Is MLV all that it's cracked up to be?

Started by Midphase, March 06, 2014, 08:42:48 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Pierluca72

Quote from: andy kh on March 11, 2014, 05:55:46 PM
i will tell you the best way to deal with so many clips if you are using windows. simply convert to cdng using raw2cdng and import all those clips in premiere pro and wala..all your audio and video clips are in sync. u neednt do any manual sync
Wow thank you so much!

Pierluca72

Quote from: ted ramasola on March 11, 2014, 04:22:41 PM
In resolve, once you have dragged all the dngs and wav files into the media pool, right click the root and right click auto sync based on time code. in edit choose new timeline unselect create empty timeline. all dngs will be linked and trimmed. Though in cases of longer clips, the wav seemed to show no waveform halfway, I manually linked those problematic clips only.
Thank you so much

budafilms

Quote from: Sganzerla on March 12, 2014, 07:04:03 AM
I'm one guy who have done 8 videos using RAW video with my MKIII and I have the same concerns as Midphase.

Still don't know if I should stick with RAW for now, 75% of me say yes.

The Beep for external recorder in .RAW it's not bad...

g3gg0

Quote from: Sganzerla on March 12, 2014, 07:04:03 AM
Still don't know if I should stick with RAW for now, 75% of me say yes.

well, it is free open source software.
just try it. no need to spend 1k$ and realize its crap.
Help us with datasheets - Help us with register dumps
magic lantern: 1Magic9991E1eWbGvrsx186GovYCXFbppY, server expenses: [email protected]
ONLY donate for things we have done, not for things you expect!

Sganzerla

Yeah, I'm using sound beep which is cool, but is not going to be very welcome in the next wedding I'm going to record, for example. I may very well end up using MLV instead of RAW with a lower volume bip (and the risk of having problems with audio sync).

I prefer PluralEyes sync with MLV instead of getting 100 takes and doing by hand with RAW, and the metadata is a good addiction as my lenses are color calibrated with DNG Profile Editor and I'm using ACR for CC. But I prefer much more the software batch/workflow that I'm already using compared to what is possible with MLV for now. In huge projects this can be a serious problem.

I know there are questions without answers yet, as software implementation has nothing to do with the ML RAW Team, but as I said before, I can really understand the questions raised by Midphase with this topic.

eatstoomuchjam

Quote from: Midphase on March 06, 2014, 10:04:12 AM
You post IMHO exemplifies a key misunderstanding and gap between the guys who are coding ML and the guys who are trying to use it.

Speaking as a guy who uses ML and doesn't code it, your posts seem to exemplify a key misunderstanding between someone who thinks he is buying a product from a commercial entity who needs his money to continue operating and someone who realizes that other people have tinkered with something in their spare time and who, out of kindness and a desire to collaborate with others, are now allowing him to download the results of their tinkering.  If you don't evangelize or download anything from ML, the project will still do just fine.

Quote from: Midphase on March 06, 2014, 10:04:12 AM
But make no mistake, sheer power without end-user friendliness is doomed from the start. So many programmers believe that just implementing amazing code in all that is needed. This is the critical difference that made Steve Jobs so successful, he understood that the end-user experience is as inherent to a product's success as the product itself.
Don't get me wrong, I don't believe in the need to appease the absolute lowest common denominator, but in the case of ML the situation is very much at the opposite end of that spectrum.

I'll help you with a more apt comparison.
Many years ago, a group of people developed an OS kernel known as Mach.  It was a microkernel which attempted to move big chunks of the kernel into user space (among other things, but that'll be a lot of reading - if you're interested, wikipedia has a nice write-up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach_(kernel)#Mach_concepts).  It was designed as a drop-in replacement for the traditional Unix kernel.
When Steve Jobs left Apple for NeXT, they needed an operating system and after looking around for a bit, they settled on using a Mach kernel with a userland heavily based on BSD, a former academic OS derived from AT&T unix which was developed largely, as the name would imply, at Berkeley, with descendants still available today (FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, etc).  At NeXT, they developed a number of graphical abstractions on top of Unix.
When Apple acquired NeXT to bring Steve Jobs back, he brought NeXTStep with him and it was retooled to become one of the early versions of OSX.

