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 ... 23 24 [25] 26
Most of my friends who are shooting with the 5D2 aren't shooting at such a high resolution. Perhaps you might be pushing the envelope a bit too much?

Try a lower resolution, and remember that on that camera, the bottleneck isn't the card but the chip which controls how fast you can write to it.

Raw Video / Re: RAW VIDEO to test CF CARD R/W performance
« on: August 13, 2013, 06:37:42 PM »

1. Using your e-mail for your handle on a public forum is a great recipe to be put on just about every spam list on the planet.

2. Read this guide, should tell you everything you need to know about how to install ML and use it:

3. If after reading the guide, you still can't figure it out; you might consider not using ML and just sticking with the Canon built-in video. ML raw is not for everyone, and a certain degree of technical knowledge and troubleshooting skills are required to use it.

Hardware and Accessories / Re: Monitoring on tablets
« on: August 13, 2013, 09:14:57 AM »
So a tablet connected to the USB port is better or worse than an external monitor hooked up t the HDMI out? Can you use it for focusing? Will it provide you with false color, zebras and focus peaking?

Considering that a 7" Lilliput monitor can be had for about $250, is the Nexus worth it as an option?

Raw Video / Re: Come girare video in raw
« on: August 13, 2013, 09:09:29 AM »
Dovresti essere capace di raggiungere una risoluzione di 864x484 piuttosto facilmente con una SD card ad alta velocità.

Raw Video / Re: Come girare video in raw
« on: August 13, 2013, 12:06:41 AM »
A che risoluzione stai girando?

Post-processing Workflow / Re: To LUT or not to LUT
« on: August 12, 2013, 07:04:13 PM »
If from this point forward you'll be working in ProRes, then no, you don't want to apply a LUT to it.

LUTs are essentially quick and dirty "looks" that you can use to export proxy files for editing while knowing all along that you'll online with the original raw files. Some LUTs are good enough to finish with, but it really depends heavily on the footage and most colorists would recommend against it.

If you're never going back to using the DNG files beyond this point, then don't do any grading, just leave it as Film BMD, and you're probably going to be fine with ProRes 422HQ.

Also, don't archive the CDNG files....that's kinda useless if you're not going back to them for online. Rather, archive the original .raw files from your camera since you can always re-extract the CDNG back if you need to.

Could this be in any way related to the GPU?

I don't speak French, but what I'm getting from this is that CDNG, PR4444 and PR422HQ are all very high quality methods of working with footage in post.

PR4444 generated from Raw2DNG and the h.264 All-I formats on the other hand are to be avoided.

Raw Video / Re: 4:3 ratio recording with ML (For Anamorphic)
« on: August 05, 2013, 07:18:52 PM »
ps just checked - 1728X1288 (almost 4:3 ratio) also works at least for me giving 92MB/s write speed continuisly (25FPS).

Assuming the lenses don't vignette, and that your CF card can handle it....why not shoot all the way at 1920X1288 and have some wiggle room/reframing options in post? You can always overlay 4:3 guides on your screen so that you can frame accurately, and I'm not 100% sure but I believe you can de-squeeze the image in LiveView automatically so that your brain is not going bonkers trying to figure out what you're shooting.

Raw Video / Re: Just finalized my first RAW shooting - Ups and downs.
« on: August 05, 2013, 06:44:32 PM »
I am not a developer, so take this with a good bit of skepticism, however to answer your questions:

1. I doubt it will be improved much, perhaps the devs will optimize the code further to make it playback a bit more smoothly with easier access to the recorded files; but I don't think we'll ever see the type of playback we have been enjoying with H.264 video in the past. The best thing that has been suggested is  to pair your camera with an ATOMOS Ninja and use it to playback the video that you recorded (or as a backup device, although with overlays on the image).

2. Yeap, that's pretty much it. Same way everyone else does it. That, and of course lighting your scene!

3. You could buy bigger cards, maybe those 1050X Komputerbay 128gig cards are all they're cracked up to be (initial reports don't seem particularly favorable). My main suggestion is to have a DIT on set, this is critical IMHO to pro shooting with the 5D ML raw hack. If I was considering using this camera on a "real" shoot, I would have at least 4 cards and 1 very sharp DIT person. I would swap out the cards to the DIT with each setup, and would want to wait to see some playback from Resolve before moving on to the next setup. It will slow you down no doubt, which is why the 5D doesn't lend itself to all situations.

There has been some interest in trying to use external drives hooked to the CF slot as storage, people have been talking about that for months but nobody has yet to do it successfully which makes me wonder if it's possible at all. Because of #1 and #3, I find myself looking at the recently discounted BMCC despite the fact that IMHO the 5D has a superior image quality.

