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 - ibrahim

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
1
For ML Raw, I recommend a Variable ND. With a Vary ND you so much more easily ETTR, for perfect exposure. And also if you spend some cheddar on a vary nd, the quality loss is negligible.. And you will catch a lot more shots instead of fiddling with 3 different ND's, forcing you to set the fstop accordingly.

Vary ND sets you free to use any fstop you like and ETTR every time.

Heliopan have really good quality Variable ND's.

Could you explain how to use the ETTR with a variable ND filter?

2
Hardware and Accessories / Re: External monitor
« on: July 04, 2018, 08:19:53 PM »
Yes of course I know very well what 14-bit vs 8-bit is Allemyr from having worked with it for quite some time now.

Just to clarify I need an external recorder for two different scenarios:

1) for live streaming
I want to use a LUT just to see what the final look will be like while recording with the atomos. I don't want to record in 14-bit (by the 5d3) since it cannot be streamed into live streaming software. Are you saying that the LUT on the monitor won't the applied to the final recorded footage (in prores/DNxHD) and only is meant to be used as a reference?

2) for 14-bit recording through the 5d3.
In this case I don't want to record by the monitor since it cannot record in 14-bit.
So my number one priority is to use the monitor for accurate focus peaking. At the same time, I want to use a rec709 LUT just to see that the final look is while making use of false colors and RGB curve in my multi-camera shots. I want to record through the ML in camera, not the monitor. Then in post I want to apply the same LUT. Since the hdmi signal is 4:2:2 8-bit in a 10-bit "container" (in the prores codec) wouldn't the difference between the LUT applied in post and prior to that be approximative enough?

Which external monitor would serve these two purposes without being an over-kill of course.

3
Well, I'm not an optics specialist, don't quote me on what I'm about to say, but here's my perspective. Each lens has its own "personality", that is, a blend of some variables that constitutes the formed image:
- MTF (resolution and contrast)
- Chromatic Aberration
- Distortion
- Vignette
- Flare

Canon lenses are very good, but generally they have this very diffuse light transmission. What I mean by that is that they try to replicate the human eye features and create a very smooth depth of field, high contrast and low focus breathing (the relationship of focus between objects). From my personal perspective, the image generated is very good for technical shots, such as architecture, but boring as an artistic choice. Also, they try to avoid lens distortion as much as possible, and that may be very good for movies.
That's why some of the most expensive lenses on the market (Cooke s5/i, Panavision G-series, etc) have what can be considered defects by academics. Cinematographers have to make artistic choices and these choices are not based on the most correct academic perspective, it's based on "look and feel" you want people to perceive in this exact story you want to tell.
Let me give you an example: many cinematographers, like Dan Laustsen, don't like to shoot on lenses that are too sharp, because they say the actors skin needs to be kinda soft while on screen or else it looks ugly. In the case of Laustsen, he even uses a Black Promist filter to soft the image even more. These cinematographers have the money to use the most sharp lenses out there ("diffraction-limited", like Zeiss Otus), but they choose not to.

I myself did many tests about this. I use old lenses of years now and when I get on my hands some newer lenses from Canon I always am dispointed by the result.
I made this test to show you what I mean: The first image is from a old Komura 135mm f/2.0, wide open. The second is the same lens, wide open, but with a oval filter, trying to simulate the anamorphic 'feel':



ps.: sorry for any grammatical issues... english is not my mother language.

Interesting. I even read one of Kurt Lancaster's book where he mentioned the same regarding the fact that many tend to dislike the sharpening effect some lenses have, hence they soften the image in post. Thanks for the info, I'll take that into consideration.

Thanks for giving the tip Levas. I'll look closer into that lens.

4
Raw Video Postprocessing / Re: MLVProducer: [v3200]
« on: July 03, 2018, 06:11:15 AM »
Download on first post on page 1 mlvp.alpha.build3261 then to update to the latest version (3354) you need to download just the "MLVProducer.exe" update file from here then replace the old ".exe" with the new one , that's it.

