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 - Midphase

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 26
Raw Video / Re: 5D mk3 1.2.3 RAW problem
« on: May 19, 2014, 07:03:22 PM »
Hi guys,

 Today installed the ML 1.2.3 on my mk3 (with 1.2.3 firmware). Im using a SanDisc ExremePro 95mb/s.
 I followed all the steps for installing and running ML. But non of the RAW formats (mlv or raw) is recording properly. I tried many different settings, but still no success! Once it starts to record it starts dropping frames almost immediately and it doesn't depend on the resolution... it only worked  with up to 864x486 not even close to 1240x720.. and what about 1920x1080. As from what I read so far It should be able to record 1920 with this card!

 Any suggestions?

Thank you in advance!

Sounds to me like you're trying to write to your SD card. Make sure you set your preferences correctly in the ML settings for the preferred card.

Raw Video / Re: Weird black and white frame flicker
« on: May 19, 2014, 08:08:51 AM »
I honestly don't know what might be going on, I have personally never experienced anything which looks like that. My first piece of advice would be to try and use something else to convert the raw data into CDNG. Since you're using FCPX, I assume you're on a Mac. In that case, I would suggest either RAWMagic, or MLRawViewer to convert the raw files. MLRawViewer will also allow you to playback, which should give you an instant feedback as to what the footage looks like.

Your stills don't look like corrupted data, but rather debayering errors. Resolve should be able to display the footage correctly, so I'm really not sure what could be causing this.

Raw Video / Re: Magic Lantern RAW anamorphic on a 5D III
« on: May 18, 2014, 06:50:04 PM »
Be prepared that this is less quality than your Zeiss prime,but for anamorphic shooting this works great.

I think some of that loss of quality and softer focus can actually impart a more filmic look to the footage. But IMHO, the same effect can be accomplished to the same extent with the usage of vintage lenses.

I think anamorphic lenses on DSLR shoots work well when you have tons of time at your disposal for a decisively more complicated set up, and you don't need to go too wide with your shots.

Raw Video / Re: Weird black and white frame flicker
« on: May 17, 2014, 10:50:27 PM »
I guess what I'm asking is what are you using to convert the footage, and then what are you using to playback and edit it/process it?

Raw Video / Re: Weird black and white frame flicker
« on: May 17, 2014, 07:44:58 PM »
What are you viewing/debayering on?

Raw Video / Re: Weird black and white frame flicker
« on: May 17, 2014, 06:54:35 AM »
Could you upload an example?

Also please give us more detail as to which nightly build you're using, resolution, frame rate, audio, etc.  and if you're using .raw or .mlv

Raw Video / Re: Magic Lantern RAW anamorphic on a 5D III
« on: May 17, 2014, 03:17:30 AM »
I can advise you, but you probably won't like my advice.

First of all, most anamorphic prime lenses are only available as PL mount, and cost many times the cost of your camera.

Most of the anamorphic adapters available are projection lens overlays that add a lot of bulk to the camera, and need to be (in most cases) to be focused separately from your prime lenses. Because many of these anamorphic adapters actually sit on top of your existing glass, they cause heavy vignetting on a full frame sensor unless you use focal lengths of 100mm and up (in some cases you might be able to get away with an 85mm, but you will get some vignetting).

The idea of having a metal ring sit directly on top of my expensive glass is also not a welcome thing.

If what I just told you doesn't necessarily detract you from shooting anamorphic, I can tell you that I have set up my .raw recording resolution to the highest vertical resolution that the 5D3 can handle which is 1920X1288. Unfortunately I can't get this resolution to work in .mlv, only .raw and only with really fast cards that actually perform as advertised.

By shooting at almost 4:3 aspect ratio, you can de-squeeze your footage in post to a resolution of about 3551X1288 which is fairly impressive. You could also go the other way around and end up with a 1920X700-ish image. It won't quite be the 2.35:1 ratio that we all know and love, but it's close enough and you can always crop it in post.

