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 - CFP

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8
Raw Video / Re: Why RAW insn't Cr2, and it is DNG, instead?
« on: July 13, 2013, 05:28:20 PM »
I'm sorry if I offended you. And I apologize for my last words.
Please don't get me wrong: I'm totally with you about safety. And I admire and appreciate your awesome work. (Guess you heard that way to often, hm? :D)

I know that you are a great programmer and I respect your high standards.

I just thought this guy here would show that I wasn't completely serious: ;D

But since we are talking about a "hack" (firmware add-on) and not even about the official and stable version, I guess that most people are okay with a certain risk. In my opinion it is okay as long at it's labeled as dangerous in the menu. And that is the case. That's why I said what I said. But I agree with you: The feature shouldn't be in the normal version. It's just nice to have the option to use a different build if you are willing to risk your camera.

Anyway, I don't want to argue or waste your time. And it goes offtopic too (At least if I understood the topic ;D). It's just very nice how it is: The stable version for the shy people, the nightlys for the more anxious ones and the unofficial extras for more careless experimental ones. It's good to be able to chose instead of letting Canon do that for you. And like I said, I'm gratefull for that.

Of course I understand if you won't forgive me. I wouldn't do it either :)

Raw Video / Re: Why RAW insn't Cr2, and it is DNG, instead?
« on: July 13, 2013, 04:51:09 PM »
You mean the "SRAW" and "MRAW" settings? They aren't in the official nightlies, but in 1%'s Tragic Lantern 2.0 build. I haven't tried the RAW Modules that come with the new nightlys but they didn't work last week on the 600D. So you need to use 1%'s build. Please don't delete it!

The SRAW images work fine in Digital Photo Professional and the SRAW option increase the buffer from ~70 to ~100 Megabyte. Without that the 600D's RAW feature would be as useless as on the 550D ...

I know that it is dangerous because it's not saved on the SD-card but in the camera. Who cares? ;D

Raw Video / Re: Why RAW insn't Cr2, and it is DNG, instead?
« on: July 13, 2013, 04:35:25 PM »
@ A1ex: On the 600D you can't set them from the Canon menu ;)

These settings don't affect the .raw video but the CR2 stills's resolution. Set the "Pic Quality" to "RAW" to get 5202 X 3456 set it to "SRAW" for 2592 X 1728. "MRAW" doesn't work properly (Files are corrupt) but it would be something in between. But you should set the "Pic Quality" to "SRAW" if you want to film something in RAW because it increases the shoot_malloc buffer size. The bigger the bufer the better.

If you don't want to work with normal DNG files, use CinemaDNG. Or write your own converter.
Here's a innofficial specs site for the CR2 file format:
And why on earth do you want to have a converter that creates useless .raw video files from usable .cr2 image files?
Sorry, but I think I don't understand your point ???

I think all you want is not using DNG. Am I right? :)

And if you need a video that shows the (very poor) possibilies you have with the 600D, search on YouTube. You'll see that it has some serious hardware limits. Reading the official thread could help too:
And here's a very little project I made with the EOS 600D and Magic Lantern a few days ago:
Did anything from my post answered one of your questions?

Tragic Lantern / Re: Uncompressed 600D Raw Video
« on: July 13, 2013, 01:01:40 PM »
I'm using RAW + FPS Override to shoot timelapse video. Is there any chance to increase image resolution? 1728 with minimal fps of 0.15 produces 10-11 Mb/s, this means write speed is enough to shoot 1920 with 0.15fps. But I can't switch 1920 on.
In the 5X zoom mode you can use higher resolutions. But not in the 1X mode.

is it possible to make interlaced it interlaced?
Why should you want that? It would probably look even worse than it already does ;)
You can use the 720p mode to get more lineskipping. But be carefull: The result may have more aliasing!

