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 - MojoMC

Pages: [1]
1
Camera-specific Development / Re: Canon 50D
« on: November 21, 2014, 12:01:10 PM »
The only thing that can make 50D H264 liveable is finding where the flush rate is and maxing the bit rate settings so it records at the highest quality 100% of the time.
I tried 2x CBR and it works, even with my old card.
For certain scenes I was able to get 3x CBR, but the results are nowhere near this sample from a 550D:

For all of the memory and write speed on 50D the H264 is exceptionally bad.
That's not what I wanted to hear, but it seems that way.
Well, off to figure out the easiest RAW workflow that I am willing to "endure"...

2
Camera-specific Development / Re: Canon 50D
« on: November 19, 2014, 05:12:03 PM »
Hi,

I recorded some video and I am not happy with the sharpness, but I am not sure if it's a limitation of the codec/camera or some other problem.

I had to shoot h.264 25fps, f8, 1/50, ISO 100.
The fotos from the same camera position (tripod) with the same settings and the same focus on the lens are fine.
The h.264-footage however is rather blurry in comparison (no example video right now, but I am trying to get the permit).

I know that the 50D was never meant to record video and I have already seen comparison videos from the beginning of RAW recording on ML that show a massive difference between h.264 and RAW in sharpness.
However since then the development of ML did not stand still and even normal videos made by stock Canon DSLRs  look way better than the h.264 I got from the 50D.

So, is it a limitation in the codec/hardware and I have to live with the blurryness/shoot RAW - or did I miss something and h.264 on a 50D should be decent?

3
Dual ISO images usually require some exposure adjustment due to the way cr2hdr reconstructs and scales the 16-bit data from two 14-bit images.
I was under the impression that the combining of the two exposures via cr2hdr results in an image with correct highlights and correct shadows.

But I searched some more and found an example where the exposure was adjusted quite heavy, so I tried a very quick adjustment with:
- Exposure +3
- Highlights -100
- Shadows +100

The result is clearly better; the sky is not blown and the shadows are lighter:
http://666kb.com/i/cqwlgt772bq7lt6vv.jpg

4
Hello,

I tested Dual ISO (with ETTR) on my 50D.
All pictures I am going to show are not altered, just developed with PS CC 2014, shrunk and saved as jpeg - but they show the problem.

First, a comparison shot without Dual ISO:
http://666kb.com/i/cqwk1wtjxwozsfw9n.jpg
I think in this lighting situation Dual ISO should show an improvement.

The next picture is how the unprocessed CR2 looked:
http://666kb.com/i/cqwk2aoz86pp68f8b.jpg
Seems normal, interlaced and all...

And this is how the resulting DNG after conversion looks:
http://666kb.com/i/cqwk2jgwfl1mw62aj.jpg
Compared to the examples for Dual ISO I don't see any improvement.

I used
- dcraw 9.19 from OSX_cr2hdr.zip
- exiftool from OSX_cr2hdr.zip
- cr2hdr.app 2.0 from from OSX_cr2hdr_app.zip

Logfile:
Code: [Select]
    1 image files updated
cr2hdr: a post processing tool for Dual ISO images

Last update: 2f4e2df on 2013-12-02 17:45:36 UTC by alex:
cr2hdr: fix DNG compression under Windows

Active options:
--amaze-edge    : use a temporary demosaic step (AMaZE) followed by edge-directed interpolation (default)
--cs2x2         : apply 2x2 chroma smoothing in noisy and aliased areas (default)

Input file      : IMG_0731.CR2
Camera          : Canon EOS 50D
Full size       : 4832 x 3228
Active area     : 4770 x 3177
White level     : 12500
Black borders   : 62 left, 51 top
Black level     : 992
ISO pattern     : dBBd GBRG
Noise levels    : 6.04 19.04 20.84 6.84 (14-bit)
ISO difference  : 4.04 EV (1644)
Black delta     : 2.76
Dynamic range   : 10.90 (+) 9.11 => 13.15 EV (in theory)
Looking for hot/cold pixels...
Hot pixels      : 3393
Cold pixels     : 863
AMaZE interpolation ...
Amaze took 3.60 s
Edge-directed interpolation...
Semi-overexposed: 9.85%
Deep shadows    : 49.66%
Horizontal stripe fix...
Full-res reconstruction...
ISO overlap     : 3.9 EV (approx)
Half-res blending...
Chroma smoothing...
Building alias map...
Filtering alias map...
Smoothing alias map...
Final blending...
Noise level     : 4.31 (16-bit), ideally 4.28
Dynamic range   : 13.38 EV (cooked)
Black adjust    : 0
Output file     : IMG_0731.DNG

Any ideas if something went wrong or did I misunderstand something?

5
Camera-specific Development / Re: Canon 50D
« on: May 26, 2014, 12:23:36 PM »
Hi,

I am a proud owner of a "new" 50D and I tried ML Unified 2.3 (stable). Installation was flawless and video recording was working.
However, only 1080p30 in H.264 and some lower resolution was available, but that seems to be a limitation for my camera? I found no information in the dokumentation of ML Unified regarding the available resolutions on a 50D.

For raw recording, I think I need the raw_rec or mlv_rec module (and new autoexec?) since no raw option is available in Unified 2.3 - but do I need to compile the module itself or is there an existing module for 50D? Perhaps even included in the newest nightly builds I can download at http://builds.magiclantern.fm ?

Another thing I missed is the card benchmark; I can't find it in the menu. Is this a custom module also?

Pages: [1]