Messages

Did you buy them on Amazon or ebay?

Amazon.

Just got in a 64GB Komputerbay 1000x card.  Works fine in a PC but the 5d3 cannot see or format the card.  Doing a low level format now and going to re-format with exFat (windows shows it already WAS exFat).  Anyone have this problem?

Same here... I had received 2 64gb Komputerbay 1000x cards this week and only 1 worked in my 5d3.  The other worked only on the pc but not in the 5d3.  Returning that one and getting a replacement.  Has already returned the 128gb due to slow write speeds.  These cards are hit and miss.  The good 64gb card however is pretty fast and 1080p works well. 

Also, post deflicker does not work when silent pictures is enabled.  For me, one of the most exciting prospects of ETTR is being able to use the combination of Auto ETTR,  post deflicker, and silent pics (to save my shutter) for timelaspes.  That is potentially the ultimate combo.  I realize that Auto ETTR was just released so it may already be part of Alex's plans for all I know.

Using Auto ETTR with silent pictures enabled, the maximum number of photos it will let me setup in the intervalometer is just a small fraction of the space I have available on my CF card.  I'm guessing that it is calculating the space available based on CR2 file sizes and hasn't been updated to account for the smaller file size of silent pics.  Am I understanding this correctly?

[audio does not get recorded]

Sound may be disabled by FPS override, check that.

I had already checked that.  There are 2 repeatable scenarios which cause audio issues in H.264 video recording...

FPS overide is NOT enabled in either scenario...

Scenario 1
- Enable raw video mode with "Sync beep" option.
- Record raw video
- Disable raw video option
- Record H264 video... audio does not get recorded

Scenario 2
- Enable raw video mode with "Separate WAV" option.
- Record raw video
- Disable raw video option
- Record H264 video... audio gets recorded but is distorted (sped up like chimpmunk)
- Record H264 video again... audio gets recorded normally from now on

I hope this helps.

3.  As others have mentioned, the sound is disabled when you turn off raw mode and try to record h.264 video.

I just noticed this as well.  Was working in previous builds.

I have been shooting using the Auto ETTR feature today and just have to say that it's amazing.  So much more advanced than Canon's own metering.  This deserves a lot more attention but I understand about the excitement of Raw video.  Great job Alex!

I wasnt able to find the post anywhere, but I remember reading something about getting live preview of the RAW output in the LCD. With this idea, would it be possible to also get a live FEED from the HDMI, utilizing said raw preview? I'm probably misunderstanding this whole thing, regardless...But theres still a slight hope of utilizing the HDMI output to record RAW via xNAMEBRANDx field recorder (such as a Ninja).

This has been suggested many times.  Apparently, utilizing HDMI is difficult to do and the focus at the moment is to come up with a solution via the CF slot to external HDD or SSD.

also, attempting to playback raw video with lcd monitor attached via hdmi hangs up the camera.

Yes... raw playback mode seems to always lock up the camera... end up having to removing the battery. 

Other than the misalignment of the resolution overlays and playback mode locking up the camera, everything else seems to work well when using an external monitor. 

same also with my SWIT monitor. the guides are way off to the left.

I wasn't sure if this was a monitor specific issue... I guess not.   Can anyone else chime in if they also experience this when using an external LCD monitor via hdmi?

I've been testing the raw recording with my 5D3 via HDMI and my SmallHD DP4 LCD monitor.   The main issue I am experiencing (at least when using the SmallHD DP4) is the outline overlay which represents the selected resolution is being displayed at the wrong location. It appears too far to the left and also is placed too high.  Here are the screen captures when I enable Raw Recording...

This one is for 1920 x 1080


This is an example of 1920 x 840.  I enabled crop marks (cinemascope) just to show where the outline should be.


If it is not possible to correct this, may I suggest adding the ability to disable the resolution overlay.  Since this is probably one the more popular monitors out there, I thought I would just let you know this issue exists.

raw2dng update for 4GB files, from rodobot: http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=5247.msg38080#msg38080

Can you check if it's working on Windows? (see first post for download)

Working on Windows...  just tried it on a 6gb file.

My Komputer Bay 64 GB 1000x wasn't aligned, maybe the Komputer Bay 128 GB 1000x isn't aligned and that's why it has such slow benchmarks?

My Komputer 128GB wasn't aligned either.  After alignment there was no change in performance in benchmarks.

