cr2hdr "Permission Denied" / HDR Wokflow

Started by MadScience, December 07, 2014, 03:57:34 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

MadScience

Hello. First of all, I'm a giant noob, so sorry about that.

I'm trying to successfully render a RAW HDR video I just shot with ML on the 5D3.

I have used raw2dng on the RAW video to separate the frames into dng files. If I just press Ctrl+A and select all the dng files and try to drag those onto cr2hdr, it says the path is too long and won't let me do it. I tried to drag the folder containing the DNG files onto cr2hdr, and it looks like it wants to work, but I get the following "Permission Denied" error.



On Windows 7 obviously.. 64 bit.

I have gone into the properties of the parent folder of cr2hdr.exe as well as all of the .exe files involved, and set all of their permissions to "Run As Administrator" for all users, and still permission is denied. Any ideas?

I'm pursuing this route because it seems easy enough, but am just looking for a way in general to get my dual iso dng files converted to HDR, so I'm open to any and all suggestions as to how people are currently doing so.

Danne

Are you selecting HDR or dual iso in magic lantern menu? They are two different things.
Conversion can also be made with the lightroom plugin from a developer Kitchehof. If you are using mlv you can use dmilligan MLVFS application. Search the apps here in the forum.

MadScience

I'm selecting RAW video + HDR Video. Made sense to me since I want to shoot a RAW HDR video. The screen strobes during recording and you end up with a RAW file. Just to clarify, I have converted the video frames from that video to dng and I can see the alternating isos. Now I just want to finish the job. So, any other ideas on how to do that? Like I said, I'm a noob, so the more detailed you can be, the better.

So what is the difference between HDR video and Dual iso then?

And while we're at it, is there any compression/loss of quality when recording raw video to MLV?

If not, then what are the benefits/downside of using the MLV function?

DeafEyeJedi

I would rather shoot Dual-ISO over HDR only because the workflow in post is easier and I want to be able to use fast motion objects whereas HDR doesn't cut it.

MUCH EASIER by a mile...

Do some research on these links please...

DUSL-ISO
http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/?topic=7139.0

HDR-Batch
http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=11486.0


5D3.113 | 5D3.123 | EOSM.203 | 7D.203 | 70D.112 | 100D.101 | EOSM2.* | 50D.109

dmilligan

Quote from: MadScience on December 08, 2014, 03:25:18 AM
So what is the difference between HDR video and Dual iso then?
HDR alternates ISOs from one frame to another, so you have to record at double the frame rate and then merge every two frames together. It's almost impossible to record any sort of motion like this (because you're going to have all kinds of weird ghosting and motion artifacts). There also aren't really any good workflows for HDR RAW video, because nobody really uses it (cr2hdr is not for HDR video) because Dual ISO gives far superior results.

Dual ISO alternates ISOs line by line within a single frame (interlacing). So each frame contains both ISOs. cr2hdr is for reconstructing an HDR image from this interlaced data. This method is much better for motion (there aren't really any additional motion artifacts over standard issues you're going to have like rolling shutter). The main tradeoff is reduced effective resolution in the shadows and highlights, and some additional aliasing effects (for this reason, it's a good idea to only use Dual ISO for video in crop mode).

Quote from: MadScience on December 08, 2014, 03:25:18 AM
And while we're at it, is there any compression/loss of quality when recording raw video to MLV?
No. MLV actually has more data (it's only metadata, the image data is exactly the same).

Quote from: MadScience on December 08, 2014, 03:25:18 AM
If not, then what are the benefits/downside of using the MLV function?
Pros: more robust file format, audio recording, metadata, spanning (record to SD and CF at same time if you have a cam with both)
Cons: in some rare situations RAW format gives slightly better performance over ML

IMO there's no reason to use RAW over MLV

DeafEyeJedi

I second that @dmilligan -- MLV Dual-ISO in 3x crop mode is remarkably beautiful!

Right, @Danne?

:D
5D3.113 | 5D3.123 | EOSM.203 | 7D.203 | 70D.112 | 100D.101 | EOSM2.* | 50D.109

Danne

Of course :).
Actually 3x mode is probably the only reason to why raw could be the stronger contestant over mlv. You get about one extra push on aspect ratio. The same probably goes for slowmo.
But! Mlv for regular full hd with metadata and audio is the given choice any day. Personally I don, t mind the existence of both formats as they fullfill different needs entirely.

DeafEyeJedi

@Danne -- Well said, agreed and exactly the reason why I don't mind swinging back and forth 1.1.3 & 1.2.3 To get the slow-mo, for the most part because you'll need to use Macboot to make card bootable if I were to go back to 1.1.3 from 1.2.3 as oppose to going from 1.1.3 to 1.2.3 which can easily be done w obviously two different SD cards w separate firmwares and not need the use of my MBP.

Perhaps one day I'll prolly find myself a 2nd body in order to install each one with different firmwares...

Now only if Santa was real -- HA!
5D3.113 | 5D3.123 | EOSM.203 | 7D.203 | 70D.112 | 100D.101 | EOSM2.* | 50D.109