Thanks man.  :)

5
General Help Q&A / False color menu in nightly build
« on: July 03, 2018, 06:03:44 AM »
Hi,

Can someone explain what's the difference between the different selections in the submenu of False color in the nightly build on 5d3v1.2.3?
I am refering to Marshall, SmallHD, etc...

Is the false color through the viewfinder accurate?

6
Raw Video Postprocessing / Re: MLVProducer: [v3200]
« on: July 03, 2018, 01:57:13 AM »
What is the most stable version of MLV producer today for testing?

7
Hardware and Accessories / Re: External monitor
« on: July 03, 2018, 01:54:09 AM »
I was thinking of using the kodak 2393 LUT only as a reference; so that I would know how the final output would prior to rec. That's the LUT I usually use for dramas in 2.35:1.
Sorry for replying so late togg. I missed this thread.  :D

8
Great job. I got this Ubi sunt feeling.

Positives:

- Screenwriting is good. Liked how it uses the rain as a symbol of sadness (pathetic fallacy)
- Soundtrack is pretty good.
- Actors are good. The kid did great.

Some critics (as you would expect from a technical forum):

- The bokeh is too "Cannon'ish". I think you would benefit very much from some old pieces of glass. I've been using old manual lenses for years now and I can say they do a great difference on the look. A Helios 44-2 with a low-end anamorphic lenses (like a Anamorphot-50), would make the images more interesting.

- Most scenes inside the house are underexposed. This is not wrong 'per se', but I think it would be better to overexpose the scene by +1.5 f-stops and then on postproduction make it darker, if it's an artistic choice. This way you preserve more information, less noise and have more flexibility on color grading.

Keep your head up. I'm sure your next one will be even better. Ganbatte.

Thanks for the shared video.

Could you explain what's not so good with canon's bokeh vs the older lenses. Do you mean that the old ones have a rounder shape than canon's?

I am planing of selling all my canon lenses and save money to buy the zeiss milvus for drama filmmaking in 2.35:1 on my 5d3. From what I have learned these primes are fantastic lenses for filmmaking but quite expensive.  :D 

9
Post-processing Workflow / Re: Adobe is garbage. Alternatives?
« on: June 12, 2018, 06:30:59 PM »
Same here, i also noticed the jump zooming on random shots and cant figure out why.

Also ACR simply has the better debayering. In some instances in Resolve the bayer pattern becomes visible if there is a lot of detail in a shot, mostly in crop_rec footage. Also in low light footage, resolve has a lot of FPN.

But resolve is 100x faster and I see myself more and more dropping AE for different projects because it litterally is 100x faster to deliver.

True the debayering in ACR is exceptional.

Did you get the jumps while editing the cinemaDNGs or an intermediate prores version?

10
Post-processing Workflow / Re: Adobe is garbage. Alternatives?
« on: June 10, 2018, 12:50:15 PM »
Having been an Adobe user for years davinci 14 and15 has been the winner, however in my case in terms of picture quality I still use After Effects.
The primary reason why I returned to AE from davinci is due to the jumping (automatic zoom-in jump) I got on my cinemaDNG footage in davinci after having color corrected the raw footages. I have written a lot about this issue but unfortunately I never got help so solve it in different forums, including in the BM forum.
I compared the picture quality in AE vs davinci, I have to say that AE is the winner IF your PC is strong enough to pre-load since AE can be painful to edit. This, even though I loved the editing and color grading interface of davinci a lot.


11
Raw Video / Re: Uncompressed 14-bit RAW video testing - 5D Mark III
« on: June 08, 2018, 05:31:14 PM »
NO! 8 bit is 8 bit.

Ok thanks. So basically the successes in 3.5-4K 12-bit (crop mode) will not be able to be transferred through the HMDI.
So there is no use to buy a recording monitor that supports 4K signal other than one that supports 1080p 8-bit to 12-bit 4:2:2 such as the old atomos Ninja 2 or the new blackmagic video assist?