In this example, Magic Lantern would probably be most similar to the BSD userland or Mach microkernel.  They're powerful tools in the right hands and thanks to their inclusion in OSX, they are running on most desktop computers in the world.

BSD was not built as a commercial product.  It was built by hackers who wanted something to make their own lives better and who were kind enough to share it with others to make their lives better too.  Thanks to the work of those wonderful hippie nerds in the 70's, you may enjoy a Mac today which isn't running a derivative of OS9.

Quote from: Midphase on March 06, 2014, 10:04:12 AM
But the reality of the situation is that ML exists on borrowed time and in about two years' time nobody will want to shoot video on DSLR's because there will be absolutely no reason to do so (and that's me being optimistic). There are other massive disruptive forces that are causing a rapid shift in how people shoot video. I live and breathe this industry on a daily basis in a town that fancies itself the World capital of film production. I am constantly interacting with cinematographers and editors, and believe me, when I show them a command-line solution they laugh in my face at the absurdity of it. So yes this is only my opinion, but an opinion shared by just about every single professional that I've interacted with for the better part of last year.

Two years, huh?  Looking at the progress that has been made by Canon with their cameras in the last 2 years, I can TOTALLY see why you'd extrapolate that in 2 more years, they'd be obsoleting the current crop.  They just released... what, like the 5th consumer camera in a row using almost exactly the same body as the last 4 and pretty much the same sensor as the 7D had when it was released in 2009?  Their least expensive raw-capable video camera is in the 5 digits price range now and 2 years ago, it was in the... 5 digits range.  Every camera being released by a major vendor now is still using some form of h.264/avchd/mp4 video, the same as 2 years ago.  Canon's already mentioned how many new camera bodies they're releasing in 2014.  It's not a large number.  So...  whose cameras, exactly, do you think are going to unseat the major vendors?  Black Magic are small and feature-poor still.  Digital Bolex finally shipped something, but their longer-term prospects seem iffy at best.

Quote from: Midphase on March 06, 2014, 10:04:12 AM
I appreciate your time and passion, I really do; and I sincerely hope that my posts aren't coming across as too snarky or negative...because in truth if we could hang and discuss this over a couple of drinks I'm sure we'd come to like one another!  8)

Sure.  I'm sure the developers would love to sit down for drinks with some whiny Internet user who rants at length about everything he thinks they're doing wrong and how difficult he finds their software.  Who wouldn't want that?

1%

QuoteBut the reality of the situation is that ML exists on borrowed time and in about two years' time nobody will want to shoot video on DSLR's

I'm more in line with the thinking that you'll be able to rent or even buy something that shoots 4K, albeit in 4:2:2 H264/etc. Rather than deal with the huge file size and complicated workflow people can just go for that option. So a production with the extra hassle of a DSLR raw might not be so enticing and the compressed won't compare. There are always the interchangeable lenses and the tool that you have is better than the one you don't.

Oh and well the whole photography thing.


Midphase

Quote from: 1% on March 19, 2014, 05:34:36 AM
I'm more in line with the thinking that you'll be able to rent or even buy something that shoots 4K, albeit in 4:2:2 H264/etc. Rather than deal with the huge file size and complicated workflow people can just go for that option. So a production with the extra hassle of a DSLR raw might not be so enticing and the compressed won't compare. There are always the interchangeable lenses and the tool that you have is better than the one you don't.

Oh and well the whole photography thing.

I agree, but just to clarify I was strictly speaking about production uses. My point of view is from someone who shoots and works on film productions for a living and what I'm seeing is a huge interest in raw video capture coming from both production and post production sides. Most of the color houses in town don't want to deal with compressed footage anymore. The hardware and storage are up to speed to where they need to be. Oh, and 4K is here to stay.

My point is that DSLR shooting for professional production arose as a bit of a fluke with the 5D2, it's had a useful lifespan; but ultimately it was a workaround for the lack of better (or at least affordable) capture hardware. Blackmagic has broken the price barrier for a sub $5k super-35 camera capable of producing 4K footage. It's not perfect, but it has a strong post production pipeline that is just going to keep getting better. NAB is a couple of weeks away and I'm sure some major announcements will be made from Blackmagic and other manufacturers. Interacting with several professionals it's clear that the writing is on the wall as far as DSLRs for film production is concerned. This is neither good nor bad, it's just the natural progression and evolution of technology.

