Messages

[@Andy600]

@Andy600

Thank you for your reply it's informative stuff. You say that once converted 'you will have the full latitude of the raw files'. If this is true it's excellent. Excuse me for being cautious, but seeing as things move quickly and possibly there will be another way of treating the images in a few months, I would personally like to keep backups of my RAW files (just in case!). Again, I would really like to know rather than think I know that I am retaining the best quality image. It always seems that almost any conversion will have it's caveats. I apologise, it's just my suspicious nature!

However, I am really interested in what your profiles have to offer and I will indeed be scrutinising your website for any information that may convince me. Of course I can't wait to see some real world comparisons and examples. I am nearly there!

Thanks again.

I think from looking on your site this is interesting stuff . I am considering getting (buying) the Cinelog but even after reading all the information on the site I still am not sure how much of an improvement it will bring me?

I am by no means an expert, but I (like many), strive for the best possible image. I have used the VisionLog profile and think that I am following the correct workflow. Basically (if I am correct?), once you convert with Cinelog, you then use AE native colour adjustments (hue, levels etc.). I think I am right with that?

So I am a little confused already about how 'best' to treat the image here. What I would really like to see is a video or video tutorial that explains the whole process (including within AE) from beginning to end. I think what would also be pretty important, is to see how it compares to alternative methods (such as the 'normal' method through ACR) including VisionLog (perhaps a direct comparison?).

I really need to see a comparison of an image being manipulated through this so I can see what's going on and where it excels (which I am almost certain it does!).

I am someone that has to be absolutely convinced before I commit to buying something and basically I am still not certain as to how much it will benefit me and if it will improve image quality. The image is the most important thing and that is why I would purchase.

Thanks in advance

Hello I'm Michael. I am also from the UK! (the Midlands). I hope you enjoy all the stuff at the forum and you find it all useful.

I have the 18 - 55 kit lens that you are talking about. It's on my 500D. I think it's a great for quick snaps of stuff bit when it comes to focus on there it's not much fun to use. It is ok for general usage and with auto focus can take surprisingly (within reason) good images. As long as you accept that it's not really a premium product.

It's pretty bottom of the range, lowest common denominator really!

You are correct that this lens will be pretty reasonable as far as field of view is concerned. When it's wide you can see a reasonable amount of sky.

One of the main considerations with this lens is that it's an EF-S as opposed to the EF lenses (which in simple terms are better).

Be aware that if you buy an EF-S lens, that you will only be able to use it on APS-C camera's. So if you wanted to get a full frame camera, at some point, you would not be able to use them at all on a 5D2, 5D3 or whatever. There is no way (to my knowledge at least) that you can adapt an EF-S to fit on a full frame sensor. In fact apparently trying this can/will cause damage! It's a physical thing.

So from a point of future proof don't go with the cheapy thing!

I think I have looked at the 8mm Rokinon before and I am not sure but I think it's the same brand as samyang? (I may be completely wrong here! forgive me!)

Anyway I have been pretty happy with my samyang and I think it's in the same league if you know what I mean. I have considered similar glass myself and would always say that invest more in your glass.

So get the rokinon (once you have got it you will not regret). I know I don't own one but I can guarantee that it will be considerably better than the kit lens.

Look after your glass and your glass will look after you!

In my humble opinion anyway!

EDIT: In fact I just did a check and yes it is basically marketed as a samyang. So I would definately say go with the rokinon. For sure. No regrets! LOL

EDIT: Actually looking at it I am wondering if a fish eye is really a good idea. I forgot that 8mm is basically so wide it become distorted (fish eye). If that's the effect you are going for then fine, but maybe you should consider a touch less wide with something like the rokinin 14mm? (which is still regarded as 'Ultra Wide')

I am assuming that you will be shooting your images in RAW? You will won't you!

Anyway I don't really know about compiling a time lapse in Premiere Pro (maybe it's possible?) but I personally use After Effects. I think that many people use this method because it allows you to use ACR to change settings in your images as you import them.

It's pretty simple to do once you learn the few steps involved.

I found a little video that covers the process. There may be many more videos for the same task but I think this one just about covers how to do it:

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

Also it's possible to use Quicktime Pro to compile image sequences but it can't handle the RAW files directly so if you converted them from RAW to TIFF or PNG or something then you can easily create a compiled movie file from that.

To be honest the compiling of the sequence is the easy part of time lapse!

