Messages

26

Tragic Lantern / Re: 50D and 40D Raw video

« on: October 24, 2013, 05:19:43 PM »

it isn't planned?

As far as I'm aware, the hardware doesn't support it.

Developer 1% will be able to confirm whether this is correct or not.

27

Tragic Lantern / Re: 50D and 40D Raw video

« on: October 24, 2013, 04:42:50 PM »

Hi All,
Dual ISO not work on 50D in video mode ? I see Dual ISO update everyday

No it doesn't

28

Raw Video Postprocessing / Re: VisionLOG profile for ACR & Lightroom

« on: October 24, 2013, 02:58:18 PM »

How do you go from premiere to resolve?

Export an xml from Premiere and then import and conform that in Resolve.

29

Raw Video Postprocessing / Re: VisionLOG profile for ACR & Lightroom

« on: October 24, 2013, 12:42:29 PM »

I'd really like to be able to use the Resolve workflow but the debayer quality is still pretty poor.

So at the moment I am using the AE/ACR option and exporting to Prores 444 with the VisionLOG profile. I then cut in premiere and grade in Resolve. I'm working on a LUT to use as a base for grading.

30

Tragic Lantern / Re: Andrew Reid review

« on: October 24, 2013, 12:03:28 PM »

Interesting comparison of BMPC against 5dM3 and 7d ML (why not 50d?):

http://www.eoshd.com/content/11350/depth-test-5d-mark-iii-7d-raw-vs-blackmagic-pocket-vs-gh3

I think the 50D would have faired pretty well and been quite close to the pocket. Not quite sure why he chose the 7D unless he has sold his 50D. It's like a warzone on those forums so I don't tend to comment there!

Also people going on about the GH3, saying it's better than Raw. To me they are just trying to justify their purchases. Now I've got a taste for Raw I could never go back to 8bit h264.

There is something very nice about the 50D image, I think it's pretty close to the Blackmagic in terms of motion cadence.

I'm still hoping a VAF might materialise at some point.

31

Tragic Lantern / Re: 50D and 40D Raw video

« on: October 24, 2013, 11:54:32 AM »

Ok, But when I change the resolution on my 50d in raw_rec module (for example to 1440x890) the shooting frame becomes smaller and don't cover the whole screen. And records only the image that stays within the frame. And it always been this way in every build I tried. Your experience is different?

Yes that is how it is going to be.

You are shooting a smaller frame resolution so you would need to expand it to fill the frame. This will result in a softer image because you have less resolution to begin with.

In the same way that if people used to  shoot in SD they would have to expand the image to HD.

This chart might help.

32

Raw Video Postprocessing / Re: VisionLOG profile for ACR & Lightroom

« on: October 24, 2013, 11:48:52 AM »

There isn t a dnxhd 12 bit, it only does 10 bit.
prores is mac only.
with the method to import the sequences from ae into pp, you get full colour range and don t have to export any files which will fill up your hdd

If you want to keep the 14bits then you might aswell just keep it as a dng sequence rather than exporting to a 16bit tiff sequence.

A 10 bit LOG DNXHD file will give you lots of flexibility in grading, so unless you plan on really pushing the image around like crazy then you're not going to notice a huge difference between grading 10bit LOG vs a 16 bit tiff sequence. (apart from massive file sizes)

What is it that you are actually asking?

33

Raw Video Postprocessing / Re: VisionLOG profile for ACR & Lightroom

« on: October 24, 2013, 10:21:07 AM »

unless i am in 14 bit the whole time, like importing to a 16 bit ae sequence, and importing this sequence via dynamik link into premiere for editing and cc for example

If you have AE, then I would export as a Prores 444 or DNXHD .mov file at 12bit. You can then take your LOG files into your editing software and then grade then in Premiere or Resolve etc.

16bit Tiff sequences take up a lot of HDD space.

34

Tragic Lantern / Re: 50D and 40D Raw video

« on: October 24, 2013, 10:16:00 AM »

As I understand lowering the resolution will result in smaller frame cover (crop factor). As I see from my experience It will increase the DOF distance, noise level and cut the wide angle lenses. If the shooting condition allows, you can use it. But you must notice it.

No it won't do that.

