Messages

Donation made.

(Let them keep the button)

Alex, I'm sorry. I mean a message accompanying the PayPal donation, so they know it's coming from the ML supporters and should be used to get you guys a Beta. It would be nice if it all adds up being a nice developers perk. No harm in that, better than an anonymous donation and more constructive than a lot of "buttons" or "karma"

Do you want a message with that? I guess I can donate some more.

Thanks for doing these measurements! Really interesting to study the graph with DR and to see how in general Canon catches up in DR on the Nikon in the higher ISO.
If I read the graph right, I'm a little disappointed in the Apertus chip. Even with HDR it scores worse than the Canon 5D3. Unless we theoretically use it at ISO 50. Is there really not a good DR chip out there? I don't care so much for resolution or size, I care more about color and sensitivity. The fixed pattern noise can be fixed, that what another camera maker using the chip told me. But they had invested much effort in it.

Also, quite worrying that Apertus are still 40k short of getting their program funded. At this point, it don't see it happening in its current form. Does this prove the big companies right, that we should pay big bucks to get the big tools?

(Combined with some traction for promising freshly announced camera's from Sony, Panasonic, Aja, etc)

And points for being clever to Magic Lantern, to build on hardware that already exists and is readily accessible?

It would be interesting to see Arri and Red chips plotted on there, just as a reference.

(edited because I needed to take in the info a bit more)

Baldand,
Thank you for developing this. But I really don't think mlrawviewer is any bit less cool than mlvs and I hope you will still feel like updating it once in a while.
Every tool has its place!

Apertus,

With the new campaign update*, am I the only one thinking about a mode to record all the pixels of the sensor, a bit like the Arri open gate mode (if I am correct?)? Anarmorphic, ... , reframe, lots of possibilties. Everything is possible if you control the hardware, right?

Also, this camerahead combined with the Atomos Shogun, could make a very lean camera package. (http://www.atomos.com/shogun/) Interesting!

*which comes at a perfect time and should give you a boost in funding.

Visited IBC today. Another camera manufacturer confirmed he was using the cmosis chip as well. Looked good. They had in a more industrial housing and all the kinks worked out by now. Are Blackmagic and Aja using these as well?

(Aja footage can look much better than what they uploaded to the internet, btw, I've seen a much less contrasty version)

I know, I know. Funniest thing is the chip manufacturer seems to be only a couple of streets away from my house. Anyway, I took the effort to download the footage (http://files.apertus.org/AXIOM%20Alpha%20Sample%20Footage%20Selection%20Ungraded.mxf) and found it quite problematic to work on. Very little color information, crushed blacks and whites. There's a big difference between creating a chip for machine vision and ending up with a pleasing natural image (no wonder the Alexa is a big box). There is indeed fixed noise (they've said that), but I also softened the image a bit because of the fine detail messing with the RGB pattern of the chip. Still prefer the 5dIII shooting MLV for now and how old is that camera?

I'm definitely rooting for them (although my financial contribution was rather symbolic) but they will need all the help they can get!

(I also wonder about the fan on top of the beta model of the camera)

In my cc test I can't get further than this and I don't like that. It looks so graded.



full res: http://www.blog.kurtaugustyns.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/AXIOM-Alpha-Sample-Footage-Selection-Ungraded-0014007b.jpg

The image sensor seems the weakest link to me. It needs more DR. Too bad hardly any chip manufacturer want to be open and publish the specs. Going through all this trouble and ending up with a thin image may stand in the way of succes. Well, that and seeing how long it took for Red to come out of an actual state of beta. Or Blackmagic with some very weird policies and PR calling any problem with the camera a moot point. It seems so incredibly difficult to get it right. I really hope you succeed, but you'll need some time!

Sebastian,

While it indeed is something completely different than taking a mass produced camera and making it do the most incredible stuff that wasn't even thought of or deliberately held back, I certainly am hoping to see the same spirit with Apertus as we are seeing here.

The mere thought of a camera company giving you all the functions it CAN give, not only the ones it wants to give at a certain price point is really exciting.

If all the people that are using Magic Lantern would donate you 1 euro, even it were only to make a statement to the industry about opening standards, your funding goals would be met quite soon! (good that you accept paypal!)

Is there any change of overlapping functions? A lot of postprocessing tools have already been made. How about supporting the MLV codec?

Seeing this evolve so fast is like watching the Big Bang from your couch with a lovely cup of coffee. Very clever thinking!

Oh, wow, that's really cool, I hadn't realized. This is becoming such a good tool to deliver edit files.
Imagine shooting something raw and then being able to deliver edit one-pass color corrected files quite easily (mlv-->lut-->prores) while you are sleeping. You couldn't imagine this a year ago (on a shoestring budget).

I will definitely create some lut's for basic color correction.

Would it be a good idea to include the shortcuts in the application itself as a help file of some sorts? I need to switch back to either a browser or text file a lot to doublecheck I'm not entering a wrong command on a crucial moment.

Perhaps I'm trying to do too much tasks simultaneously.

It will become even more helpful as there will be more and more different versions floating around on people's computers.

Test build... I made a Mac test build of the current source as version 1.2.3

https://bitbucket.org/baldand/mlrawviewer/downloads/MlRawViewer_1_2_3_mac.dmg

Works great! (Well, some layering issues in the GUI, but as I understand there isn't much you can do about it. Perhaps just tell it to put the dialog windows behind the video, and it will show it correctly  )

Thank you very much!

