Messages

From another guy's suggestion I plunked down the $80 for a color calibration card.  I also turned off AWB (should have known better).  Anyway, thanks for your thoughts!

Perfect showcase of how the film-look, higher dynamic range, of RAW can capture certain moods better than the contrast rich look of today's video CODECs.  Ditto the ML team!!!  I did feel the RAW color correction was a tad bit green.  Or maybe it needed a tad more red.  N any case, I loved it!  Or maybe more contrast?  There's so much you can do with RAW footage it's difficult to decide (for me) which way to go.

There's a lot of things I need to set correctly!    Can you be more specific?

Here's another test I did comparing D600.  Hopefully I'm getting closer to better comparisons

ALL the shots of the AVCHD, out of the camera, are better!    Believe me, I'm as equally impressed by what Panasonic has done with their MFT cameras.  I'm loving them.  The interesting thing about photography is the viewer (not taker) did not see the original scene.  It's just a pretty picture/video to them.  Again, all the MFT's video is beautiful to me.  However, the RAW footage is capturing a way-more accurate reality, both in lighting and color.  Faces (skin) is where I believe the compressed video really shows its weaknesses.  This RAW video is the first video I've ever shot where I'm getting (to me) naturally looking faces.

Yes, there is more workflow, but (despite my current shortcomings) it is not that hard, or time-consuming, if you don't go for perfect.  I copy the RAW files to my computer and run them through RAWanizer STRAIGHT to Cineform 422.  It takes, maybe 15 seconds per clip?  I then drop the Cineform clips into Vegas Studio (the cheap version) and the AVCHD clips.  If the AVCHD is good then I'm good of course.  BUT, if I want to make changes the Cineform 422 responds, the AVCHD does not (for me).  In other words, my video is getting better and better, the more I learn about grading.  The AVCHD is more or less static.  Again, I love it. 

@ShootingStars, have you tried RAW?  If not, try the simplest workflow like me.  I think you'll be glad you did.

I tried to make the G5's AVCHD footage less contrasty, more detail, like the 50D RAW.  Couldn't do it.  Magic Lantern has NOT DROPPED a frame yet on me.  I even had my wife direct me in coloring and she couldn't get me to get the AVCHD to look right to her.  She ended up choosing the 50D RAW and she has zero interest in this stuff. 

Second day, took 50D out for walk.  Didn't understand the ML exposure settings, so exposure changes.  Syncs with sound just fine.  I continue to be wildly impressed at what ML has done!  The 50D can write data almost as fast as a 5D Mark III.  You can get the body for about $400. I see a lot of people on the forum that seem to think they have to have the latest Canon 5D Mark III.  Why? I was hot to buy the BMPCM, but now, I'm not so sure!  With ML this camera simply kicks a__.

Used Andrew Reid's EOSHD 50D Shooter's Guide.  Saved me countless hours!   

Thank you Magic Lantern team!  I can't tell you how excited I am over this!  This IS how my wife looked.  I took some quick video footage so  I could show the video look we've all become accustomed to.