I think the 5D ML raw is a good solution for casual shooting, or very indie low budget type of productions where everyone understands the limitations and is willing to work with them. For higher budget commercial shooting, I can't imagine that most DP's and directors would want to put up with the restrictions as opposed to renting a RED or Alexa (unless their name is Shane Hurlbut).

Raw Video / Re: Canon 7D RAW Video News.
« on: August 05, 2013, 06:24:43 PM »

I think this is meant as a sarcastic statement right? I mean wouldn't going to a 5D2 or even a 50D make much more sense?

Raw Video / Re: 4:3 ratio recording with ML (For Anamorphic)
« on: August 05, 2013, 01:28:46 AM »
By artifacts do you mean aliasing? The reason there are less artifacts is because there is less detail. And I have to ask, do you see the artifacts when viewing the image at 100% or 50%? Or are they there at some weird zoom like 63%? Viewing at the weird zooms will cause artifacting because of complications with scaling.

I think Andrew Reid might want to chime in here and comment since he's truly the resident expert when it comes to shooting with anamorphic lenses.

What I'm saying is that a 1920x1280 scaled up to 2500x1280 will look better than say a 1280x720 scaled up to 1920x1080. So IMHO it's possible to obtain very good looking footage by shooting at 1920x1280 (a 3:2 ratio) with an anamorphic lens and then de-squeeze in post. I also think that shooting with ML raw yields an overall better scalability in general.

Having said that...anamorphics are not everyone's cup of tea and different people obviously have different opinions. To get a 2.35:1 ratio, some prefer to shoot at 1920x1080 and then crop in post, some prefer to shoot at 1920x817.

I think all these methods are valid. The OP was asking if it's possible for a ratio to be added that would allow  to shoot at 1440x1080 and I thought this was already possible (although there are 2 problems with that...1 is that in order to access that resolution one would have to shoot in Crop mode, and 2 that you still end up stretching the image horizontally back to 1920 width.....crap, now I'm all confused and stuff).

Raw Video / Re: 4:3 ratio recording with ML (For Anamorphic)
« on: August 04, 2013, 07:46:34 PM »
And you think that putting a projector lens in front of an lens would yield good results?

We're all trying to help, and there are so many different people here with various levels of knowledge and experience that it's difficult to be able to clarify if someone knows what they're talking about or not.

But to answer your original question, I think the max vertical resolution right now is 1280 so best you can do is 1920 x 1280.

Note:  Feel free to attack the post, but no personal attacks please.  -Audionut

Raw Video / Re: 4:3 ratio recording with ML (For Anamorphic)
« on: August 04, 2013, 08:10:43 AM »
I don't want to start a big discussion here, but the way data is encoded in the image, stretching the image horizontally produces a less artifacted image than stretching it vertically so going from 1920 to say 2500 will still look quite acceptable, especially coming from RAW.

Realistically, most people who want to shoot anamorphic on a DSLR are going to do it with a projector lens. True Kowa anamorphics (the type you're talking about and which can run in the tens of thousands of dollars) can't even mount on an EF DSLR!

In this particular context, shooting using anamorphic lenses is very much about the flares, the oval bokeh and squeezing a higher resolution out of the sensor without compromising the IQ too much. Otherwise why not shoot in 1920X817 and save yourself some CF card space and hassle? If you want "cinematic" feel out of your glass, you'd probably be much better off investing in some vintage Zeiss or Leica with mounts which can be converted to EF without too much fuss.

Raw Video / Re: 4:3 ratio recording with ML (For Anamorphic)
« on: August 03, 2013, 11:56:32 PM »
What he just said!   ;D

The idea of recording an an inferior resolution than what the camera is capable of giving you, just to that you can stretch the footage back into what the camera could have recorded in the first place seems bizarre.

The way to record anamorphic on the 5D3 is to record at 3:2 resolution (1920X1280) and then stretch that out in post to roughly 3008X1280 for a 2.35:1 ratio. That assumes that your anamorphic lens is a 1.5X stretch and not a 2X stretch which will give you a much wider image that you'll need to crop in post.

Anyway, the point of using an anamorphic lens is to increase resolution, not decrease it. Yeah, I know, you also get the nifty horizontal flares and oval bokeh...but seriously, resolution should be the most important.

Raw Video / Re: ML RAW + Atomos Ninja 5D3
« on: August 03, 2013, 11:49:22 PM »
Not possible.

I recently did a shootout test with the BMCC vs. 5D3 raw with some Zeiss lenses in a controlled environment.

