Messages

I think the "The Radeon 4850 is not a supported Resolve GPU." may be the problem.

[Raw Photo Processor 64]

Actually I did get something out of the last file. I managed to load it into Raw Photo Processor 64 (OSX) and it saved out a TIFF file:

https://mega.co.nz/#!t0VEnCjA!B2OwCGyRmT_5vao7FjkD9TyCez6t7gIT09eUJ51Rukw

[completely empty]

Not looking good I'm afraid.

I analysed the files in a hex editor and this is what I found:

IMG_6635.CR2 - This file was completely empty (meaning a file with no header or information at all). Just lots of 000000000's
IMG_6636.CR2 - This file had some header info (enough for me to find that you are using Canon EOS 550D) but no essence. Just lot's more 000000's
IMG_6640.CR2 - 00000000000's all the way through!
IMG_6641.CR2 - more 0000000000's
IMG_6663.CR2 - Slightly more interesting. I see that the file has a thumbnail. I am not sure if that occupies the rest of the data in the file or not (?), but there is half of the image data in there I think. It doesn't have an end of file and I am not sure how to add the correct information to create an EOF.

Possibly the last image could be saved but it wouldn't even be the full image.

In the thumbnail I think I could make out some of the lovely green colours of the aurora. It's a real shame to be losing such images.

I am sorry that I can't help anymore than that.

[FREE]

Perhaps for a longer term FREE solution to organised encrypted cloud storage consider MEGA.

50GB FREE with FREE account

https://mega.co.nz

I'm not sure what's going on with the camera. Sounds odd. Maybe the card has become corrupt?

Have you tried formatting the card? and re-installing ML? Possibly the card is just corrupt and you need a new one but I wouldn't assume that that is the case.

You don't say what software you are using?

I mean do you have software installed to view the CR2 files on your computer?

If not you might want to install some of the software that comes with your camera.

Maybe you could upload one of the files that has come from your camera so people can inspect the files.

I am assuming that the pictures that you took were in DNG format.

If you don't have Adobe Photoshop installed you will probably not be able to open them or use them at all. There is a select few other programs that can open DNG but it is Adobe's baby.

http://pcsupport.about.com/od/fileextensions/f/dng-file.htm

Anyway the original question wasn't a Magic Lantern related question.

[EDIT:]

In the images that you used for examples I can see that there is a depth of field change. If you look at the scratches on the metal that appear in the DNG file they are out of focus on the others. So, for a start you are not comparing the same images.

I just did a test where I set the camera up on a tripod and took a full resolution raw file (CR2) using a infra red remote trigger (to not move the camera at all). I then went into live view and took a 3x zoom (2144x912) MLV RAW DNG sequence.

I then took them into my computer and extracted the DNG sequence and loaded up the full resolution CR2 image into After Effects. It's a large frame (5616x3744) I then loaded up the DNG sequence and changed the opacity of the layer so I could align them properly. I used exactly the same ACR settings for both.

I could then turn the layer visibility on and off to make a comparison.

The images aligned perfectly. It is indeed a crop of the bigger image. I noticed a very slight line down the left hand side of the cropped frame. It's nothing that would be a problem because it's on the edge of the frame and it's not fully black. Just very slight.

There is also a very slight difference in the rendering of the two images. The CR2 seems to contain more grain. Again it's not that much of a deal (at least I don't think so). The DNG is fractionally softer. If anything, that softness will be some kind of aliasing artefact and it does make it look smoother (or fractionally softer). None of it is enough to make me shriek in horror though.

I am not really getting any nasties there. I suggest anyone that is concerned about the difference should try it and see if it is of enough concern to be a show stopper. It's not for me.

This is just my humble opinion of course.

EDIT: In fact. I am a muppet!!! . I forgot to fade up the opacity on the layer and slight misalignment would make it more blurry!!! Now I don't even see any difference in the grain levels! YAY! The only difference is a very slight shift in colour balance (again it's very slight and would be easily adjusted).

So how did you manage to add timecode to the audio files?

[@GTempler]

@GTempler

YAY!

and looking forward.

Thanks again!

Oh no, not again

It's Random Access Memory to my understanding so it shouldn't suffer in the same way as a mechanical device. Maybe I am not understanding this correctly but that's how I see it?

I format my card regularly just to keep it more organised (or tidy) in my head!

[cost?]

Maybe I will wait for everyone to send their cameras off and have an unknown 'modification' carried out. (At what cost?)

There are barely any details, other than it will greatly improve this and that. All the things that you will need and they will need your camera to do this (I bet they need your camera! ).

No science or demonstration of anything.

It's just rumour and speculation nothing more.

After all it is on a site called Canon Rumors. It's in the name

Depends if you want to make a permanent modification to your camera.

As standard the cameras have a 'hard wired' IR filter which makes IR photography almost impossible without removing this. It's an expensive modification (I think) and also it's not reversible. It really depends on how much you really want to do IR photography.

I am not exactly an expert on this but that's my understanding of this from what I have read in the past.