How do I record RAW stretched with skipped lines??? Can't google out anything relevant...
Wow, it almost looks like my posts are invisible... no answer again, but the guy who posted right after me got his... this isn't the first time too... The question seems to be on topic... Maybe I have a ghost account...  :-\
In the Canon menu you have to chose the 720p resolution. That will increase the line skipping from every third to every fith line and give you a nice squished image. I guess since that was mention a few thousand times already nobody answered your question earlier ;)

@ 1% the 650D's videos are just like the 600D's one: Squished in 720p mode but normal in 1080 and 640 mode. I asked it in the thread :D

Share Your Videos / [Canon T3i | 600D] RAW Shortfilm: Daisy's Death
« on: July 13, 2013, 12:50:39 PM »
Hello everyone :D

Since almost every 600D RAW test I could find on YouTube looked quite bad or boring I tried to do my own with a little bit more content than cats & flowers. And I tried to get the highest quality out of my camera, but I guess I failed. I'm sure there's still room for improving the workflow and result. Anyway, here's my short 'test video':

The settings and everything is in the description. If you have a question, ask it. The video is no cool film or something like that but I hope it shows how the 600D's RAW videos may look if you put a bit effort in them.

Raw Video / Re: 550D raw video recording port official thread
« on: July 13, 2013, 12:31:46 PM »
Hi, i just tried various frame rates, is it normal on 720p frames I get extreme moiré and bad quality (in terms of detail)? I'm not sure but maybe the real gain in resolution only starts at 1080p frames? Does 720p on 5d mk3 (the heaven for raw) look as bad ?
On my EOS 600D even 1280 X 512 (2.5:1 aspect ratio) looks very good after upscaling it to 1920 X 769 (2.5:1 aspect ratio) if you use the right scaling and debayering algorithm. It looks as good as 1920 X 1080 H.264 in terms of aliasing and maybe even better in terms of moiré. So: No the 5D Mark III isn't the only camera that profits from the RAW videos.

But what exactly do you mean with '720p'? Do you mean, in the Canon menu you've set the resolution to 1080p or 640p and the width in the Magic Lantern menu to 1280 with 16:9 aspect ratio? Or have you set the resolution to 720p in the Canon menu too? It is important since the 1080p and 640p mode both have the same line skipping: Every third column and every third line. But the 720p mode uses a different skipping: everythird column but every fith line. The 720p mode has way worse aliasing because of the bigger gaps between the lines. It also means that the Canon 720p mode produces a squished image that needs to be streched in post. So for 1280 X 720 without good quality set the resolution in Canon menu to 640p (Every third line and every third column is read and the YUV buffer is smaller than in 1080p mode = more space for RAW and Magic Lantern) and in the Magic Lantern menu the width to 1280 and the aspect ratio to 16:9.

And to reduce moiré as far as possible you should use Adobe Lightroom or CameraRAW to debayer your footage. Everything else looks worse, even Davinci Resolve isn't as good as LR and CR.

Raw Video / Re: Why RAW insn't Cr2, and it is DNG, instead?
« on: July 12, 2013, 07:56:41 PM »
I think you are a bit confused? :)

DNG (Digital Negative) is an open lossless file format for raw stills. It was developed by Adobe to replace all the other formats like Canon's CR2 or Nikon's NEF and become the only standard for raw stills. CR2 isn't open. You can't simply make a RAW2CR2 converter without license. And it wouldn't help you since both formats, CR2 and DNG are based on Adobe's TIFF format. They don't differ in quality. And if your hardware is too weak to handle DNG sequences it won't work with CR2 sequences either.

Short: DNG and CR2 are both equally good raw formats. But one is open, and one isn't ;)

And .mov is only an ending. The container format is called QuickTime and it's a standard by Apple. It supports a lot of audio and video codecs and is used by many video cameras together with the H.264 codec. That has absolutely nothing to do with RAW or Magic Lantern. The videos inside the QuickTime container are compressed and edited. But the compression is too strong and the editing that's applied inside the Canon DSLR is quite bad as you may know.