IMHO, anamorphic shooting is a relic of a different era. While I enjoyed my experiments with it, and sunk a few hundred $ into the idea, I ultimately came out with the conclusion that it's just not practical. If you want a cinematic 2:35 ratio, you can always crop in post. If you want the higher resolution, I would advise shooting on a GH4 or Blackmagic at 4K and then crop in post.

If you're still undeterred, I'll sell you my anamorphic lens and mounting adapter for what I paid for it. ;-)

General Chat / Re: GPL issues with ML post processing software
« on: May 15, 2014, 11:21:43 PM »
Instead, I'm trying to build a community that does not just consume whatever we give to them, but I want this community to actually participate in the development process, help each other, and share the knowledge. We gave you some free software, we gave you a proof of concept that you found useful, and now we expect you all to take this software at the next level, and let us build upon your work, in the same way as you have built upon ours. I'm quite far from this utopian goal though, but this is the direction I want ML to go.

I wish we could have a conversation about this on Skype, because it's so difficult to convey the concept I'm trying to convey simply through text.

In essence, what you're asking for is impossible due to the huge knowledge gap between who your product is used by vs. who can develop the product. ML appeals to users who are interested in taking still photography or shooting video with a very specific (and narrow) line of cameras. Those users (including myself) have a great deal of knowledge of lenses, lighting, frame composition, and so on. A very small minority of those members have knowledge of how to write code, or even how to properly test code and report bugs. The best that can be expected from your end-user base is to provide some feedback on improvements that they would like to see. Unfortunately, more often than not, this feedback is misinterpreted by the developers as criticism which is responded to with the same retort "If you want to do ... then why don't you program the code yourself?"

The basic conclusion is this -- We (the users) by and large have no desire to "participate" in the development of ML. We are excited about ML inasmuch as it allows us to capture better looking video with cameras we already own. We look on with excitement at new possible developments and your upcoming ability to unlock even more functionality out of our old and tired DSLR's. At the same time, we want to invest the least amount of time as possible online, or reading manuals. We want to pretty much install ML as fast as possible, and get back to doing what we are actually interested in doing which is to shoot.

Sorry if this doesn't fit your utopian goal, but if we're all honest about the world we live in; this is in effect the truth.

Raw Video Postprocessing / New RAWMagic is out!!!
« on: May 14, 2014, 07:01:33 AM »
Big news, the new RAWMagic 1.1 is officially out. The new version supports both MLV and Raw, and creates CDNG files which look flawless in Premiere Pro.

I still feel that RAWMagic is the single best solution for Mac based post processing of ML raw, I've been waiting for this update for a while now and it's finally out. Thomas has figured out something that others have not and all of the CDNG files look exactly the way they should in Premiere Pro, the audio syncs properly and is imported correctly in Premiere and Resolve.

Best of all, I think the price is very reasonable...this is a big game changer for many of us! Let's show Thomas some support, grab it here:


As I said, you already seem to have all the answers so I'm not quite sure why you even posted here. Go back and read your own original post before you get your panties in a bunch and tell me to grow up.

Nowhere in your original post do you mention your camera budget, and just because you're making a no-budget $10k feature, doesn't necessarily imply that you don't have some other money saved up with which to buy your gear (or perhaps know a DP or two with their own set up).

You specifically asked for advice on what to shoot with, and you got it. Once you receive your response, just be thankful and then do what is best for you rather than argue as to why the advice isn't good enough.

Best of luck with your feature, sounds to me like one way or another it's shaping up to be a good learning experience for you.

Well the difference would be that all my 60D lenses and batteries work just fine with a 7D and nothing new has to be purchased, aside from the CF cards. But with the Blackmagic Pocket Cam, not only does it cost twice as much right off the bat because you can't get it used, I would also need a completely different set of lenses, would would be a few more grand.... and tons and tons of batteries according to PB because it eats them like candy unlike the 7D, and those batteries are expensive. To rig up a single BMPC for the film would be around 3-4k whereas a 7D would be around 1-1.5k (buying it used, getting CF cards) so thats a huge difference when you need TWO cameras, and the total budget is around $10,000 for the whole film.