If you run cr2hdr into the Terminal, could you post the output ?

Illegal instruction

And what's you dcraw version ? 9.21 works for cr2hdr 20bit

9.19 works too for cr2hdr 20bit on 10.9.4 , but not on os x 10.6.8

I'm sorry. I can not be of too much much help there (yet). Sorry.

On the other hand, a small step in the that direction has been taken as I got the 20bit version of cr2hdr to work. And very happy about that!

The steps I took:
-Move to a computer with a different OS. OS X 10.9.4 instead of OS X 10.6.8 (the cr2hdr didn't run on 10.6.8 )
-Installed dcraw with this tutorial: http://vkphotoblog.blogspot.be/2014/05/dcraw-921-for-os-x-mavericks-users.html
(including xcode installation) (interesting read too)
-Move cr2hdr to the same folder as dcraw is in. Allows you to just type the cr2hdr command without specifying a directory.
-Install exiftool from here http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/
-Run the program from the terminal
-Say fuuuuuuh...!

I will see if I can now also make it work on a OS X 10.6.8 machine.

[Mac only]

Code Select Expand

$ ./cr2hdr
cr2hdr: a post processing tool for Dual ISO images

Last update: 30a5132 on 2014-05-07 10:34:25 UTC by a1ex:
cr2hdr: print a message when overwriting the output file

Download cr2hdr-20bit for Mac only with last commit 30a5132

@a1ex thanks for having solved the warnings on compilation!

I am totally hooked on how good Dual ISO MLV's look on a Canon 5D3 to get nicer highlights, but I've broken my teeth on this for several days now and I'm dying to see the latest improvements in quality and less flicker in my files. I can't get this version to work on my mac and I'm very sorry to ask for help.

dcraw & exiftool are installed. The version from 4/10/13 works as expected.

It would be great if there was a complete package out that that people can run without any further installations. I'm trying every approach and I understand if a developer doesn't feel like pushing every update to the mac platform, but perhaps there's someone out there to help me out. Or point to other useful threads. Of course you can also reply here:
http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=13028.0

Many thanks!

Care to provide a step by step or checklist of all the stuff that should be installed in the tool chain to get this working.

[FCP 7]

Hi Kurt, ProRes 422 can be configured easily. If you need a different picture size, you can add a resize filter to the ffmpeg string.

Have a look at page 31, everything should be there!

Thanks for pointing that out! So to recap for any other half-brained people like me out there using FCP 7 on Mac OS X 10.6.8 (and perhaps myself in the future)

To set up Prores 422 HQ encoding with audio settings adjusted from page 31 here:

1) Make sure MLRawViewer is working well as it is.
2) Make hidden files visible in finder by either using the terminal or an application. Lazy as I am, I used the latter.
3) Go to your user directory. Then go to the hidden directory '.mlrawviewer' in there are the configuration files. You can made an alias of this directory and made it visible by removing the dot in front. Now you turn off showing hidden files and still have easy acces to the configuration files.
4) Open ffmpegWithAudioConfig. Make a copy of the standard Prores 4444 code for future reference (or just delete the file if you mess up and it will be regenerated). Insert this code for Prores 422 HQ encoding WITH audio that gets accepted by FCP7 (at least in my current testing)

-f mov -vf vflip -vcodec prores_ks -profile:v 3 -pix_fmt yuv422p10le -acodec pcm_s16le %s.MOV

5) Save the configuration file.
6) Render out your files as would otherwise.

In my test files this generated perfectly accepted FCP 7. The code on page 31 made me render audio (known ffmpeg bug).

I absolutely love the program. If only because audio becomes so much easier. And I prefer the color processing to Resolve. Would it be possible to also have a Prores 422 output setting? I love the debayering, but I seem to get more color noise at higher iso's than files processed with ACR (or am I doing something wrong). We could use 422 for offline editing.

For me personally, even if it still has some quirks, this is a huge step in the whole ML development. Thank you!

I also find the article useful in the way that producers sometimes decide on a camera, even if it's not the tool for the job. With the growing succes of ML, some may think it's perfect for everything, even if we as users know it's not.

So I consider it as a warning to unexperienced users and producers thinking they will get perfect results without the effort. A 5d3 with ML shooting RAW reallly is an camera owner's thing, where your entire workflow is thoroughly tested and proven and you know where you will lose time and gain quality.

So I can quite appreciate it, even if it makes me raise my eyebrows at times.

I remember how Red users used to explode when someone dared to criticize their camera the first couple of years. Where as a matter of fact, it DID have a lot of loose ends and problems, but they had learned to live with them or work around them.

Shot on 5dIII. Keying may have been even better. I'm normally not an vfx guy. Crazy color cast on some browser platforms though.

Little story about the video here:
http://www.blog.kurtaugustyns.com/2014/05/05/the-perfect-story/

Same here. Much better to watch the hard drive activity.

Congratulations! Even more people will be drawn to ML now with the bootflag issue solved.

50 files. I just had that too today.

As for Resolve: frankly it's the first version that works for me.... at all. Before, it just crashed. So I'm really not the person to ask as I'm really new to it. Syncing I will probably do in Final Cut, because a prores proxy just works quicker than going trough dng files. And if you have a lot of clips, it a job, but it's not endless. It just depends on how much the footage is worth to you and if you get enough time for delivery (and perhaps have an assistant?).
For now, I also prefer the color I get with ACR for onlining files, but it looks to be much slower.

I'm just very happy that we have these options now. It's becoming a real palette of processes.