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 - vickersdc

Pages: 1 [2] 3
Raw Video Postprocessing / Re: DNG preview in Mavericks (10.9) Finder
« on: December 30, 2013, 12:32:35 AM »
I'm using Mavericks and I'm not too sure what you mean... as I can preview DNGs from within Finder...

Raw Video / Re: [600D RAW] Dots, dots and more dots.
« on: December 29, 2013, 03:02:41 PM »
RAWTherappe is even slower. You can make batch: modify one DNG, click with right button on icon, copy settings, place on others, and put it on qeue... but the AMaZE is very slow too, and using the highlight recover is impossible in my opinion.

RAWTherapee is not too bad - using the command line to 'batch' process an entire directory full of DNGs doesn't take so long, although it does mean that you no longer have raw files to deal with, but 16-bit TIFF instead (and they take up more space!).

But I think RAWTherapee is do-able as part of the workflow... just. :)

Raw Video / Re: [600D RAW] Dots, dots and more dots.
« on: December 29, 2013, 12:23:35 AM »

Any developer can explain how these artifacts occur in the image? It is the line skipping? On 3x crop this occur too, so... I really don't understand it.

I agree... it's odd that the 'prehistoric' TL [New System] didn't suffer from this, but anything subsequent does seem to...

Raw Video / Re: [600D RAW] Dots, dots and more dots.
« on: December 29, 2013, 12:05:14 AM »
Lost of information here:

Also Adobe Camera RAW will fix most of these problems.

Thank you!!!

I've actually had RAWTherapee on my Mac for ages and never used it! It took me a while to find the relevant 'Hot/Dead Pixel' tickbox, but when I did...  ;D Dots gone! Brilliant!

Now I need to work out how to batch process and save them - ideally back into DNG, but I think the only options are JPEG, TIFF or PNG. Anyway, I need to do some searching about using RAWTherapee, but I feel I'm a step closer to getting rids of those dots.

Many thanks for that link.

Raw Video / Re: [600D RAW] Dots, dots and more dots.
« on: December 28, 2013, 11:45:27 PM »
I tried the MLV video recording module and used mlv_dump with the no-cs, cs2x2, cs3x3 and cs5x5 chroma smoothing options and none of those worked.

Interesting results with Lightroom 5.3 - I don't have LR on my iMac (just RAWMagic -> Resolve 10 -> FCP X)... if it does a good job of removing the dots across the entire frame I may well pay the £70 / $100 for it as it would be worth it; but is the workflow with it?

Do you have to batch process the DNG's after raw2dng, deal with them one by one, or...?


Raw Video / Re: [600D RAW] Dots, dots and more dots.
« on: December 28, 2013, 06:10:55 PM »

I'm really curious to know the real reason you do not use TL and not ML NB ... @a1ex has said several times that packets of TL 2.0 for 600D are outdated (since June) and that the version is unstable (overheating, and memory blocks are not as vast as the current ML NB). Why use? Even in H.264, bitrate is the same.

I believe that only software we will be able to remove the dead pixels. Unfortunately I have no programming skills, but I'm studying to do so, since the matter related to the topic seems to be dead. No one is posting anything, not even discussing ... well, this is not the correct way to resolve things in an open source project.

I use both TL and the nightly builds... both give me the dots, which I do not believe are dead pixels at all. If I fire up TL [New System] from back in June, I can shoot raw with none of these pixels occurring. I've now stopped using raw, as much as I love the quality, having so many of these dots all over the image is no good  :(

I'm currently back to using nightly builds and H.264.

Raw Video / Re: [600D RAW] Dots, dots and more dots.
« on: December 27, 2013, 11:07:14 PM »
This was something of a last ditch attempt to find a quick way of getting rid of / reducing the dots in raw recording. I decided to shoot a few seconds of my wife knitting - lit by a compact fluorescent light (camera right), a halogen light (above camera right) and tungsten light (directly above camera)... so a total mish-mash of lights!

Anyway, the clips were shot at 1152x432 (2.66:1) which gets automatically upres'ed to 1280x720 in Davinci Resolve; I wondered if scaling it down to 1024x383 to retain the 2.66:1 aspect ratio would get rid of the dots.

It didn't :(

But the raw handled different light sources really well :)

Unfortunately, it's quite difficult to see the detail that is still in the MP4 file that I uploaded - the Vimeo compression seems to have made it rather darker than it really is :( (Oh well, not to self - must take that into account next time).

Raw Video / [600D RAW] Dots, dots and more dots.
« on: December 27, 2013, 10:12:58 PM »
I've been plagued by dots on raw recording since moving away from Tragic Lantern [New System]... I'm now using NewMem as the base, and updated with the nightly build from Dec 22nd. Whether I just use NewMem, or the nightly build, I get dots; for a long while I thought they were black dots which you can clearly see in this video, especially where there is a very light background.

And then I took a much closer look at them, and there is a sort of pattern to these invaders, as the image below shows:

You can see that the dots are not black at all, but take on the surrounding hue; there's always a central 2x2 pixel formation which is surrounded by a sort of brighter halo.