I disagree on your cost assessment, you basically only need a micro 4/3 to EF adapter (about $10 on eBay), SD cards (which as I mentioned are actually more cost effective than el-cheapo CF cards), and some batteries which B&H sells for as cheap as $14 a piece.

Most completed eBay listings on 7D's are in the high $700's to $900, so yes, it's a bit cheaper...a bit. EP6 batteries are more expensive (even the off brand), CF cards are also up there particularly if you go with the more reliable Lexars. Also, shooting in raw will definitely use up batteries faster than in normal mode. Ultimately you're still running a hack on a camera which until fairly recently wasn't even supported. You'll be dealing with glitchy external monitoring, no playback, and the constant fear of not really knowing if the footage you just captured is corrupted.

I'm not saying this because I pulled this info out of my ass, I'm saying it because I've shot extensively with the 7D and ultimately it just wasn't up to my work standards.

I think the 5D3 is pretty much the only camera of the bunch which yield a workable reliability with somewhat reliable external monitoring, good ISO/noise ratio, no moire/aliasing, full 1080p resolution, a CF bus fast enough to handle audio and video simultaneously (will come in handy for sync purposes in post), and is the least prone to errors.

You're of course free to go and learn from your own mistakes, but you did ask for opinions.

Your words "What would be the best camera to go with?" 

I think the polite response to my post would have been to acknowledge the information instead of immediately shooting down everything I shared...then again I suppose maybe I have different standards.

I hope that isn't blatant sarcasm... lol
Well... back to that whole "under 10k budget for the whole film" thing... there is no way we can shell out $3500 for one camera. And we're actually looking to have two cameras, to shoot from multiple angles at once for some of the improvised scenes.

Isn't great dynamic range / being able to correct the lighting one of the biggest reasons for shooting in raw? That said, we are using a decent light set up, not just running around pointing at things.... low light capability is not as high on the priority list. I prefer to shoot at ISO 160, and never above 640 on the 60D, and have been happy with it. I also have fast lenses. What do you mean by sub HD? It shoots full 1080...

If you can go for a 7k upgrade half way through the shoot more power to you! :) But that's not going to be possible for this project.

I always enjoy it when the person asking the questions turns out to be a know-it-all who apparently has already all the information that he needs. Were you just testing us?

First of all, rental is always an option. We rented the 5D3 for about $100/week.

Secondly, I also mentioned the Blackmagic Pocket which retails for about $1000, all in all is a superior camera to shoot something as important as a feature length project. I could tell you about all the various other issues that we had with the 7D (which is only slightly less expensive than the Blackmagic...if you buy it used on eBay) but apparently you already seem to be the expert so why should I bother?

And lastly, no, the 7D doesn't shoot at 1080p, you'll have to upsize in post.


About the added cost of the Blackmagic -- guess what...that is true for all cameras. You will need a bunch of cards, extra batteries, some sort of rig, lenses etc. If anything, the Pocket is the least expensive to outfit well for a shoot (i.e. you won't need to tag on a $500 Anton-Bauer external battery rig as you would on the 4K). Also, the SD cards required by the Blackmagic Pocket are, if anything, a bit less expensive than the cheapest Komputerbay cards you'll need for the 7D, and a lot less expensive for the better name brands like Lexars.

In my tests, the 5D2 actually performed a bit worse than the 7D, however it does have a bit better low light capability.

I still have to recommend the Blackmagic Pocket as a solid contender for very low budget productions looking to shoot in raw.

First of all, congratulations on making a no-budget sub-$10k feature film; the world simply doesn't have enough of those!