My 1000x Komputerbay 128GB arrived today. Just as I had expected, it is quite slow. Topping out at 70MB/s... so I'm stuck with 1920 x 900 on a good take and most often 1920 x 840 to be safe. This is a slow 1000x card. I'm not sure how others like Cinema5D are writing 1920x1080 to the 128GBs.

I get similar speed results as you with my 128.  I have written about this issue here and on Cinema5D.  Bottom line, the KomputerBay 128s seem to be slower then the 64s.  Cinema5D has assured me that their 128s are fast so they just might have been lucky with theirs.  EOSHD was using 64s for his tests.  Most current reports of the 128s are benchmarking around 70MB/s.

[potential]

Ok.. here are my thoughts about this workflow...

I have been playing around with CineForm Studio Premium for the last few days.  This has potential to be a much faster workflow than any other methods I have seen discussed.  One of the advantages that jumps out at me immediately is that importing a large number is DNGs into your product is very quick (almost immediate) and this allows you to play the raw sequence in your video player right away.  Other workflows take much longer to get to this point so this is a good way to be able to play through all your footage to see what you have shot, discard any bad sequences and not waste any time converting sequences you won't be using.  It's also pretty amazing how the raw workflow extends right into Premiere... when you import the converted Cineform Raw files into Premiere and still can update the files live from Cineform Studio and have those changes reflected immediately in your Premiere timeline... very nice.

However, there are a couple of things that give me pause about this workflow.  I think a large number of people will ending up liking the Adobe Camera Raw interface for getting their image into a very usable state quickly.  Besides very intuitive exposure controls, ACR includes time saving features such as decent noise reduction. This could eliminate the need for more render intensive noise reduction plugins later.  In my test footage of a fairly bright window in a dim room, ACR let me bring the highlights down and adjust overall exposure much more easily than in Cineform Studio.  Other than a white balance correction, minor tint shift, and a bit of noise reduction, it only took minutes to get my footage looking beautiful.  In contrast, using Cineform Studio, I found that I needed to play around for quite a bit longer to get the the point where the footage was acceptable, and it still didn't look as good as what I had achieved using ACR.  Highlight preservation was especially problematic.  I'm not a professional colorist by any means but that is the point... I feel this experience I described will be repeated by many like me.  Another observation...I had initially opened my DNG sequence in ACR, made my adjustments, synchronized these changes to all my files, and then imported those files into Cineform Studio.  I was expecting (or hoping rather) that my changes might have been preserved in Cineform Studio but alas they weren't.  I'm sure there is a reason for this but it would be useful to be able to do this.  Cineform Studio still to me has the advantage of non-destructive raw editing which extends to the NLE, small edit-friendly files, not to mention the ability to preview your footage very quickly in your video player before any conversion or rendering takes place. 

Just some food for thought...

Highest reliable res on the 128GB card is 1920x840, around 65MB/s.

1920x960 isn't too bad... but right on the limit of the card at 73MB/s. Sometimes it can't even do that.

Still the 64GB card pushes on for 92MB/s peak and can do 1080p no sweat.

Our cards are behaving almost exactly the same in terms of speed.  You should also be able to get 1920x900 WITHOUT frame skipping for the full 4gb file.  The build from a little earlier today omitted that resolution but lourenco sent me a link adding it back...

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B7QlH_BH2m32Q1FMeHBBQVVmb3M&usp=sharing

If you are missing 1080x900, just overwrite these files in the ML/MODULES folder (I'm assuming you are using the latest build).

Sometimes my 128GB card is slow off the marks - 50MB/s, then slowly rises to reach 70MB/s after around 10 seconds of recording.

In benchmark it always achieves around 73MB/s no matter what mood it is in 

On your 128gb, what is the highest resolution you can use (1x mode, 24fps) and still record the full 4 gig file without skipping frames?  On my KomputerBay 128gb, I can only do 1080x900.  Anything higher will only go for 10-20 seconds before frame skipping begins.

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B7QlH_BH2m32Q1FMeHBBQVVmb3M&usp=sharing

Thanks.

I feel like the refactoring lowered write speed somehow.. I'm getting less frames.... either that or the card is getting slower?

Now in photo mode non LV it takes all the memory and you have to turn it off before LV will start.

Same here... getting less frames as well.   Also, the 900 vertical resolution was removed since the last build.  1920x900 was my maximum baseline resolution I was using that had no dropped frames.  Can this be added back?