I've seen and read loads of posts about pink dots, green dots and all sorts of dots, but haven't seen anything about this particular pattern... anyone know why it occurs, and how to get rid of it? It's the only blot on the otherwise excellent raw recording. Unfortunately it's a bit of a showstopper for me - I love using the raw workflow and the capabilities it brings, but an image full of clearly visible dots is of no use (to me).

I've tried the MLV recording too, using chroma smoothing options, but that made it worse  :'(

Share Your Videos / 600D RAW @ ISO3200
« on: December 21, 2013, 01:18:09 AM »
I'd always been really put off shooting the 600D at anything over about ISO400. But I think I was wrong - wrong to judge it so quickly, especially as it seems the mistake I made was to underexpose the footage too much, resulting in lots of noise. Having recently tried a test using raw recording and an ISO1600 setting - video above - I thought I should see just how noisy ISO3200 was.

I popped down to the town (Farnham, Surrey (UK)), and took a few handheld shots of the christmas lights, using just ISO3200 and the standard kit lens set at 18mm (between f5.6 and f8).

Converted in RAWMagic, edited and graded in Davinci Resolve 10 Lite, music / titles added in FCP X.

Share Your Videos / Re: [600D RAW] Farnham Art Society. Shot at ISO800+
« on: December 20, 2013, 01:20:05 PM »

The sensor does not need cleaning - as you'll have seen in my text, I said I hadn't removed the dreaded dots from the video. Check out this forum - it's a known issue with raw recording and the 600D, particularly noticeable in the highlight areas.

Share Your Videos / [600D RAW] Farnham Art Society. Shot at ISO800+
« on: December 19, 2013, 11:49:29 PM »
Having tried some tests with raw recording at high iso, and having amended how I approach it, I had the opportunity to pop down with the camera gear to shoot a quick video.

The Farnham Art Society had opened a 'pop-up' gallery for the second year in a row, and on the day it was closing, I got in to shoot some footage and interview one of the committee members. This gave me a chance to try out the higher ISO settings (800-1600) as well as the Tascam DR-60D audio recorder.

There has been no noise reduction applied to the footage, and you'll also see that I haven't removed the dreaded dots that appear with raw recording.

This was shot using just the Canon 600D, with the 18-55mm kit lens, audio recorded with a phantom-powered RODE lavalier mic, fed into the Tascam DR-60D.
Edited and graded in FCP X and Davinci Resolve 10 Lite.

Share Your Videos / Re: Classic Mercedes Shot in Raw
« on: December 18, 2013, 11:24:47 PM »
Beautifully shot and edited; thank you for sharing this.


Share Your Videos / Re: Dalston - London. 5D3 Raw Test.
« on: December 17, 2013, 09:39:37 PM »
Looks nice :)

I've just upgraded to OS X 10.9 (Mavericks) which meant that I can now run Davinci Resolve - what a difference that makes! I can now do the whole conversion on the iMac, whereas before I had to load the .RAW files on to an old laptop, run BATCHelor, import teh DNGs as a sequence into Adobe Premiere Elements to convert them to a YUV4:2:2 file, which I could then transport across to the iMac and into FCP X. So, I feel your pain ;)


Share Your Videos / Re: Running competition - Z biegiem natury
« on: December 17, 2013, 09:22:35 PM »
Thanks armir,

I don't have a steadycam (or similar - although I have been known to use my tripod as a sort of counterweight). I see that you have a DIY glidecam... any pictures of that?

Share Your Videos / Re: [600D RAW] Has lowlight performance been improved?
« on: December 16, 2013, 06:08:44 PM »
Thank you for the information A1ex.

All the best,

Share Your Videos / Re: [600D RAW] Has lowlight performance been improved?
« on: December 16, 2013, 04:58:18 PM »
Hi A1ex: I think you maybe right... I've noticed that I have a tendency to underexpose shots, and started using the waveform display. But that got me into the habit of ensuring the majority of the exposure was around the mid-level. I've now gone over to zebras instead and I'm finding that much easier and quicker, not least because I can see very quickly if it's just a specular highlight that is blowing out, or something that I really do want to retain.

Either way, I'm so glad I came back to raw recording with ML/TL and did these quick tests. I'm spending quite a bit of time just running various real-world tests with the camera and different lenses, then running the results through Resolve. I'm liking what I'm finding - ML/TL is just awesome and I'm looking forward to using it for my Farnham360 project where I'm likely to be interviewing and shooting people and places in relatively dimly lit conditions.

Just need to get rid of the green dots now, so that's my next search on the forum...

Share Your Videos / [600D RAW] Has lowlight performance been improved?
« on: December 16, 2013, 01:32:40 PM »
A while ago I ran some tests comparing raw recording against the standard H.264 recording in the Canon 600D. I rather liked the ability to use raw, even with the additional work that's required, but I completely changed my view when I saw how it reacted to lowlight situations, as even the slightest grade seemed to make it fall apart completely.