As for safe values for astrophotography, I would say that's open for debate. There are plenty of variables here. The wider your lens, the longer you can expose for before you get trails. Obviously faster glass is also recommended to let in much more light and allow shorter exposures (to counter star trails).

Pretty high ISO's are actually acceptable for astro stuff (say 800, 1600). Securing a sturdy tripod (even with weights) is premium. As is 'mirror lockup' mode so you don't get the vibration from the mirror actuation (this can cause blurry trails like when you do long exposure and move the cam on light sources).

I have used pretty wide open settings on my camera before but also realise that some lenses have poor performance (soft) wide open. It's maybe an idea to stop up one or two stops. Like from f1.4 to f1.8, f2.0.

Oh and exposure time is variable. But I have used 30 second exposures before. Sometimes even longer, but you will face the problem of star trails. Try and get it as long as you can before trailing. if I can remember I get reasonable results at around 15 - 20 second exposures.

For me the problems have been more to do with the logistics. Getting there with all the kit, the cold, the lens surface condensing, batteries and where I live in the UK the biggest of all the problems is finding a place where you can actually see the sky without all the damned light pollution.

It's everywhere around where I live. I live in between 3 major cities in the UK and it's unavoidable!

The video still doesn't play in Google Chrome on Mavericks 10.9.1 . I am thinking that it will probably need a Flash or Shockwave plugin update or something because I did manage to get it to play in Safari (although that's not really my browser of choice).

I like where it's going - the time lapse thing. It's a little hard to take it in, because I feel, the sequence is a little too short. This is what I mean about the time it takes!

The bit with the thunder is good . I assume you had it set up somewhere close to home? I can see that it would work well if you had it set up as a more 'composed' shot . Also it's a shame that thunderstorms don't last longer! Can't really change mother nature I suppose!

Anyway keep at it . I apologise for my criticism . Maybe I should upload more of my stuff and I am pretty sure I would get plenty of criticism . There is plenty that is not right about what I do!

I appreciate that you share your program with us all. It looks interesting and I love everything to do with time-lapse (apart from the time it takes ).

The link you put up there is a FLCKR link to a photo that doesn't seem to display . I haven't looked through all the photos there but I like the lightning one .

I am assuming that you meant to link us to a video that (at least) I would like to see!

So where's the video?

[THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN!]

Stability is variable between various modules. As already mentioned things are now generally pretty stable. I think that you are maybe worried that your camera is going to go up in flames or something. Generally this doesn't happen.

NO LET ME BE STRAIGHT: - THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN!

In fact most of the time when people panic and think that ML has killed their cam it's usually something pretty trivial. Having followed many posts on here (I haven't read all of them), My general view is that Magic Lantern is actually pretty safe and generally stable. I know that there are some quirky things that can happen and sometimes it can be a little buggy with some things and other times it's me not knowing exactly how a function works.

Most of the time when the camera locks up (which does happen) you just remove the battery for a few seconds. There is plenty of information on the ML forums regarding all this.

To my knowledge (broad general statement I know) NO ONE HAS HAD A CAMERA DAMAGED AS A RESULT OF MAGIC LANTERN

Also (to my knowledge) most 'problems' are usually resolved.

At some point you have to weigh up the risks (if any) and just jump in and not be scared to experiment a little. Canon designed a pretty sturdy unit (the cameras) and I also have a lot of faith in the work that ML does too. Of course this is just my humble opinion. I hope you enjoy using Magic Lantern and get as much out of it as many people including myself have.

(disclaimer: please if someone has had something unfortunate that has happened directly as a result of ML please don't jump on me for this! I am just going from what I have read on here)

I ♥ RAW

[not]

Interestingly it says it records at 200 Mbps which is not 200 MB/s.

That works out at 25 MB/s, which is just about as fast as an SD card (or slightly faster).

I wonder if it's a typo?

EDIT: Yep that's a typo for sure!

I think that most people here on the Magic Lantern Forum value their cameras just as much as yourself. I know I do and I have been using Magic Lantern for some time and I would never look back.

The benefits by far outweigh any the negatives (which don't really exist!)

(In my humble opinion and from my experience that is )

[@ dossisman]

@ dossisman

Have you tried to go to the Prefs > Config files > Restore ML defaults ?

Of course that will return all settings to default so maybe you should save your settings or take note of them.

[fair]

I think that's for you to work out.