[peaking]

I just ordered and received the same CF card as you... the KomputerBay 128gb 1000x CF card and have been running tests with each of the various Raw builds over the last 3 days.  The latest build for 5D3 someone just posted from today seems to be the best in terms of speed... see http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=5413.25 (Reply #30).  This includes some small memory tweaks that definitely helped me get a little bit longer runtimes as well as moved me up to the next resolution without dropped frames.

Here has been my experience with the KomputerBay 128 GB 1000x CF card...

For my tests, I tried Global draw turned ON and OFF and there was no significant difference except maybe a second or two extra of recording time but the extra time was not consistent.  So I decided to leave Global Draw = ON (with just peaking and crop marks enabled).


My tests using the ML benchmark utility shows read speeds that range anywhere from 52MB/s to 72MB/s.  Using CrystalDiskMark and ATTO Disk Benchmark, I get similar write speeds so my particular card seems to have a write speed that varies a bit.  I would say the average write speed that I get most of the time is about 65MB/s which is completely in line with the ML benchmarks and the listed speed needed by each resolution listed under the RAW video section of ML.  So I would trust the ML benchmarks and recommended write speeds for each resolution.  I have also confirmed that at least one other person is getting similar write speed using this card.

That said, the buffer/memory tweak Alex made today did have a significant impact when using my card. 

Here are my tests Before today's build...
1920 x 720 or less resolution (no skipped frames for complete 4gb file)
1920 x 840 (no skipped frames for complete 4 gb file)... before today's build, this was the best I could do.
1920 x 900 (no skipped frames for complete 4 gb file)... tweaks added to today's build allowed me to use resolution for first time
1920 x 960 (maybe 10 seconds before frame skipping begins.. unusable beyond that)
1920 x 1080 (maybe 1-2 seconds before frame skipping begins... unusabe beyond that)

After using today's build...
1920 x 900 (no skipped frames for complete 4 gb file) before today's build, I could not use this resolution
1920 x 960 (went from 10 seconds to 20 seconds before frame skipping begins.. unusable beyond that)
1920 x 1080 (went from 1-2 seconds to 5 seconds before frame skipping begins... unusabe beyond that)

So the tweaks made by Alex today have definitely helped so I encourage further memory/buffer optimizations... they are making a difference.

I don't know how EOSHD, Nuemann Films, and Cinema 5D are getting 1080P and greater without dropped frames. They say they are using the same card.  Maybe some of these cards are getting faster write times.  Or maybe they are just getting that resolution for a limited time but a bit longer than me before frame skipping appears.  If any of them can chime in here to clarify, it would helpful for those considering the Komputerbay cards.  This card is by far the most realistic in terms of pricing for the vast majority of people who want to take advantage of this RAW update and plan on using it beyond test videos and personal work.  None of the other cards comes close in terms of price/gb.  The other solutions by Lexar and Toshiba (soon) are more like $650 for 128gb vs $178 or KomputerBay. I'm sure this will eventually change, but that could take a year or longer before cheaper alternatives are available.  But there is no getting around the fact that the less than ideal write speed of these cards may prevent continuous 1080p for some (depending on their particular card?).  But continued memory optimization and other techniques by the ML team may be able to extend 1080p recording from 5 seconds to 30 seconds or possibly more when using this card.  If that can be attained, the vast majority of folks will be able use this resolution in many shooting scenarios, short of documentary or event work.  I do realize that smaller resolutions can be scaled up in post nicely, but I tend to avoid that as do many others I'm sure.

Lastly, on the topic of workflow mentioned above... it's completely worth the time as far as I'm concerned.  The difference is night and day.  There are a lot of test videos coming out now, some of which don't fully capture the quality improvement gained here.  EOSHD, Nuemann Films, and Cinema 5D did great job of showing what's possible.  Just wait until some shorts and features by other skillful DOPs start to appear online.  While I don't love the added work required in post, I find it impossible to go back to H.264 after getting used to the look of my footage now...it's improved that much.

Thank you Alex and team for this... also to g3gg0 who apparently had a huge role in making this particular breakthrough happen.

A little update regarding the KomputerBay cards...

You may want to avoid recommending the 128GB version of the KomputerBay CF card. Evidence is building that the 128 version had slower real world write speeds than the 64. This prevents 1080p raw recording since the 128 doesn't seem to attain the 83MB/s minimum write required for 1080p raw recording. The 64GB version seems to test at 90+ MB/s write while the 128GB version tests at 60-70 MB/s write.  It turns out that Andrew from EOSHD was using the 64gb variety of the KomputerBay card for his Raw tests, which is why he was able to utilize even greater than 1080p raw without dropped frames.  This is all still unproven but I just returned my 128gb and ordered two 64gb to see for myself.