Secondly, if you can get your hands on a 5D3, that is the camera you want. If you can't get your hands on a 5D3, then your next best bet would be the Blackmagic Pocket Camera.

The 7D is a distant 3rd, with poor low light capability, lots of noise and stuck pixels at higher ISO's, and sub HD resolution. I shot with two 7D's, and halfway through the shoot we opted (smartly) to upgrade to two 5D3's which made everyone considerably happier.

Raw Video / Re: 7D skipping frames - clarify write speeds
« on: May 10, 2014, 08:48:59 PM »
Many people don't seem to realize that the bottleneck in these cameras is not necessarily the card speed but rather the speed of the CF controller chip.

The very same CF card that in my 5D3 writes at over 100mb/sec, when placed in the 5D2 can barely achieve 80mb/sec. This has got nothing to do with the card, and everything to do with the camera.

This is also why we keep seeing incessant new threads about building CF and SD RAID arrays, or CF/SD to USB converters so that we can hook up an external SSD drive to record to. They all miss the basic point that it doesn't matter.

For what it's worth, even the Blackmagic cameras skip frames if the media isn't able to keep up with the write speeds (although in that case, it is a media-related issue).

The obvious conclusion is that the Canon 5D mark III really stands out in terms of quality, sharpness and beauty of the image, but more importantly, being able to deliver aliasing/moire free videos it makes its predecessor Mark II totally obsolete.

I don't really get the point of this post. The word "duh" seems to be the appropriate reaction to reading it.

Raw Video / Re: 7D skipping frames - clarify write speeds
« on: May 09, 2014, 07:26:54 PM »
with global draw off I can only get 27.7 MB/s buffer=16384. I purchased a Sandisk Extreme Pro 64Gb 90MB/s speed. do i have a fake card? it should be writing quicker than this.

You should run some benchmark tests within ML to find out what the CF card is actually doing.

Also, I was referring to whether you have the still mode in the Canon Menu set to RAW, JPEG or what. I think you want it set to small jpeg, I think.

Raw Video / Re: 7D skipping frames - clarify write speeds
« on: May 09, 2014, 10:00:22 AM »
Do you have Global Draw on? Also, what is your still photo mode set as?

Raw Video / Re: Does Whitebalance Matter while shooting raw?
« on: May 08, 2014, 08:05:51 PM »
So is there any reason to set the white balance at all if it's not affecting the image?

Just as a personal reference and starting point, or to make the monitor look somewhat close to what you want the final image to look like.

1. Does anyone have an idea what I might be getting wrong?
2. How does Magic Lantern number each file, seems to be pretty random when using two different cards?
3. Can MlRawViewer change the aspect ratio?

1. Yes. You forgot to run the Make DSLR Bootable script on the card.

2. Typically you set the file naming convention in the Canon menu and ML should abide by that. I think there are also some new settings to enable you to name takes and such in ML.

3. I don't think it can. You're stuck with whatever you recorded at.


Each card records what, about 8 minutes total?
And how long does it take to copy off to a computer/hard drive? Probably a fair bit longer than 8 minutes.

64Gb cards on the 5D3 record roughly 12 minutes of 1920x1080 at 24fps. Takes roughly 10 minutes to copy the data of a full card to a hard drive with a USB3.0 reader.

General Chat / Re: 5D markiii or black magic camera 4k
« on: April 30, 2014, 09:03:54 PM »
Since I've been pondering the same question, I can give you some hopefully useful thoughts to consider.

First of all, let's assume that still photography isn't important for you. Let's also assume that money is not a deciding factor.

You can get your hand on a 5D3 nowadays for around $2500 (plus or minus $200 depending how much you like buying from eBay retailers). Add about $400 to that for a few CF cards and maybe another $100 for a couple of batteries. Total cost is within $3500 for a camera you can go out and shoot with.