Coming back to it 6 months later, and with a new build of Tragic Lantern, and now using Davinci Resolve 10 Lite for grading, I decided to try lowlight  (ISO 1600) again. The results couldn't be more different, and I now wouldn't hesitate to use raw for lowlight recording.

How have others found raw lowlight capabilities with the 600D?

(None of the footage in this short sequence has had any noise reduction applied).

Canon 600D, Tragic Lantern [NewMem], ISO1600.
Lens was an old M42 mount Prinzflex 70-162mm f3.5-f22 macro (set at f5.6 or f8) for this test.
Graded in Resolve 10 Lite.

Share Your Videos / Re: Running competition - Z biegiem natury
« on: December 15, 2013, 04:30:44 PM »
Good to see everyone out running! Tough work for you too - running along, looked a bit slippery, spectators and trying to handle the camera too. Well done!

My wife just recently ran something called the "Grim Challenge" - here's my short video for that (also shot with the 600D running ML2.3, but no raw recording this time).

All the best,

@aaphotog (and anyone else really): you can download a clip of a shot down Castle Street at - hope we get to see what you do to it, as that's the great thing about grading: there's no right answer and I love seeing how others grade their footage. The file is 289MB or so.

All the best,

aaphotog: it won't be today.. sorry - but I will try tomorrow. Will a 300MB .RAW file be OK? I'll load it up to Dropbox and put the link on here for you if that's alright. The clip is likely to be one of the ones looking down Castle Street (that is in my video).

Today, I popped down the town again to visit the Town Council and start arranging interviews, but whilst down there I popped into the Victoria Garden as it's so close to the Town Council offices to get some shots as a sort of visual notebook for a later video. Here's what I shot (all handheld).

This time shot at 1152x464 (RAW) and upres'ed to 1280x500 in the final using QuickTime 7 Pro.


aaphotog: let me see how I get on with various jobs today, and I'll try to load something up for you later on.

All the best,

Thank you for your comments everyone, its much appreciated.

SamW4tson: maybe we should meet up - fancy shooting a video for the Farnham360 project?

aaphotog: its a slightly convoluted workflow, but then raw workflow often is, as I'm sure you know already.

The. RAW files were renamed using Automator (Mac), converted by RAWMagic, then imported to Davinci Resolve 10 Lite with a BMD profile. I then put all the clips I want to use on the timeline and export proxy files to import into Final Cut Pro X.

All editing is done in FCPX, and then an XML file is created, and imported back into Resolve.

Colour correction / grading is then done, before creating higher quality ProRes(422) HQ files and an XML file.

Back to FCPX to add titles, sound and any audio, transitions, etc. I then create a master file and use QuickTime Pro 7 to get the correct aspect ratio - if you watch it on Vimeo there are no black bars top and bottom (or on the site).

Writing all this out makes it sound a horrendous workflow, but its actually fairly quick and simple.

One more thing, in well over 20GB of RAW recording I had 3 corrupted magenta frames, and they were at the very start of the clips. I'm loving RAW!

Camera set to 25p / 1/50th.

Back to

So, there I was sitting waiting for the fog to clear on a cold, damp December day; it never did clear, so I figured I go out shooting the following morning. When the morning came, it was foggy again. In the end, I went out anyway to grab some shots around Farnham, in Surrey.

'Farnham 360' is a personal project to try and capture the essence of my home town; it's a place that sits on the Surrey / Hampshire border and from the centre of the town you can be in wide open spaces within minutes, or sitting next to the river, or walking around an 11th century church.

There's so much to see, little details that people just don't notice as they go about their daily tasks. 'Farnham 360' will be providing some insight into these things.

Camera: Canon 600D / T3i.
Lenses: Prakticar 35mm & Kaligar 135mm (both vintage M42 mount lenses).
Magic Lantern 2.3 + Tragic Lantern [NewMem] giving continuous raw recording at 1088x448. {Canon settings at 640x480}.
Davinci Resolve 10 Lite (DNG files loaded as "BMD") & FCP X.

Share Your Videos / 600D, RAW recording and commercial work.
« on: December 10, 2013, 09:43:35 PM »
I was asked to create a short video to be used as a resource for a new horticultural book that should be out in the new year. I decided to shoot it on RAW (Tragic Lantern 2.0, [600D] New System) and it's been under wraps until now (it was shot in June!). Anyway, here is that video...

... at the time, I had a tortuous workflow involving a Windows laptop, Adober Premiere Elements, then transferring it to the iMac and FCP X.

Shortly after this, I gave up using RAW, and just the other day I thought I'd check out ML2.3 and the latest Tragic Lantern RAW. So, I've now loaded up with '[600D] New Mem', sorted out the exFAT filesystem on the SD cards so I don't have to worry about the 4GB limit, and I'm now using a much better workflow with Davinci Resolve 10 Lite and FCP X :)

This is the latest using the new workflow / ML/TL, it's just a quick trailer for a new idea that I've got...

Having completed the simple highlight / skin tone test for my camera, I wanted to find out more about how it would deal with lowlight conditions; so I set up a simple test using a single candle to light a 'scene'.

The results surprised me...

Pages: 1 [2] 3