The frames inside the .raw files are raw. As raw as possible. Even more raw than Blackmagic CinemaDNG raw or Canon CR2 raw. They are no DNG frames, nor CR2. No compression and no more editing than croping the edges to lower the resolution. Anything else.They are even a bit too raw so you have to convert them to something else to work with them. And if you chose DNG or CR2 makes no difference. But since you can't chose the CR2 option anyway ... ;D

If you convert a .mov (QuickTime) file to several DNG images you won't get raw images. That's no the way it works.

Raw Video / Re: RAW on 650D / 700D?
« on: July 09, 2013, 06:33:13 PM »
How strong is it squished? I havent seen it on my videos from 650D.
Very strong. On the 600D you have to strech it by 166%. So I guess if you haven't noticed anything like that, it isn't squished and the EOS M is the only camera which has this issue. If you set the resolution in the Canon menu to 720p and record a raw video with Magic Lantern you'll see what I meant which squished.

@ Aborgh: Not at the moment. Otherwise the 600D wouldn't suck so much ;)
Once the Magic Lantern version for the 650D/700D gets better and the RAW feature gets more stable it should be possible to get a bit more speed. The benchmarks show that the hardware can handle ~ 41 Megabyte/s write speeds. And maybe more. But even with the current 37 Megabyte/s you shouldn't be too unhappy.

Raw Video / Re: RAW on 650D / 700D?
« on: July 09, 2013, 04:06:19 PM »
What are your settings? Maybe you have something enabled that eats the speed?
Try to set the mode dial to 'M' and leave the LiveView. Also, disable Global Draw before you run the benchmark.
It's worth a try - if you haven't used these settings for your benchmark yet - But I guess that won't help much.

Actually your benchmark looks like your card or your camera doesn't support UHS-I. Your card might be fake. Or your camera ;D

Btw: I have a question. 1% mentioned that the EOS M and the 650D/700D probably all have the same issue: The recorded raw image is squished and has to be streched vertically in post. That happens on the 600D if you record in the 720p mode. But is it true that it can't be avoided on the 650D/700D? Or is it only an issue with the EOS M?

Tragic Lantern / Re: Uncompressed 600D Raw Video
« on: July 06, 2013, 07:21:21 PM »
The 650D has issues. Like the current 37 Megabyte/s write speed limit and the AF-Points in the image. But are you sure that it's always squished? I thought it would be better than the 600D because it has a better SD-Controller. But it is far away from being perfect and if it really has no option for unsquished images ...

Tragic Lantern / Re: Uncompressed 600D Raw Video
« on: July 06, 2013, 04:52:11 PM »
Im a 550d user about to buy a few t3i's
If you want to film in RAW, don't buy a T3i / 600D. It is limited to 0.5 Megapixel resolutions at 24 frames per second since it has the same 21 Megabyte write speed issue like the T2i / 550D. So if you want to film with a 16:9 aspect ratio for more than a few seconds you have to use 960 X 540 which gives you a crop factor of almost 3 and looks worse than H.264.

If you don't want to film in RAW, get a T3i. It's as nice as the T2i but has the flipscreen.
Otherwise, get a used 50D, a T4i / 650D or a Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera.

Hehe.. is sraw helping H264 or is canon not using the memory? Sraw should be in both versions.
There's no way to check the shoot_malloc size with the TL1 build, or am I missing something?

I tried it with the settings postet in the first post and the picture quality set to "RAW" and "SRAW" (Rebooted, to increase buffer. But I don't know if it worked). I couldn't see a difference. At 30 and 35 frames per second (ISO 3200 to push the bitrate) it stoped with both settings after a few seconds.

But I have a few questions: Why aren't these controls in the new builds? Will they return? Is it possible to set the flush rate with the TL1 build? If not, what's the default?

Tragic Lantern / Re: Raw video on 50d and 40d
« on: July 03, 2013, 11:00:47 PM »
Since a VAF filter for the 50D is no option at the moment, using a different Software might help too.