I found the BMCC footage to look kinda crappy compared to what I got out of the 5D3, which really surprised me actually. The 5D3 seems to be able to handle highlights better than the BMCC, if you clip them, they look far worse on the BMCC. I also found the BMCC so be somewhat softer than the 5D3 in fine detail (stray hair, fabric, etc). The BMCC also showed pretty bad moire and the rolling shutter seemed worse. Adding to all of that, the severe restriction on lenses that a cropped sensor will give you, the lack of a replaceable battery and a not superfriendly form-factor wouldn't seem to bode well for the BMCC.

Having said that, the BMCC is superior in a few things. First of all it's production ready, meaning that you can easily playback on set, it records audio, and not being a hacked device it is inherently more stable (even if most of that is psychological). You can interface with external gear easily, send a signal to video village without any problems, and I find the SSD an overall more robust and...frankly cheaper storage solution than CF cards.

So even though I own a 5D3, and I love the way the footage looks, I'm also leaning towards picking up a BMCC. I think it would not only serve quite well as a 2nd camera, but also provide an extra bit of safety on a shoot.

Raw Video / Re: Uncompressed 14-bit RAW video testing - 5D Mark III
« on: August 02, 2013, 08:25:00 PM »
Don't really see the point of out of sync drifting audio. Just record audio on a separate recorder like all the big boys do and you'll be a lot happier when you get to post.

I'm sure the guys are looking into ways to fix it, but in the meantime it's really useless to have out of sync audio.

Raw Video / Re: Best APS-C camera for RAW Video 50D vs T2i vs ??
« on: August 01, 2013, 01:22:53 AM »
Yeah, I get that, but I'd think in another couple of months finding a Blackmagic Pocket shouldn't be too difficult.

My point is that I have yet to see any footage which originated on a 550 or 600 which looks decent enough to go through the trouble. The CF enabled cameras are clearly the winners with ML raw.

A 50D can be had for about $450 on eBay.

Raw Video / Re: Best APS-C camera for RAW Video 50D vs T2i vs ??
« on: July 31, 2013, 11:09:08 PM »
I think by far the 50D will give you much better looking footage than you'd be able to get in any TXi model.

However, if I didn't own a 5D3 or 5D2, and was looking to buy a camera to shoot raw, I would seriously just pick up the Blackmagic Pocket camera.

I really haven't had any problems whatsoever formatting my CF cards to ExFAT using a USB 2.0 interface.

All in all I must have lucked out because both of my Komputerbay 1000X 64gig cards can handle 1920X1280 at 24p on my 5D3 without any issues. One of the cards sometimes needs to be warmed up a bit, and it helps if I turn off GD when shooting with it, but otherwise I'm a pretty happy camper!

Raw Video Postprocessing / Re: Shooting a music video... Audio???
« on: July 31, 2013, 08:59:16 PM »
Yes Aussie, I think it's clever although specific to music videos where the audio will be later replaced with the song.

Maybe people didn't understand your description? Perhaps you might consider making a quick YouTube demonstration video?

How are other people using ML with 128 GB cards? I've read posts on different forums where people use this card with the 5DMKIII.

5D3 has a dual CF/SD slot, so we load ML on say a 16gig SD card, while recording the video to a separate 128gig CF card...unfortunately this can only be done on the 5D3 because of the dual slot.

Raw Video / Re: Idea/question about raw RGGB green cheat
« on: July 30, 2013, 07:27:53 PM »
Seems like everyone has some great idea that surely none of the developers could have possibly thought about to get 4K 120fps video on a T2i.

Problem is that as you start reducing data here, get rid of bits there, and so on and so forth, you might as well go back to recording in H.264 and forget about ML.

I have seen plenty of footage coming out of the lower end cameras which has needed to be resized pretty substantially, and IMHO the results aren't much of an improvement over the Canon codec.

We sometimes tend to forget that for many things, the Canon H.264 video looks quite good all things considered (many feature films have been shot on it).

There are two major bottlenecks at work here, CPU speed, and the write speed to the card.

The ML developers have unlocked something quite remarkable, but their discovery has real hardware limitations. My guess is that faster CF cards will render the 5D3 more reliable (not that it's not right now, I can consistently record 1920X1280 footage). Unfortunately faster CF cards will not help 5D2 and 50D users as they have already reached the limits of what their cameras can output.

The idea that reducing data will enable higher resolutions on lower cameras goes against both of those bottlenecks since they are outfitted with slower CPUs and slower SD card writers.

Raw Video / Re: How do you use ETTR while shooting RAW video
« on: July 30, 2013, 07:11:13 PM »
What Andy just said (which is what I said, but apparently Andy can say it better than me).

Pages: 1 ... 23 24 [25] 26