Shooting in a lower resolution will just give you a softer image when blown up to 1080P, if you only plan to put it on a DVD then this won't matter. (although, in my experience, shooting a higher res and downscaling does tend to give better results than shooting SD from the outset)

The angle of view, crop factor, DOF, f-stop etc will stay exactly the same regardless of whether you shoot at 1584x1058 or less. All these things will  only change if you enter 5x shooting mode, then the crop factor is around 4x I believe.

35

Raw Video Postprocessing / Re: VisionLOG profile for ACR & Lightroom

« on: October 23, 2013, 05:31:06 PM »

I have this lut but i cant use it as a starting point. Or at least i dont know how.

Goto settings (gear icon)
Click on 'Lookup tables'
Under the '3D input LUT' dropdown, change this to VisionLOG

Now when you select BMDFilm in the raw clip settings it will change to VisionLOG instead of BMDFilm. You can then apply your LUT of choice to a node.

36

Raw Video Postprocessing / Re: VisionLOG profile for ACR & Lightroom

« on: October 23, 2013, 10:18:33 AM »

I have the same thoughts. BMD film looks different than VisionLOG in ACR, more contrasty and saturated, after applying LUT obviously giving some other results. So is there visionLOG LUT for Davinci Resolve? Could you post a link, i cannot find it and have it only for ACR. Thanks

There is a VisionLOG Lut in this package, you could use that in Resolve.

http://vision-color.com/m31/

I also find ACR debayering a lot cleaner than Resolve, which is a shame as the Resolve workflow is quicker.

37

Tragic Lantern / Re: 50D and 40D Raw video

« on: October 21, 2013, 02:04:53 PM »

Really? This was told to me by a ML developer. So what are you saying is that is possible to shoot RAW video with the RAW picture mode ON? Everyone told me that for the RAW video to work continually, it would be necessary to turn the "RAW" mode OFF in CANON menu and get "JPEG" ON.

So, Im not getting the best quallity? Is that it?

I would guess that your card is causing the slowdown. Which version of ML are you shooting with?

I always use Tragic Lantern and can shoot with Raw photo mode turned on, also global draw on, zebra, histogram & peaking and still get around 8% idle with an empty card. Once the card gets about half full I have to turn off zebra in order to maintain continuous.

I've not experienced any issues shooting this way on a 1000x 64GB Komputerbay.

What frame rate are you shooting at? I shoot at 25fps.

38

Tragic Lantern / Re: 50D and 40D Raw video

« on: October 19, 2013, 03:23:01 PM »

You have the RAW picture turned off in the CANON menu? It only works if its JPEG in the CANON menu.

Hope it helps...

I always shoot with RAW picture turned on in the menu and I've never had a dropped frame. Your card is probably a dodgy one, the komputerbay's seem to be a bit hit and miss.

39

Tragic Lantern / Re: 50D and 40D Raw video

« on: October 16, 2013, 11:49:22 AM »

So tell me, I just did the benchmark with the latest nightly build on 50D and Sandisk 16GB Extreme Pro 160, which one of these is the relevant number?

Just try recording, if you drop frames then the card is too slow.

40

Raw Video Postprocessing / Re: VisionLOG profile for ACR & Lightroom

« on: October 16, 2013, 11:41:29 AM »

Thanks for this, I did a similar profile based on the 50D neutral preset but yours is much brighter in the highlights. On some shots I find myself still needing to pull down the highlights with the slider, whereas with my profile the highlights are lower.

I don't like using the highlight slider as it introduces flicker. In my experience, using dcp profiles prevents flicker from occurring.

Having said that, I've not seen any white balance issues, it works as it should and my camera is correct in ACR. I process my .RAW files with Rawmagic.

41

Tragic Lantern / 50D and 40D Raw video

« on: October 11, 2013, 10:29:23 AM »

Resolve 10 Beta 3 is out, but I didn't tried it yet

ML DNG's working fine again in Resolve 10 Beta 3

42

Tragic Lantern / Re: Resolve 10 and ML

« on: October 08, 2013, 08:53:20 PM »

I just got the clarification from BMD Support:

That issue should be sorted in the next Beta release. I don't have a time estimate for when the next Beta will be released.

http://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=13534&p=85981#p85981

So in order to have the ability to process ex-ML files we have to roll back to R9.

i just reinstalled Beta 1 and it works again now.

43

Tragic Lantern / Re: 50D and 40D Raw video

« on: October 07, 2013, 10:52:17 PM »

Ideally, yes - if you spent the time to light the scene to prevent blown out windows, you could extend the dynamic range. But I could do that with any camera.