Are we there yet... are we there yet... are we there yet.

So funny... was thinking the same thing. 

as only few cameras support files > 4GiB, we will probably not use that feature, but use file splitting instead.

Makes sense... thanks.

That's correct... the camera will respect whatever compatible format the card is using.  So formatting my exFAT card in-camera maintains exFAT.  FYI... the benefit of exFAT will be when the ML folks enable >4GB raw files.  Fat32 only supports files up to 4GB...  exFAT has no such restriction.  This may be a moot point if the ML folks decide to create separate 4GB files instead of one larger file >4GB for long takes.  I see the pros and cons of either approach so ideally it would be a configurable option.

I actually need to correct what I just said.  It seems that when formatting my CF card in-camera, the 5D3 uses Fat32 for cards up to 128gb, but switches to exFAT for cards larger than this.  It's in canon's documentation and I verified this behavior myself by first formatting my card in my computer using exFAT and then formatted in-camera... the file format was switched to Fat32.

This can be quite problematic for all people using cards up to 128gb (the vast majority) who need to record Raw files larger than 4gb and still be able to format in-camera.  Doing that would revert the card back to Fat32.  I am unaware of any method of changing this camera behavior.  So for future prospects of recording 1080p longer than 30 secords or so, you would have to format via computer using exFAT and be sure not to ever format in-camera.  Unless the ML team could override this behavior when formatting, the best option would probably be to automatically create additional 4gb raw files on the fly for longer takes.   Anyway, just thought I'd share this observation.

Just consolidating some information here from what I've read as I find this thread highly intoxicating, despite not owning a 5D3.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but a RAW frame will be composed of R, G, & B channels. However since the data is not debayered, R & B are 1/2 the horizontal and vertical resolution of a debayered frame, thus 1/4 of the frame's resolution is color data for either R or B. And since G is twice as pixels than either R or B, it'd consume 1/2 of the frame's resolution is color data. Overall, this add's us to just the pixel count of what a frame is. Now, this is 14-bits per pixel data, 8-bits in a byte, 23.976 fps (simplified to 24 fps for the sake of simplicity), frame_res*14/8*24= datarate in bytes/sec.

If my understanding of the data format is sound then this is what follows so far...

For the 5D3 with the KomputerBay 1000x cards being used, we've seen:
1920x900 @ 24 fps --> 1,728,000 pixels, 14 bpp @ 24 fps --> ~69.2 MB/sec write speed requirement
1920x1080 @ 24 fps --> 2,073,600 pixels, 14 bpp @ 24 fps --> ~83.1 MB/sec write speed requirement
1920x1152 @ 24 fps --> 2,211,840 pixels, 14 bpp @ 24 fps --> ~88.6 MB/sec write speed requirement

For the 600D, the reported card I happened to miss, we've seen:
1280x400 @ 24 fps --> 512,000 pixels, 14 bpp @ 24 fps --> ~20.5 MB/sec write speed
960x540 @ 24 fps --> 518,400 pixels, 14 bpp @ 24 fps --> ~20.76 MB/sec write speed

CF and SD cards are Flash memory. There is a bit of a principle of Flash memory that *will* affect  your write speeds, and though these memory cards are not what we consider SSD's, they have to abide by the same rules.

In order to provide a proper test, also to ensure your CF/SD card wears evenly, which not all manufacturers use or advertise if they have wear leveling, you should format your memory card in a computer with a "Full" format to make sure you get real world results. Initial writes may be faster, but that won't be how the rest of the card performs during the rest of it's life.

Interesting analysis... thank you.

I haven't found that to be the case, rather the firmware of the card dictates its native formatting schema and size allotment, etc.

also, 1080p23.98 14bit raw footage: https://vimeo.com/66268193  with more to follow

That's correct... the camera will respect whatever compatible format the card is using.  So formatting my exFAT card in-camera maintains exFAT.  FYI... the benefit of exFAT will be when the ML folks enable >4GB raw files.  Fat32 only supports files up to 4GB...  exFAT has no such restriction.  This may be a moot point if the ML folks decide to create separate 4GB files instead of one larger file >4GB for long takes.  I see the pros and cons of either approach so ideally it would be a configurable option.