I got similar results when I open my DNG images with Google Picasa, but by opening them with Lightroom 4 I got rid of the colorfull borders.
Probably because Picasa's debayering sucks.

So if you aren't using ACR or Lightroom already, you might want to give them a try.

Tragic Lantern / Re: Raw video on 50d and 40d
« on: July 03, 2013, 09:12:25 PM »
Im getting red dots all over my image when I review my footage. Not sure if thats the moire or if the camera is broken or if this is normal...
What did you use to process the RAW videos? RAW2DNG to create DNG images and something else to convert the DNGs to JPEG I guess?
What ever you used for the DNG->JPEG step probably has a bad debayering algorithm. Use something else.

Raw Video / Re: Interpolation to upsize RAW video?
« on: June 30, 2013, 10:02:14 PM »
mkrjf: You've got an answer in that thread. That's exactly how it works. It skips lines & columns to reduce the resolution and saves the result directly to the memory card. Magic Lantern isn't processing the RAW files at all - Except from cropping the borders.

scout72: I got amazing results using this AviSynth script for upscaling my 600D footage to 1920 X 768 (2.5:1) and sharpen it:

# Get the Plugin here:
# Edit the path if necessary

LoadVirtualDubPlugin(ScriptDir()+"..\VirtualDub\plugins\msu_sharpen.vdf", "MSUSmartSharpen", 0)
# Get the Plugin here:
# Edit the path if necessary

# That works only if your TIFF files are named like this: 1, 2, 3, 4, [...], 678

nnedi3_rpow2(rfactor = 4)




Spline36Resize(1920, 768)
# If your aspect ratio isn't 2.5:1 you may want to change the second number ;)
# If you want 4K, use 4048 X (4048 / YOUR_ASPECT_RATIO)

Raw Video / Re: RAW on 650D / 700D?
« on: June 30, 2013, 08:31:56 PM »
Just got 4070frames of 1280x720 which is close to continuous right?
Almost 3 minutes! Nice :D

Not continuous (If you can fill your card I'd call it continuous) but enough for many situations. And way more than you can get with the 600D.

Good to see some benchmarks and more information about the 650D and 700D. So there is space for improvements. Squeezing out a bit more buffer and killing what ever eats the write speed should be possible. But with 95 Megabyte buffer and 37 Megabyte/s write speed the cameras are quite usable for RAW videos in my opinion.

By the way, are you German? Because you're using the German Amazon page ... :D

Raw Video / Re: RAW on 650D / 700D?
« on: June 30, 2013, 05:50:39 PM »
Heh.. .the EOSM controller is just like the 6d controller.. you'll probably get at most 41MB until something new is found. You probably need to hack dialog timers to get that. Theoretical is 50MB, thats being eaten somewhere.
... Eaten by the firmware, right?

Still, I'd like to see a benchmark from the 650D. Maybe it's different from the EOS M and 6D? Who knows.
But of course I can't test it. All I can do is showing you how a hardware limit looks like: Benchmark EOS 600D + SanDisk 45 Megabyte/s ;D

And at least a developer showed up ;)

Raw Video / Re: RAW on 650D / 700D?
« on: June 30, 2013, 05:28:48 PM »
I dont think we will never get any benefit from a 95 MB/s card. [...] I think the HW limit is 37.1 to 37.3MB/s
You may be right.

But I could swear that I saw a few benchmarks from the 650D in one of the older threads which stated 42 Megabyte/s speed.
And since the camera supports UHS-I the hardware should be capable of doing almost 50 Megabyte/s. But there's only one way to find out what's the real limit: Turn the mode dial to "M", disable LiveView and run the Read/Write benchmark ("Debug" tab -> "Benchmarks" -> "Card R/W benchmark (5 min)"). After the benchmark finished, upload the .BMP image from the SD-Card and post it here.

Please do that with a 45 Megabyte/s card and a 95 Megabyte/s card so that we can see if there's a difference or not.
And make sure that you are in "M" mode with the LiveView turned of, since we don't want the firmware to limit the speed.