1%

There is also the matter of nobody knowing DSLRs shoot raw or thinking its 5DIII only. But then eyes glaze over from the C100 and its digitally pushed ISO 80k. The premiere CC neutering isn't helping things either, don't know how good support is in FCP. The price barrier for raw is actually pretty low now, a 50D is much cheaper than BMCC. As a primary camera though DSLRs are pretty sketchy in a larger production.

Midphase

Yeah. Well, for me the 5D3 has been the one camera that could be fit for production. Recent developments with MLRawViewer and another product that I'm not quite at liberty to talk about; coupled with the Blackmagic's 4K's lackluster low-light performance could breathe new life into if for pro uses. As a matter of fact tomorrow I'm the ML raw consultant/DIT on a music video that's being shot on the 5D3 with ML raw (nighttime shoot, low light setups).

Just yesterday I was discussing with someone in the industry how cool it would be if ML could be ported to the 1Dx or the C100 (the C100 in particular would be very appealing since many DP's prefer its ergonomics and stronger production features).

1%

I've seen some kick ass 50D/7D stuff on here and they are sub $1000. They easily do anamorphic 2k. People that already have 5DIIs can get new use out of them too. ML-raw does lower the cost of entry quite a bit if people actually knew about it. 1Dx/C100/etc are all in a similar price range, 5DIII and BM are slightly cheaper only.

Renting red or arri is what? $700-1000 a day? If you have a budget and already paying for a union crew + just want to get done....


Midphase

Anamorphic isn't really a good solution since these cameras can't be adapted to PL mount lenses (it's probably ok anyway, anamorphic cinema lenses like the Angenieux line can easily cost or rent as much as an Alexa per day or more). I had high hopes for anamorphic shooting, but ultimately I had to give up due to far too many impractical issues (particularly when done with projection lenses).

I mentioned before that part of the problem with ML raw (particularly on the 5D3 which yields a full HD resolution with low moire, high sensor ISO, and robust media) is that it's a little too good. What I mean is that the quality really is remarkable and it puts it in the class of productions that originally made the 5D2 shooting so attractive (i.e. independent features with not quite enough budget to afford a $20k or more camera rental package). It also makes it a very attractive b-camera on higher end productions, and certainly a good camera to be mounted in tight spaces or in situations where the camera might be disposable (i.e. dropping it off a building).

There are undoubtedly many impressive videos out there done even with low end ML raw cameras. But there is a big difference between a leisure/week-end warrior shoot and a pro or semi-pro shoot. I think ML raw is so close, if the post pipeline was only stronger (similar to the way RED did it...I know I know, billion dollar company...I know). This lack of an efficient post pipeline is IMHO the reason why industry magazines and higher visibility cinematographers like Phil Bloom and Shane Hurlbut haven't embraced this remarkable tool.

To paraphrase Marlon Brando "It coulda been a contender."    ;D

g3gg0

Quote from: Midphase on March 19, 2014, 08:19:34 PMI think ML raw is so close, if the post pipeline was only stronger (similar to the way RED did it...I know I know, billion dollar company...I know). This lack of an efficient post pipeline is IMHO the reason why industry magazines and higher visibility cinematographers like Phil Bloom and Shane Hurlbut haven't embraced this remarkable tool.

then dont talk about what is missing, but take a development environment and put the missing pieces into the puzzle.
Help us with datasheets - Help us with register dumps
magic lantern: 1Magic9991E1eWbGvrsx186GovYCXFbppY, server expenses: [email protected]
ONLY donate for things we have done, not for things you expect!

1%

QuoteBut there is a big difference between a leisure/week-end warrior shoot and a pro or semi-pro shoot.

Yep... but not everyone who shot with the other CF cams was a weekend warrior as you imply. There were and are people using DSLRs even in H264 to crank things out and getting paid. 5DIII isn't the be-all end all. Who would chose a $4k camera to destroy when they can just wreck a $400 50D... both do 1080P.

