prores in automated fashion, but it's clunky and time consuming.  I'd dump it in a second for drag-and-drop right into the timeline.
#13
Quote from: scrax on June 07, 2013, 05:47:58 AM
Can you check if with 0.10 they are correct using the same .RAW

I just checked on the same raw file and yes, the older version that I have adds the 5d2 metadata, whereas 0.11 does not.  Thomas Worth on the RawMagic thread indicated that there is no camera metadata in the actual .RAW files.  So it would seem that the older version that I'm using must have "Canon 5D Mark II" hard-coded.  This may be a custom version that was uploaded at one point just for the 5D2.

If that is indeed the case, it would be great if Raw2DNG had some kind of drop-down to specify which camera you're using, so it could set the correct metadata.

Eventually, the best solution would be for the .RAW files themselves to be set with the correct metadata at capture time -- camera model, white balance, and so forth.  Of course everybody's plate is pretty full right no, so we'll get there when we get there.

Anyway thanks again for your work on this!
#14
Hi.  Thanks so much for your continued work on this.

This version breaks the 5D2 metadata -- .dng files open up as Camera model "Canikon" in Photoshop on Mac, and picture styles are no longer available.

For reference, here are the metadata tags from a v0.10 that correctly identify the 5D2:

Make                            : Canon
Model                           : Canon EOS 5D Mark II
UniqueCameraModel               : Canon EOS 5D Mark II

If you can include these again in the next compile, that would be fabulous.

Thank you!
#15
I've been looking into this.  I noticed the color shift with ffmpeg, and have reproduced it in just about every other quicktime based process, including Compressor, and even Photoshop when it exports with Quicktime.  Needless to say, if you spend quality time tweaking your raw color in Adobe Camera Raw, this is the last thing you want.  It's totally noticeable and totally unacceptable.

I don't use After Effects, so I haven't tested that.  But its Apple counterpart, Motion, works, as does FCP X.  X is a little clunky for this sort of thing, but Motion is just about as fast as Quicktime player.  No need to even save the project when you're done.

If you export via Motion, the source .tif file and the resulting .mov file look identical.  Interestingly, although Compressor causes a color shift when you process image sequences with it directly, you can batch Motion projects through Compressor and the colors are still good.  I believe Motion and FCP X use a separate codebase from the older Quicktime apps.

If you're handy with the command line, here's the script to invoke Compressor on a Motion project.  Just fill in the blanks for your setup:

/Applications/Compressor.app/Contents/MacOS/Compressor \
-clustername "This Computer" \
-batchname "dngbatch" \
-jobpath "/Path/to/motionproject.motn" \
-settingpath "/Users/yourusername/Library/Application Support/Compressor/Settings/yoursettings.setting" \
-destinationpath "/path/to/some/moviename.mov"

So:  Apple Motion.  Either on its own, or through Compressor.
#16
Quote from: mvejerslev on June 01, 2013, 11:09:38 PM
Ok, used exiftool GUI to copy the exif data over from some sound files, so the files are saved.

Cool glad that worked.  To be clear, this is just a hack, because a lot of the exif in the "good" dng might not match the "bad" one:  resolution, ISO, etc.  But ACR will probably just ignore the data that doesn't fit, or maybe set some sliders incorrectly -- like white balance -- which you will then have to fix.  Hopefully you can figure out what is causing the problem in the first place.
#17
You tried the files a.d. just linked to?  Hm, strange.

One thing you can try, if you really need to get those files processed and nothing else is working:  There is a command-line tool I was experimenting with called exiftool that can copy exif data from one file to another.  I'm pretty sure you can run this on Windows.  But I'm on Mac, where the syntax is:

exiftool  -tagsfromfile sourcefile.dng destinationfile.dng

...where you replace "sourcefile.dng" and "destinationfile.dng" with the names of the files you're copying and to.  What I did here is take a still image with the camera in CR2 format, and used Adobe DNG Converter (a free download from Adobe) to convert this to .dng.  Then, use you that .dng as the source file and copy all those tags to the destination file.

When I did this to a Magic Lantern .dng, it opened up in Adobe Camera Raw and all the picture styles were then available.  The important tag seems to be called "CameraUniqueID", which needs to be set to "Canon 5D Mark II".  you can actually do that specifically with exiftool like this

exiftool -camerauniqueid="Canon 5D Mark II" destinationfile.dng

Anyway a bit convoluted and it would be better to sort out the Raw2Dng process so it works.  But if you need to attempt a rescue of sorts this may work for you.


Edit:  If you just want to do a quick check to see what exif data is even present in your Magic Lantern .dng files, just pick one .dng file and do this:

exiftool -s filename.dng

This will list everything that's there and you should see very quickly if it's an Adobe problem or a Raw2Dng problem.
#18
a.d. -- thanks for the links.  This new command line version solves the exif issue.  The camera model now displays correctly, and picture styles are available in ACR.