The more information you gather the higher are the chances to find and remove the current limitations :D

Raw Video / Re: RAW on 650D / 700D?
« on: June 30, 2013, 03:23:20 PM »
No, maximum speed is 37.1 MB but 1600*600 at 24 frames works 1000 frames and more.
Don't make me jealous. On the 600D I'm getting 57 frames at this resolution ;D

But thank you for the info. You are using the SanDisk 45 Megabyte/s SD-Card, right? So ... How much is possible with a 95 Megabyte/s card?
Since the hardware limit of the camera is 50 Megabyte/s and not 37.1 Megabyte/s, there's still space for improvements on the firmware side. And the buffer could be a little bit bigger too, I guess.

The 650D/700D's only issue would be the focus artefacts.
But I think the cameras have a great potential for RAW video.

Raw Video / Re: RAW on 650D / 700D?
« on: June 30, 2013, 02:32:51 PM »
RAW + L  91MB
All other 59 MB
So the Picture Quality setting does change the Shoot_Malloc size. Just like on the 600D and 60D. Good to know.
I wonder what you've done that midnite haven't done? He said that changing the picture quality wouldn't affect the buffer size.

So, how far can you push the resolution? If 1280 X 720 (16:9 | 37 Megabyte/s at 24 frames/s | 2.2 crop factor) works, does 1536 X 614 (2.5:1 | 38 Megabyte/s | 1.8 crop factor) work continously too? It would make the 650D almost as good as the 50D in 1X mode. But the 650D has audio and flipscreen. If the 70D won't be really awesome I might upgrade from 600D to 700D once the price droped a little bit more.

But thank you for confirming my suspicion :D Still somebody has to fill the gaps in the Comparison Table.

Tragic Lantern / Re: Raw video on 50d and 40d
« on: June 30, 2013, 02:02:06 PM »
But if it would be possible to set the skipping from 3 to 2 the image's size would be 2376 X 1584 right?
To answer my own question: Forget that.

I just understood that it is impossible because of the sensors's bayer pattern. It would result in a monochrome picture. The only usefull skipping values are 3 or 1 (No skipping). Looks like there is no way to increase the 1X mode resolution of any Canon DSLR. The only way I can imagine would be to combine 4 pixel to one cluster and skip clusters instead of pixels. But I doubt that this is possible and it might affect the image quality. Time to stop dreaming and be happy with what we have I guess ;D

Raw Video / Re: RAW on 650D / 700D?
« on: June 30, 2013, 01:36:50 PM »
shoot_malloc total 95MB
Thank you :D

Interesting. It wouldn't help me at all but I think some of the other 650D guys may be interested in your exact settings. Maybe you can share them? It looks like the normal Shoot_Malloc size (That's the RAW buffer by the way. The bigger the better) is only 91 Megabyte big on the 650D. At least if midnite's 650D isn't odd or something. These 4 Megabyte are probably making the difference between a few thousand frames and continuous recording.

And if there's a way to increase Shoot_Malloc from 91 to 95 Megabyte I guess it will be possible to push it at least to the 600D's level (103 Megabyte). By the way: The developers aren't really present in this thread, are they?

Raw Video / Re: RAW on 650D / 700D?
« on: June 30, 2013, 01:14:34 PM »
Curious I can record 720p24 continuous with my SanDisk 45MB/s Card
On the 650D or 700D? Could you please check your "Shoot_Malloc" size ("Debug" tab -> "Free Memory" -> Press "Q")?
Maybe you have more than 91 Megabyte. That would explain why you are getting better results with an average SD-Card ...