Blackmagic 4K is $3k for the body, add another $350 for about 3 SSD 128Gb drives. Now here's the absolutely will need an external battery unless you're planning on only shooting indoors. So you really need to add $300-500 at least for that. Total cost is within $4000 for a camera you can go out and shoot with.

Dynamic range is roughly in the same ballpark, about 11 stops with maybe the 5D3 having a slight edge over the Blackmagic.

If you're planning on shooting in low-light conditions and with only available light, then the Blackmagic won't work for you. The ISO400 is not sensitive enough for anything less than a well lit indoor, or daytime exterior. You won't be able to push the footage in post without massive noise. If your bulk of shooting is nighttime, dark interiors etc, you will need the 5D3.

How important is resolution for you? 4K is much more future proof, but right now it's simply overkill unless you're planning massive re-framing in post.

The 5D3 full size sensor is both a blessing and a curse. I can tell you that most pro DP's despise it and much prefer the Super-35mm sized APS-C.

Both cameras can be reliable and unreliable. They both can suffer from dropped frames, with the 5D3 having a slight advantage in the sense that you can set it up to stop recording if frames are dropped (which is not possible with the Blackmagic).

Blackmagic has inputs for 1/4" audio lines, however the in-camera levels are poorly implemented and the build-in amp crappy. Still, it's a bit more "pro" than going into the mini-jack on the 5D3.

How important is it for you to use an external monitor? The Blackmagic monitor kinda sucks, especially in bright light. The 5D3 monitor is kinda small and annoying to pull focus, particularly with a full frame sensor. If you plan on using an external monitor with the Blackmagic, do know that you'll need one with SDI inputs which might push the price up (no HDMI out on the BMPC).

Lastly, how important is it to be inconspicuous when you shoot? A well rigged Blackmagic will look more "pro" than a handheld DSLR in public places.

Depending how important the above points are, should make it pretty clear on which camera you should buy.


You will need a faster computer than what you have either way. Resolve is CPU and most importantly GPU hungry. I wouldn't recommend anything less than a 2012 model.

Raw Video / Re: Benefits of 1.2.3 on 5DmkIII
« on: April 30, 2014, 07:08:23 PM »
Look, after being around here for over a year, I'm not scared or reading long threads and doing my fair share of searching. But some simple feedback from a couple of users who have upgraded to 1.2.3 would not only be helpful to me, but to the many other people who will post the same exact question in the upcoming months. Sometimes, pointing someone to a 16+ page thread mostly ridden with garbage posts is not the best way to help the community.

I'm just as snarky as you are about newbees not doing their required reading, but I also understand that sometimes a more concise and brief explanation is needed and helpful. So every once in a while, even I try to grow up a little bit, roll up my sleeves and attempt to post some helpful responses.   ;D

Raw Video / Re: Problems With Raw Converting And Other Issues
« on: April 30, 2014, 03:25:04 AM »
1. Maybe.

2. It's 14bit. If you want to enable .raw then you need to use RAW_REC and not MLV_REC. .mlv is the new format (new as in since last September) and it's raw with the added benefit of audio.

3. There is mlv2dng, MLRawViewer and a few others if you look around. They all generate true raw files.

4. Load the MLV_SND module and enable audio recording. You will lose some write speed because of the audio. The audio is embedded into the .mlv files and will be demuxed by the conversion apps into a .wav file.

5. Yes. This enters the Crop-Mode.

6. Dunno...never use the focus detection for video.

Raw Video / Benefits of 1.2.3 on 5DmkIII
« on: April 30, 2014, 12:43:56 AM »
Just curious about specifically what are the benefits of updating my firmware to 1.2.3 when using ML raw vs. staying in 1.1.3.

Alternatively, what are the downsides?

This is obviously a question for people who have updated and are using the new 1.2.3 ML build. I'm interested in updating, but not if there are no specific benefits to doing so (if it's not broke...), or if there are some functionality downsides that make shooting raw less reliable than it is in 1.1.3.

Many thanks.

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 26