Thank you!
#19
Quote from: reddeercity on June 01, 2013, 08:49:39 AM
i did switch between the profiles and it dose change the image
i will have to Work with this and see if the embedded is the third party
Picture profiles, i'm very use to using  Technicolor CineStyle Profile for H264
but in Raw its total different image , and that what i having problems with
it very robust, Not flat and desaturated like CineStyle.

Yep, those are the Canon picture styles!  That's great.  And you're seeing these using Magic Lantern .dng images that you converted right on the Mac?  If so I wonder what I'm doing wrong.  What build are you using and what version of Raw2dng are you using?

The picture profiles in ACR should look almost exactly the same as they do in the camera.  You just have to make sure there are no other settings applied, such as saturation and sharpness and so on.  You can test this with a CR2 still image from the camera.  When you load it into ACR with a particular picture style, it should look very similar to an in-camera JPEG taken with the same picture style.

If you load in a CR2 that is tagged with Cinestyle, that might load it into ACR and make it available in the drop down menu.  If this works, it should say Cinestyle, not embedded.  You'd probably have to test it.
#20
Quote from: reddeercity on June 01, 2013, 06:46:54 AM
Just Run the RAW2DNG on my Pro 
yes it look like it, the only thing i don't see is Len info, and iso rating
i just run a quick test on a frame
i was checking the metadata in Adobe Photoshop Elements verion 9
I'm still looking for a alternative to Adobe workflow, without stepping on the
quality.

Thanks for the test.  I've used RawTherapee on Mac with some success -- it's free / open source so you can give that a try.  The nice thing is that is has numerous command line options, so if you're familiar with scripting (or willing to learn) you can setup a workflow that uses RawTherapee automatically without even opening the program.  Of course these will be automated settings so you will not have as much control as if you opened the app and made manual changes to each clip.

What I'm interested in with the Adobe workflow is having access to Picture Styles, both by Canon and also third party.  Some of these are nice starting points for color grade.  When you did the conversion on your Mac Pro, did you see Canon Picture styles (Landscape, Neutral, etc.) in ACR?  They would be under the "Camera Calibration" tab, and there should be a pulldown there which lists them.

If you don't see them, this is where I think the current build may be omitting the metadata that allows ACR to identify the camera properly.  Unless something is wrong with my setup -- which is entirely possible.
#21
Quote from: reddeercity on June 01, 2013, 03:29:56 AM
I converted my DNG to tiff with Adobe PhotoShop and Camera
Info is diplay right, but i convert with my Windows PC and edit with my MacPro

You can also use adobe Photoshop Elements to read, edit dng's or convert Tiff
i used it a little slow compared to Full blow Photoshop but works
it also read the MetaData right.

Thanks for the feedback.  Sounds like it might be a Win vs Mac thing.  What happens if you use Raw2Dng on your Pro, does the exif still display properly?
#22
@a.d.

First, thanks for all the work on the builds and continued updates to this thread -- appreciated.

I see on the first page that "Canon 5D Mark II in Exif" is listed as being added to raw2dng.  However I'm still seeing "Canikon" listed as the camera model.  I'm on OS X.  I've tested this with today's build and also the most recent versions of raw2dng (app and command-line).  Has this not been implemented yet in the Mac builds?

Currently, .dng files do not display the usual Canon picture styles in Photoshop / Adobe Camera Raw, and I think this is because the camera is not being correctly identified.

Thanks!
#23
On a Mac, if you batch the .dng files through Adobe's DNG Converter utility, which is a free download, Finder will then be able to display them.  This is a quick process.  Once you install the utility, you can click on any .dng file and it will open the utility.  One more click can batch the entire folder.  Make sure you have compression turned off, embedded .jpg turned off, and so forth.  The file sizes will actually be a little smaller when you're done.

Note that the files will still be .dng files -- I think DNG Converter just rewrites the metadata in a way that Finder can see.  Finder doesn't always display the colors correctly, but at least you'll be able to see thumbnails and use Quicklook without loading up an app.
#24
Sorry -- was referring to hack3d mode, where the LV display does not update video during record.  If I understand correctly, this is worth a couple MB/sec write speed.  Which would be really helpful if we could get that working on the 5d2.
#25
Quote from: t2scorp on May 30, 2013, 10:00:59 AM
I still have awrite speed around 62-64 MB/s

Are you using a 1000x card?  If so, make sure of the following:

*Global draw is off
*Photo quality (in the stock Canon menus) is set to JPEG "L" and Raw photos are off
*All stock Canon on-screen graphics are turned off -- i.e. enter live view and press the "info" button until the screen is clear.

In a few subsequent tests I was getting around 67MB/sec but either way this is pretty strong performance.

@a.d.
Is it that we haven't figured out how to disable LV during recording yet on the 5d2, or is the 5d3 simply the priority and we haven't had time to port that feature yet?  Because if that saves a few more MB/sec, we can probably use full-res HD 1880x1060 for at least 1000 frames before buffering out.  Which would be pretty cool!