Of course that's true but with more initial dynamic range the lighting package on the 50D would be also be smaller. I tend to light everything, so more dynamic range just makes it easier for me to get the lighting how I want it on set.

What really draws me to Raw are the post options, I just like having more options when it comes to grading.

44

Tragic Lantern / Re: 50D and 40D Raw video

« on: October 07, 2013, 07:22:46 PM »

Unfortunately, in the case for my 50D short, in order to expose correctly for my subjects, blown out windows is something I had to contend with. While the 50D has more dynamic range, it's not 14 stops.

Even so, the 50D is a great RAW machine.

Oh I see. Did you shoot without lighting indoors then?

45

Raw Video Postprocessing / Re: Rawmagic not working in Resolve 10 beta2.

« on: October 07, 2013, 03:05:59 PM »

Same here.

46

Tragic Lantern / Re: 50D and 40D Raw video

« on: October 07, 2013, 11:24:47 AM »

No new news from Mosaic Engineering. Left a voice message last Friday the 4th offering my assistance and/or just to simply touch base and find out about the progress of the filter.

... Been following 50D ML Forum and reading what other users have asked about Mosaic Engineering.

Here is a link to DNGs featuring the VAF and a $10 Promaster UV filter and also no VAF with the same $10 Promaster Filter. Looks like the moire is nearly completely eliminated (95 - 97%).

https://copy.com/hjxaDziN02ae

... The last two Fridays in a row I've left a voice message with Mosaic in an attempt to touch base... Still no new news.

Thanks for chasing it. It looks like they have been working on a BMCC filter so maybe they haven't had time for the 50D one lately. Hopefully they'll get to it soon.

Can you shoot a test on some striped fine detail fabric if you have time?

Cheers

47

Tragic Lantern / Re: 50D and 40D Raw video

« on: October 07, 2013, 11:11:10 AM »

Honestly, this GH3 footage I shot looks better in sharpness and dynamic range than anything I've gotten out of my RAW enabled 50D.

To me, the GH3 looks very video like and if you're getting more dynamic range out of it then I don't think you're exposing the 50D properly.

If I invested into RAW for an extra stop and half of latitude and post-white balance - I wouldn't have enough money to make my little indie shorts.

That extra dynamic range could be the difference between blowing out the windows or not, definitely worth it in my opinion.

RAW can't be compared to H264, there's no contest. I see my 50D as a mini Red one.

48

Tragic Lantern / Re: 50D and 40D Raw video

« on: October 06, 2013, 09:57:33 PM »

@levisdavis

Any further developments on the 50D VAF from Mosaic?

49

Tragic Lantern / 50D and 40D Raw video

« on: October 06, 2013, 08:43:58 PM »

Did anyone succeed to open Cinema DNGs from Canon 50D in Resolve 10 Beta? In my case I have immediate CRASH (

I just tried and get the same crash.

50

Tragic Lantern / Re: 50d vs BMCC :: Dynamic Range

« on: August 30, 2013, 10:25:26 AM »

Hi all, I recently was shooting on BMCC and decided to make comparison of BMCC vs 50D.
So I decided to evaluate the usable DR of both cameras.
This is not a scientific test -- just practical approach.

I was shooting both scenes in a ETTR way (without ETTR module), so that the whites are mostly overexposed.

Then I tried to push the shadows and see how much that can go until you have unacceptable noise (purely in my opinion)

I'm pretty sure that someone can make more sense from these tests, so welcome!

BMCC was shot at ISO 800.

I decided to shoot 50D at ISO 400. On the one hand, I wanted their ISOs somehow to match. On the other hand, ISO 800 of 50D would be too unfair to 50D, being a no low-light king.

The same 17-50 2.8 lens was used.


CONCLUSION: Based on the eyedropper tool info in the shadows I estimate that BMCC is 1 stop wider in its Dynamic Range.

As I said, this is a brief non-scientific test. Don't shoot me based on this. Any reasonable comments are welcome.

And yes, the original RAW files are found here: https://copy.com/oG6C31ghjeJ0

_{PS Monti, please relax and don't respond to this. You may create your own thread somewhere in the forum and post, post, post...}

Interesting test, you could probably push those 50D shadows even further and use neat video. Pretty amazing considering the price difference between the cameras.

I've got that Shot by shot book too!