As in any enterprise you work out your parts labour etc. and then consider, first of all, if it's viable. Then you work out what a fair price is. You will see what is the right price as people will be buying it!

I am sorry to point out the obvious but to sell things at over inflated prices, is to take the consumer as foolish. A fool and his money is soon parted. All you have to do is find the fool! (if profit is your primary aim)

I agree. These connectors would not exactly be difficult to make. The parts can be sourced pretty cheap on eBay and to charge so much is excessive.

[RAW2DNG GUI]

And of course the RAW2DNG GUI works fine. Also it can directly convert to ProRes

At least on the version I am using: raw2dng converter GUI for OsX
Beta ver.0.13 (I think that's the latest? I haven't checked recently)

[5DMKII]

Sound with raw. Tried on at least 7D/6D and 5DIII

And of course 5DMKII

I think I agree that it's probably broken .

If you are on Windows you may at least want to try this freeware app:

http://www.thelifedigital.com/scan-the-flash-drive-for-errors-with-check-flash/

I think the idea is that if it has errors chuck it!

[g3gg0]

I was waiting patiently for the MLV audio support and I really do commend the work that has made this happen (big thanks to g3gg0 on that one ). Since before ML RAW I was using a clapper board so that I could get a decent sound recording with a Zoom H2 and the 5DMKII.

Now that I have the MLV recording I will be using my sound recorder less. But when I really want good sound and more control of the sound production I will be using slate again.

With the stereo sound recorded onto the camera and the 4 channels of sound on the H2 I can record a nice 6 channels of audio. I have always found that manual synchronisation works very well.

Slate is the tried and tested way and guess what ... It works! 

Surely if it was that windy how would it pick anything up? (apart from lots of wind) and why would you want to record and synchronise external sound in such windy conditions?

It all sounds a bit extreme to me. I wonder how film makers of old coped with just having a traditional slate?

[@ ted ramasola]

@ ted ramasola

Yes use the mlv_rec.mo, mlv_snd.mo from that link and (in my case) I used the 2013/12/02 (c44ceb8452f2) build. That works fine for me.

http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=5533.0

@ olik

Yes I get a lower data rate with the MLV format. But I am still able to record what I need to record so I can live with the reduced numbers.

The audio is really important to me. If the images are more important to you (as in more frames) then you can always use which module is more suited. Whenever!

[@ olik]

@ olik

Well essentially the MLV format will hold all sorts of meta data but the latest addition that I think pleases many is the addition of audio. The MLV is a kind of package containing all the RAW data (including audio etc.). You need to use the the correct conversion tools to use this.

I am not going to explain all of this because there is more than enough information on this site. But yes, the audio that seems to synchronise well with the video, is what makes me want to use it.

I know this is all slightly off topic but seeing as there are a number of people that are using the Zoom H2 I thought I would mention that I also have one, and as clunky as the thing is - it's a great little device.

I made a modification to it that allows you to hijack the points where the audio is fed to the recorder. It allows you to have four separate audio inputs (the H2 only has 2). The inputs are switchable between MIC/Line level.

My one has cables hanging from it with a a couple of connectors that switch out the onboard microphones when you insert alternative sources.

The mod was 'fiddly' but it does work. You just have to be willing to 'hack' your device a little. Believe me, I was nervous because I don't have millions of $$$$ to mess around with. Neither am I an expert in electronics. I was careful and methodical and thankfully I did it. It works, and as you can tell: - I love what it has allowed me to do.

There was a video on You Tube that inspired me to do it. With instructions. I think there is also more stuff around the internet too. Just google 'Zoom H2 mod'

Anyway if you are interested here is a little video for it: -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1vJq13ukrk

g3gg0,

When I try to record in 3x crop mode and when I set the FPS override to 23.976 it currently disables the audio. Is there a way to have prevent the audio from being disabled now that we have have the mlv_snd module?

Are you sure the audio is disabled?

The reason I say this is because when you have the FPS override turned on there is a message saying that the audio is disabled. I would record regardless of this message and just check and see if you have recorded an audio file when you extract it.

Just try it. You might be pleasantly surprised (as I was) to see that it actually does record it!

If that's not the case then I really can't help you and sorry! but Merry Christmas anyway

48K will be great if it's possible. I am impressed with the audio recording now. It now makes 'run and gun' type filming a much more realistic possibility. The audio thing is a game changer. Again. Thanks for all the work. It's much appreciated.

Can we have 24-bit too? (only joking! )

Merry Christmas to ALL!