I think for my T3i I am going to stick to my BM Shuttle 2 recorder and HDMI out, since I bought the recorder. It will give me close enough to RAW
Have you tried working with the RAW videos? I can get 18 seconds of 1280 X 512 (2.5:1 aspect ratio) on my 600D which is enough for many situations and gives you a 2.1 crop factor. Upscaling it to 1920 X 768 makes it look really nice, even better than H.264 in terms of sharpness and detail if you use the right debayering and upscaling method. Although the aliasing is quite bad, I had no problems with moiré so far and the dynamic range is just incredible. Of course, the uncompressed HDMI out videos are slightly better than the default H.264 videos. But the RAW videos are even nicer in my opinion. And they look more like film.

By the way, I use Lightroom 4 to edit the DNG files from RAW2DNG (Almost no sharpening to avoid aliasing) and save them as TIFF images. Then I use an AviSynth script to upscale and sharpen the videos, open them in VirtualDub and export them as AVI videos using the lossless Lagarith codec. The result looks stunning and still has all the information from the RAW files in it, since the workflow is basically lossless. So you can process it in a better color grading software than Lightroom if you want.
Here's my AviSynth script if anybody is interested:

# Get the Plugin here:
# Edit the path if necessary

LoadVirtualDubPlugin(ScriptDir()+"..\VirtualDub\plugins\msu_sharpen.vdf", "MSUSmartSharpen", 0)
# Get the Plugin here:
# Edit the path if necessary

# That works only if your TIFF files are named like this: 1, 2, 3, 4, [...], 678

nnedi3_rpow2(rfactor = 4)




Spline36Resize(1920, 768)
# If your aspect ratio isn't 2.5:1 you may want to change the second number ;)

Raw Video / Re: RAW on 650D / 700D?
« on: June 29, 2013, 10:59:14 PM »
The 500D/550D/600D are limited to 21.4 Megabyte/s write & read speed because their SD-Controllers don't support UHS-I.
So the highest resolution they can record continously is 0.52 Megapixel (E.g. 960 X 540 = 16:9). The 650D/700D/100D's SD-Controllers support UHS-I so they can get much higher write speeds. Theoretical up to 50 Megabyte/s.

So on the new XXXD cameras you can record much higher resolution. With some more improvements and a slightly bigger buffer recording 1280 X 720 at 24 frames/s should be no problem for these cameras since it would require only 37 Megabyte/s write speed.

The 95 Megabyte/s SD-Cards are slightly better than the 45 Megabyte/s cards because they are more stable. On the 45 Megabyte/s card the write speed is actually 20 Megabyte/s and jumps up to 21 Megabyte/s from time to time. On the 95 Megabyte/s cards it stays at 21 Megabyte/s. So the very fast SD-cards are a little bit better than the normal ones.

To see the differences between the Canon DSLRs, check this list: [ML] Canon EOS Raw Video Comparisons
The 650D/700D/100D users have to add some information, but it's enough for a quick overview.

I hope that helped a bit.

Still, I'm curious about the 650D/700Ds capabilities. Sad that 1% doesn't have a 650D/700D. He did a lot of very good things for the 600D.
I guess you don't have GOP and Slice control either?

Raw Video / Re: RAW on 650D / 700D?
« on: June 29, 2013, 10:32:54 PM »
there is no Pic Quality setting in 650d's ML. i changed my settings on canon's firmware.
And? Did it change anything?

On the 600D the only settings that affect the Shoot_Malloc size are "SRAW" and "MRAW". "MRAW" decreased it from 75 to 43 Megabyte and "SRAW" increased it to 103 Megabyte (It used to be 104 Megabyte until A1ex changed something ...).
The Canon settings had no effect. But since the "SRAW" and "MRAW" settings aren't available without Magic Lantern and can't be changed from the Canon GUI, I guess on the 650D you can't increase Shoot_Malloc at the moment?

Maybe a developer might put the "Pic Quality" setting on the 650D/700D too?

hei how do you guys -printscreen your menu
In the "Debug" tab you'll find an option that says "Screenshot - 10s". Press it and wait 10 seconds and you'll get a screenshot of whatever you see on the display ;) The screenshot can be found as .BMP image on the SD-Card.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8