There is a site that offers the mod here:

http://www.maxmax.com/canon_5d_mkii.htm

[@GTempler]

@GTempler

Would it be possible to have a check box option to format the output of the file names so they are compliant with DaVinci Resolve?

By this I mean using the naming convention that allows the files to be directly browsed with a thumbnail image for the folder when you browse in Resolve.

an example of the Resolve 'compliant' formatting is this: -

/M15-0121_C0000/M15-0121_C0000_000308.dng

I'm not saying this naming convention should be adopted; but it would really help to make life easier when using DaVinci Resolve. So having a checkbox for compliant file name/structure for resolve would be super useful!


Thanks anyway. It's good to see an MLV conversion program (on OSX ) making the process a little easier.

From what I can see; what you are doing is correct. There is no magic here as such (apart from the Magic Lantern itself! ). You just record when you are in the zoomed mode. The 3x zoom is the amount it's actually 'zooming'. Basically ignore the 5x it's actually 3x!!!

Anyway ... You are obviously triggering the h264 recording at the same time (or instead?) as the MLV RAW video. You obviously need to stop the h264 from recording and that's the bit I am not sure about?

I have had that before but now my cam is set up so it doesn't do that. I just can't remember what I switched. I am pretty sure if you did a fresh install with the latest build it should 'just work'.

I really can't remember what it was that I did to ensure that it only records just RAW but I know most things are common sense.

Maybe someone else can put us straight with that one? Sorry I can't help more than that right now!

http://builds.magiclantern.fm/#/

[not]

It's not a 5DMkIII specific mode. It's not really a magnification as such it's actually a crop of the sensor rather than the 'line skipping'. It avoids moire too.

Yes you can do it on the 5DMKII. It works.

Basically you will be able to record when you are in the 5x zoom mode (the 10x does not function that's just how it is).

Check out this video which explains it nicely:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQ51rE_ZUgo

I agree that 'tilt shift' should be considered a post process thing.

Of course, true tilt shift photography is not a post production thing. It also comes at a considerable financial cost (with the lenses involved). I am a mere mortal, with the budget of a mere mortal, so I have to compromise.

I tried the Photoshop route and is actually pretty convincing tilt shift effect. I would love to have a tilt shift lens and do it 'properly', but it's surprising what can be achieved, in post, with Photoshop. It's pretty simple too.

Here is an example of the technique (from a random YouTube search):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85-84NJlgV8

What are the best settings to export from After Effects/Adobe Media Encoder to Youtube etc.? Workflow:

RAW to DNG  -- Import/editing in After Effects -- save project -- render project in Adobe Media Encoder -- upload to internet.

Well I am not sure what platform you are on, but I have found that uploading the highest quality uncompressed (or least compressed) video has yielded the best results for YouTube. People may think that it's insane uploading a video that is huge to YouTube. It takes a long time to upload an uncompressed, high quality, video but it actually does make a considerable difference.

Basically don't finalise it to .H264 because YouTube will do that. You don't want to recompress.

I am rendering on the Mac and use ProRes 422.

Check out this little article:

http://www.videomaker.com/article/17034-encoding-youtube-videos-at-the-highest-quality

[@ted ramasola]

@ted ramasola

Correct!!!

This all stems from me pointing out that when you use FPS override you lose the audio level meters (and no it's nothing to do with resolution!)

[@reddeercity]

@reddeercity

I think people are getting some wires crossed here!

First of all I was questioning what Ted was saying about turning off FPS override. In my experience, if I don't have FPS override turned on it will record at 23.976.

I work with 24 FPS that's the speed that I want to work at!

I am fully aware of how long I will be able to record video for and at which resolutions. If I wanted continuous recording I would drop the resolution a touch. This is fine if you are doing long takes where you might need to be talking to the camera etc.

It all depends on the type and style of production you are doing. Watch any advert and you will notice that each cut lasts only for a very short time (a few seconds for example).

Many commercial (and non-commercial) films have very short cuts. Anyway that wasn't what I was questioning!. I was merely stating that if I turn off FPS override and I have my canon settings set to 1920x1080 @24 (from the canon menu) and the mentioned 1872x1054(ML menu) (it doesn't seem to make any difference what resolution this is set to either), it will record at 23.976.

So despite what Ted is saying, I will continue to use FPS override because without that I am not getting the 24 FPS that I require.

Ted was responding and then went offline so it never really got clarified. I am sure he will answer when he is around again. If he knows better I am sure he will let me know!

[1920x1080]

Normal (the 1920x1080 was the setting from the canon menu!)

1872x1054 in ML

[Live View/Movie func. set.]

I have my Live View/Movie func. set. set to 1920x1080 @24

I turned my FPS override off and it sets the recording at 23.976. I can't work at that FPS.

Recording at 1872x1054

So what's happening there?

[it will still record the audio]

One unrelated question does MLV audio work with FPS override enabled? I tried it when I first switched and it didn't buy I may have done something wrong.

I use FPS override all the time too. What happens, for some unknown reason, is that the live level metering doesn't work in that mode. I can assure you though that it will still record the audio, just without being able to see the recording levels.

It's an annoyance, I know but; it will record. I am sure that some time this will be resolved. (hopefully anyway!)