Messages

I'm really enjoying working with mlvapp, and getting great results from the tests I'm doing.

Something strange I've found, however...

When I export as 16 bit tiff, I'm getting fewer colours than "save an actual frame" as an 8 bit PNG.

On the order of 110,000 vs 98,000.

I'd expect the opposite!

Looking at the tiff file, it says it's 48 bit, so there's a bit of a mystery here...

Here's a sample frame of the results I'm getting with my current settings, emphasis on highlights and maximum dynamic range.

Based on ISO 200.

It's working well in every scenario so far, from screaming sunlight to dark scenes.

I find this functionality essential to my work, even though I only use the parameters on the ISO registers GUI.  I'm getting great results from using those, even if it could be better (what couldn't?)

That being said, it's extremely tedious and sometimes very frustrating to change the base ISO and redo the whole process just to be able to get a shot under much different lighting conditions.

All I ask is for information on any possible way to store and retrieve settings for faster setup in use.

Is it possible?

The ideal under current (and seemingly for years to come) circumstances would be "ISO presets" from the GUI, perhaps with the ability to provide a name for each to avoid confusion in the field.

I'm just asking for information.

Please keep it friendly.

ISO 74 is the lowest I get while keeping the full range without losing highlights.

It's a pleasure to work with when there's lots of light.

My preference is for darker scenes, but the more I'm tinkering with the experimental ISO, the more comfortable I'm getting with a wider variety of conditions...

This frame was saved from mlvapp, in standard mode, no lut, no filters, no noise reduction, etc.  Simple exposure adjustment and low strength to raise the shadows a touch.

Looks good to me!

Inspired by this discussion, I have been testing ISO 320 pulled down to 100.

I tried a few other Isos as well and found that 320 is excellent for the cleanest shadows and only a very small loss of highlights in actual usage.

The highlights clip straight to pink, making it very easy to expose exactly at the threshold, and the beautiful shadows are a joy to work with. In the example frame, I exposed for the direct sunlight on the wall. The room was dark otherwise.



I'm using 320 a lot now, except those times I need as much highlight detail as possible at the expense of slightly noisier shadows.  Then it's back to 200!

Excellent stuff.

with mlv app's new capabilities, i tried processing this video using only it!

it handled everything except a couple of shots that needed features (currently?) unavailable on it.

i used hyalinejim's excellent magic lantern ektar LUT that he made intended for resolve.  i simply pointed mlv app to the directory with his .cube files, and used slog3.  it worked beautifully!  try it!

thanks to the iso experiments, the shadows are so clean that no noise reduction was required.

when will this capability be available for everyone?

http://drive.google.com/open?id=1OLyW3iQqRa6KgVnc6bg3yKdUA7ktP_Kv

My understanding from rawtherapee is that lmmse is primarily for very high ISO shots.  I've never really found it too useful, but who knows, it might work for certain conditions...

Thx for the clips. I found the problem very fast: the problem is that these files are <1.0fps. MLVApp was not made for clips with so low fps ... at least I forgot that it might be possible
I made a quickfix - that means: if the clip is <1fps, I set it to 1 fps. Otherwise it is very hard to show a correct timecode... (timecode was the crashing module). So you can compile the latest revision using Dannes compiler tool, or you wait for next release.
1) You really would do this in MLVApp? I always do it in the NLE - each pixel might be good for stabilizing for example... after this I crop it if necessary.
2) That should be possible to add... let's see... but you'll get a very blurred image.

I found an implementation of LMMSE debayer with correct interface in C, so I added it to MLVApp now. Has someone used it in past in any other program? I have the problem that hard contrast lines are getting very green and cyan. Is that normal? Only highiso clips are okay... but AMaZE looks nearly always way better.

I'm between projects, so I finally got the chance to try your new colour balance functionality, and it's great!

Also, focus dots removal is finally working for me.  I use digital dolly and film exclusively at 3072*1308, so it's never worked before.

I'm so happy with it that I'm trying to reprocess one of my prior videos entirely in mlv app.  So far, it's going extremely well!

One of the shots required a tokina 11-16mm lens, famous for its purple fringing.

Any chance you could add a defringe function?  Rawtherapee does this really well. You just specify the colour, a colour range for the removal, and pixel radius.

I think a lot of users will be thankful.  Most of us have at least one lens that needs this kind of love...

Keep up the excellent work!

+1 for the incredible demosaicing suggestion

I understand.

It's not the best example, but it's all I had readily available.

I don't need to do this often, so it would take quite some time to find better examples...

It's a real game changer for highlight issues in certain conditions.

That's cool.

How long would it take to grab the existing library from rawtherapee?

It is open source.

I find that different algorithms are beneficial for solving different problems.

Almost all the time, amaze is a great choice, but sometimes, it's great to have other options, especially when it solves a problem!