12
Raw Video / Re: Uncompressed 14-bit RAW video testing - 5D Mark III
« on: June 07, 2018, 05:08:13 PM »
So does this imply that there is no point in using a monitor/recoder as odysseyq7+ which can record in 10-bit over HDMI since my HDMI output is only 8-bit?

This product claims to use supersampling which results in a pseudo-10-bit color sampling for improved color reproduction. Does this mean that encoding with this product will result in better quality than the original 8-bit hdmi?

13
Raw Video / Re: Uncompressed 14-bit RAW video testing - 5D Mark III
« on: June 07, 2018, 03:41:16 AM »
With the nightly builds on 5d3 firm. 1.2.3 (respectively the experimental) what will the HDMI signal be in, 14-bit 4:4:4 or 12-bit, if I were to use a external video capture card to transfer the footage to a PC via USB 3.0? I want to video capture the footage and encode it through a live streaming software.

14
Is there a way to use cinelog-C and then apply a rec.709 lut directly in an external field monitor/recorder?
I intend to do video capturing to PC for live streaming through vMix or some other live streaming software.

15
With the expterimental crop_rec will 5d3 be able to transfer a 4K output through hdmi to an external monitor that supports 4K or is the camera restricted to 1080p even though a monitor would support 4K?

16
Hardware and Accessories / Re: External monitor
« on: May 18, 2018, 03:36:49 AM »
There is no problem with ninja blade, everything works correctly.


Sorry for my bad English.

No problem. Which firmware do you use on the 5d3? Can you see both on your atomos and on LCD camera screen?

17
I use a SmallHD AC7 when recording raw. No problems so far, though I am still using 1.13. I wouldn't mind if it were a little smaller (I think that 5" would be perfect for this camera), but sometimes the extra real estate is nice -- especially when dealing with the super shallow DOF of the 5D. It also has a useful anamorphic scale mode if you ever shoot with those lenses.

Interesting. Since you used 1.1.3 you could only see the monitor while the camera screen was black right? i.e. not being able to use both cameras and external monitor at once.
Are you able to see verything on the monitor from overlays, zebras, LUT, etc.
However, I am trying to find SmallHD AC7 but it seems that it no longer sold and discontinued. What is the new upgrade version of AC7? A 5 inch would be sufficient.

18
Hardware and Accessories / Re: External monitor
« on: May 15, 2018, 12:07:41 AM »
hello, I use a  ninja blade, it has zebra tools, focus and also I record a backup file in prores, even when recording in raw.

Katrikura

Are there any issues with the ninja blade?

19
Hardware and Accessories / Re: External monitor
« on: May 14, 2018, 05:42:02 PM »
The following features are important for me to film films/short films:

- waveform, histogram, false colors
- LUT
- in/out hdmi
- 16:9, 2.35:1
- 24 and 48 fps
- at least 5 inch
- and most importantly not gloosy monitor. Being able to see in the details on the monitor in harsh sun conditions.

Other features are not that important for me. I am only interested in recording in RAW uncompressed 14-bit, not through the monitor.
Eyeing for those features I have for several months now narrowed down my interest to these external monitors:

1- SmallHD focus 5 inch

2- Atomos ninja blade

3- Atomos samurai blade

4- Blackmagic video assist

5. Atomos Ninja Flame

6- APUTURE VS-5 or APUTURE VS-5X ?

7- MustHD 7" M702S-4K ?

Is anyone using a professional monitor from this list or outside this list that results in very little complications either with firm 1.1.3 or 1.2.3 on 5d3? And if so what issues do occur.
Note my budget is max 600 pounds.

I've gone through the entire forum on this topic but there isn't much new from recent year (2017-2018) that give me a clue if any of these work while recording RAW. For instance smallHD is told in old topics that it has many problems but nothing is updated about it for several years not. My cinematographers out there which do you recommend?