Quoteif the post pipeline was only stronger

This is the time for the community to shine too. I can see not everyone being into camera fw hacking but I'm sure there are quite a few coders who can do windows/mac and image manipulation. Its a fairly different skill set. Red had to fix the workflow or they wouldn't sell cameras. Here you already have people who bought the hardware and are just getting a very nice extra for free.

Midphase

Quote from: 1% on March 19, 2014, 08:56:29 PM
This is the time for the community to shine too. I can see not everyone being into camera fw hacking but I'm sure there are quite a few coders who can do windows/mac and image manipulation. Its a fairly different skill set.

Agreed, that's why I see promise with tools like MLRawViewer and the other aforementioned app that I shouldn't discuss.


Kharak

MLRawViewer is the biggest step since RAW.

Being on shoots and not being able to watch the footage was embarrassing and a great cause of concern.

The post process is hard, but thats the price we pay for the quality of RAW. In the long run, if post process will not be improved, I don't see that too many people will be using it on semi-pro/pro shoots in the future.

I think Midphase has pointed out a couple of steps that are missing. And I see some "hate" against Midphase for pointing this out. But for real world work, there are steps missing for Magic Lantern to be accepted shoots other than weekend warriors as he points out so well.

At the moment its something that needs to be thoroughly convinced to people.

my 5 cents.

ps.

I love ML dont hate.
once you go raw you never go back


Audionut

There is no hate, simply a misunderstanding of the expectations of the developers of the Magic Lantern codebase.

As a user, it is significantly easier just to ask for stuff.  When the response is not one which is expected, continued persistence is not conductive.

g3gg0

Quote from: Kharak on March 21, 2014, 04:45:32 PM
I think Midphase has pointed out a couple of steps that are missing. And I see some "hate" against Midphase for pointing this out. But for real world work, there are steps missing for Magic Lantern to be accepted shoots other than weekend warriors as he points out so well.

thats not hate or anything related.

situation:
- things are not ideal for use case X

A:
- a person shows up and asks provocatively "is that all?"

B:
- a person shows up and explains:
   * his/her situation
   * the workflow he/she has
   * realistic things to improve on that workflow


pick your favorite.
Help us with datasheets - Help us with register dumps
magic lantern: 1Magic9991E1eWbGvrsx186GovYCXFbppY, server expenses: [email protected]
ONLY donate for things we have done, not for things you expect!

Midphase

g3ggo...if you're interested in having an adult conversation about this, PM me and I can go into as much detail as you want.

Kharak

@g3gg0

Perhaps the word "hate" was ill chosen.

And I'd choose (B) ofcourse, who wouldn't. The thread has gone off-topic in many directions from its original post (including this one), but the later posts have also raised some fundamental questions, in my opinion.

I do also think the name of the thread is a bit provocative even though he clearly states at the top of his post, that it's not meant to be.



Edited after post below: Look what I found. http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=7486.0
once you go raw you never go back

Midphase

Thank you Kharak.

My original question was really made in an effort to figure out what I am missing out on by not moving over to .mlv from .raw considering the fact that:

1. Writing .mlv files seems to yield worse performance in camera than .raw

2. The conversion tools to CDNG were at the time non-existent (amazing what a few weeks difference made thanks to MLRawViewer and the "other" app).

3. The metadata saved with .mlv files doesn't seem to improve the post production workflow since Resolve, Premiere or FCP don't appear to make any use of it.


But yeah...it did branch out.

g3gg0

i would prefer it the other way:
-> have the adult discussion in public forum and the childish ones per PM.

Quote from: Midphase on March 22, 2014, 06:37:53 AM
2. The conversion tools to CDNG were at the time non-existent (amazing what a few weeks difference made thanks to MLRawViewer and the "other" app).

thats why everything is tagged as "EXPERIMENTAL" and "UNDER DEVELOPMENT"
Help us with datasheets - Help us with register dumps
magic lantern: 1Magic9991E1eWbGvrsx186GovYCXFbppY, server expenses: [email protected]
ONLY donate for things we have done, not for things you expect!