Sorry, the filenames are the algorithms used.

It's RCD.

I've edited the linked post for clarity.

It would be awesome if you guys added more demosaicing algorithms.  Here's an example of one other from rawtherapee:

https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=22483.msg203990#msg203990

Here's a quick example...  It's the only suitable shot I have handy at the moment, but it gets the point across.

Amaze shot was done with mlv app.  I then saved the dng and loaded it into rawtherapee for other demosaicing, in this case RCD.  That's why the colours are different.  I did nothing to either program for colours, just defaults.

Before this thread once again fades to oblivion, I'll just provide this final thought:

I'm not looking for reasons NOT to take advantage of this excellent functionality.  I'm not shooting pictures of charts or cats.  I'm making beautiful video using this experiment ISO, without knowing what I'm doing.  I'm just loving the clean shadows and actually using this.

Watch this video, and then you'll see for yourself.

See any aliasing?

I had to use canon ISO for the opening shot because it was filmed at 60fps, and I couldn't get the right results with the iso experiments build.  I had to apply extreme denoising to that shot to get a barely acceptable result, but you can still see how bad it is compared to the rest of the video.

Amplifier optimization is a great tool!

I'll just keep enjoying this incredible capability and scratching my head as to why no one else is.

http://drive.google.com/open?id=1RXZ5vrQggaX1EHi1Yeg0hA9gokJmnquc

Yes, that's how it works.

The biggest problem is there's absolutely no video oriented workflow at all.  But if you're performing surgery on a single clip, it's not really an issue.

It's a great tool to have handy, no matter what you use.

I'm running win7 sp1.  Resolve 15 beta installed without any issues.  The machine is air gapped, and nothing else was required.

I hope that helps.

It works very well for quick and convenient grading, and I can do 24fps playback with a couple of nodes in series.

I actually prefer using rawtherapee for post, even on video, although it's agonisingly slow and extremely inconvenient.

Usually I just use resolve unless it's an extremely difficult scene.

Rawtherapee has some excellent demosaicing algorithms that are far superior to amaze for very critical details.

Exactly.  But as I've said all along, I'm not doing anything special or analytical.  I'm just happy with the results I'm getting, and want to see this taken seriously so we can all benefit from this!

Absolutely stunning results!

EDIT: but... after closer look the "optimized" file seems to be amplified by about +0.85EV, i.e. the overall brightness is matched only after pushing the normal ISO100 by +0.85EV from RAW. One can also already notice loss of data in the highlights on the metal cover of the floppy disk on the left. So, unfortunately, it's not comparing apples with apples. I don't say it doesn't have a potential but a better comparison is needed to quantize the difference in DR.

Grab the DNGs and play, or better still, play with the iso experiments tools and help get the ball rolling!

Nice shadows. How's the highlights doing?

ok, here it is!

these images were created by loading the DNGs into mlv app, and dropping the dark strength to zero.

note the aliasing on the dual iso shot.  no surprise there...

also note that the optimised "experiments" shot is beautiful.  no hassle, no slow post processing, no unexpected behaviours and side effects, etc.

the canon 100 iso... sucks.

CAN WE FINALLY DEVELOP THIS???
what the.
i'm done pushing for it.  if this isn't enough proof, the world has gone mad.

Don't forget, these results are just from me arbitrarily reducing ISO 200 to 100.  Who knows how much better it can get!

No one will know unless this gets some serious attention.

here's the DNGs, zipped:  http://drive.google.com/open?id=145YfRJB9lbauqHGJpHTzbD__iBYj4WOt








funny music poems

Will do.

Yes, you could drop 400 to 100, but 200 is the sweet spot for dynamic range...

@70MM13

Can you compare please 100 from 200 ISO (Your technique) vs Dual ISO 100/800 vs normal Canon ISO at 100. And upload DNG sample please for each one.

Thanks!

Edit: Can you even get 100 from 400 ISO,, its there better result ?

It's a real curiosity that this amplifier optimization is being ignored.

Those using dual iso would benefit from this also, because even at canon iso 100, shadows are just plain ugly.  Not so after gain optimization!

AHH, the joys of bias and prejudice.  Why, I wonder, should it apply to this?

"Cornelius..."

That's great to know!

I've been considering switching back to Linux, having only used it seriously for render farm nodes in the past, running blender.

Davinci resolve runs beautifully on win7...

Also, you can stick with openshot, but use either mlvapp or mlv producer to easily convert your mlv files to a format that openshot works with.

If openshot supports dng, perhaps it's a compression issue?  It might require uncompressed dng.  I'm just guessing here. I've never used openshot.

The mastered version is now linked in the initial message.  If this doesn't convince people of the benefits of the ISO experiments, nothing will.