20
General Help Q&A / Re: EOS Utility monitor with Magic Lantern
« on: May 11, 2018, 05:49:40 PM »
Hi, I am looking to use my laptop as a monitor for video shoots using a rebel t2i, which I know I can do with EOS Utility. I was just wondering though if I can still use this EOS Utility feature while running magic lantern?  I am new to magic lantern and while it's running great so far I am concerned about the possibility of bricking my camera. I know the canon controls for aperture, iso, and the like can be controlled through the laptop, but since I will be running magic lantern, will that just not compute with EOS Utility and damage my camera? If so, does anyone know of any good external video monitoring solutions to use with magic lantern? 

Thanks!

Which field monitors do you strongly recommend to use on for raw 5d3 that has focus peaking, cropmark 2.35:1, 24fps, 16:9, scopes, that are compatible with raw 14-bit recording. I don't want to record to it only use it for focusing on my ronin-M gimbal and make use of scopes and false colors while recording on my CF card. Recording with the monitor is not my goal. My budget it max 600 dollars.
Since I will not be able to see my camera's LCD screen do I need to use firm 1.2.3. I have read some say that I will only be able to see the monitor with 1.1.3 while the cameras screen turns black. Is that true?
Another question. Will we be able to use a 4K monitor with 14-bit in 4K or is it so that the 5d3 can only output 1080p in hdmi? Just asking so that I would know if it is worth the extra money to spend on a 4K monitor.

21
Share Your Videos / Re: Brooklyn Bridge - 5DIII RAW 3.5k
« on: May 01, 2018, 02:07:51 AM »
Thanks Ibrahim!

All my shots were pretty much continuous, as far as I remember, but my takes were only about 10 to 15 seconds long, and with sound recording disabled.
I think that when I tried to record sound, the camera would stop recording after 10 or 15 seconds.
I didn't find any skipped or corrupted frames in any take...


thanks!

That's great results! How were the results in 24fps in case you have tried it?

22
Share Your Videos / Re: Brooklyn Bridge - 5DIII RAW 3.5k
« on: April 20, 2018, 12:33:52 AM »
Nice.
Were your shots continuous or did you get any skipped/black frames in your shots using the provided settings?

23
Raw Video / Re: .dng - Blackmagic color space and gamma
« on: March 21, 2018, 01:38:11 PM »
For cinemaDNG files (from ML): In the camera RAW tab of davinci's color grading tab I change decode using to clip, color space and gamma to black magic design. Highlight recovery checked.
In my project settings -> color management I set the timeline color space to rec709 gamma 2.4 (which is my default).

Color grade using the nodes and if you want to use a LUT create it in the begining and add it at the end. Create the remaining nodes prior to the LUT.

That my starting point when I grade footage to look cinematic and not videoish. Any better suggestions from others since I come mainly from the Pr/AE world.

24
Thanks Danne!
I already have twixtor on my PC, it is a great plugin.

25
Hi Ibrahim, and congratulations on your first short!

In terms of grading, generally it looks good. However, I think that your blacks are lifted too much. I know that this look has been popular over the last ten years or so, but I think it makes your film look too washed out.

However, this might be a problem with your export settings, as the RGB values for the letterboxed area (which should be 0, 0, 0) is actually 16, 16, 16.


Thanks man I appreciate your feedback.

Well I have had a few difficulties maybe that has caused what you mention, however sorry for asking I don't understand what you mean by 16, 16 , 16.

My render setting was tiff 16bps RGB since davinci crashed when I tried to export directly to DNxHD 444.

I worked between 64 and 960 IRE since I learned that that is the range of rec 709. Is that why the blacks look that washed out?


I think I see some sharpening with a wide radius or perhaps it's a local contrast adjustment... I would be inclined to not do that. It's particularly crunchy looking at around 4:15

There is also some colour banding on skin (for example at around 5:55). Maybe you are using a LUT that is causing this.

Finally, I think there is a frame rate problem somewhere in your workflow as some clips are a bit jerky.

Aside from these grading considerations, the camerawork is good and so is the editing.

True, I should remove the sharpening effect, especially its radius.

The issue with frame rate belonged to the drone scenes. How do I use drone footage in 30fps? My drone cannot film in 24fps.



Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7