Author Topic: Magic Lantern RAW - Bad quality  (Read 6967 times)

Magiclanterner

  • New to the forum
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Magic Lantern RAW - Bad quality
« on: March 20, 2015, 02:18:51 PM »
Hi everyone
I apologize in advance if I did not express myself well because I am french.


It's been that I have a problem when I shoot in RAW with Magic Lantern installed on my Canon EOS M. My lens is the 18-55 kit.
The thing is that the quality is just as good as horrible if I was filming in 480p in H.264.
The dynamic range is good but not the quality. My images are pixelated, jagged.
I record in 1728x692 in a 2.50:1 aspect ratio.
Yet my workflow is good I converted to DNG with raw2cdng, I open DNG in Adobe Camera RAW I only do color correction, but not color grading and I apply the profile VisionLOG for more dynamic range.
I save the images in TIFF 16 bpc and I open them in After Effects.
I Denoise the footage with Magic Bullet Denoiser, adding an unsharp mask and then I apply the LUT VisionLOG to Rec709 and then i color grade my footage in Magic Bullet Looks.
After I save the project and open it in Adobe Media Encoder, and render it.
I also have a lot of chroma subsampling even with the corrections of the lens enabled in Adobe Camera RAW.
Here is a picture of the quality once render :




This post is long but I try to describe my problem in the best and hope you can help me.
Thanks
Magiclanterner

Walter Schulz

  • Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7577
Re: Magic Lantern RAW - Bad quality
« Reply #1 on: March 20, 2015, 02:23:10 PM »
Upload this frame's untouched DNG and link it here.
And tell your raw2cdng settings.

EDIT: And you will always have bad aliasing artefacts OOC when using uncropped mode without additional anti-aliasing filter (VAF).

Magiclanterner

  • New to the forum
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: Magic Lantern RAW - Bad quality
« Reply #2 on: March 20, 2015, 03:01:15 PM »
Thank you for responding so quickly Walter !!
Here is the DNG frame untouched:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/gyk6ivk90tbys0z/000001.dng?dl=0

I don't know my raw2cndg settings I just use a version apparently for the Canon 650D and M to remove the pink dots.

Thanks
Magiclanterner

N/A

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 576
  • Dreaming in 14 bit
Re: Magic Lantern RAW - Bad quality
« Reply #3 on: March 20, 2015, 03:04:27 PM »
Looks like a combination of chromatic aberration and soft detail from the kit lens with insufficient post-processing. Shoot mlv instead of raw so ACR has more metadata to work with, and try only applying basic edits in ACR (WB, Exposure and lens correction for all that CA). Import the cdng's straight into After Effects as a Camera Raw sequence, no reason to convert to tiff. And try doing your denoise/unsharp very last ;)
7D. 600D. Rokinon 35 cine. Sigma 30 1.4
Audio and video recording/production, Random Photography
Want to help with the latest development but don't know how to compile?

Magiclanterner

  • New to the forum
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: Magic Lantern RAW - Bad quality
« Reply #4 on: March 20, 2015, 03:08:08 PM »
Thank you for your reply I try immediately

Magiclanterner

N/A

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 576
  • Dreaming in 14 bit
Re: Magic Lantern RAW - Bad quality
« Reply #5 on: March 20, 2015, 03:32:47 PM »
Ahh I see, you're shooting in 50 or 60 fps, right? Try 25 or 30 fps mode, I'm not familiar with EOS M but that should give you a raw file that doesn't need to be stretched.
7D. 600D. Rokinon 35 cine. Sigma 30 1.4
Audio and video recording/production, Random Photography
Want to help with the latest development but don't know how to compile?

rbrune

  • Contributor
  • Freshman
  • *****
  • Posts: 64
Re: Magic Lantern RAW - Bad quality
« Reply #6 on: March 20, 2015, 04:21:44 PM »
On EOS-M only the magic zoom/crop mode gives raw that doesn't need to be streched - even the 1080p modes. Also recording 60/50fps raw doesn't work.

Magiclanterner

  • New to the forum
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: Magic Lantern RAW - Bad quality
« Reply #7 on: March 20, 2015, 05:25:09 PM »
It's really weird because people filming with the same camera as me and get to have an incredible quality without moire, aliasing and other problems and I do not think it comes as the lens I use.
The video :
Magiclanterner

Walter Schulz

  • Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7577
Re: Magic Lantern RAW - Bad quality
« Reply #8 on: March 20, 2015, 05:29:21 PM »
You missed a critical point: Crop vs. non-crop. Try crop mode using the same background and compare.

Magiclanterner

  • New to the forum
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: Magic Lantern RAW - Bad quality
« Reply #9 on: March 20, 2015, 05:35:55 PM »
Yes when I crop the quality is just amazing.
I never understood why the crop gives image without moire or aliasing.

Magiclanterner

Walter Schulz

  • Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7577
Re: Magic Lantern RAW - Bad quality
« Reply #10 on: March 20, 2015, 05:56:38 PM »
Non-crop mode on all cams supported by ML (but 5D3) will use line skipping. Only every third line is recorded. See the wires and the roof turning into some kind of stairway? That's why. But it uses the whole sensor area (about 22.3x14.9 mm) as frame.
And crop mode "zooms in" and uses a smaller frame inside your sensor. But this frame is using every single line without skipping anything inside the frame).

That's the short version.

rbrune

  • Contributor
  • Freshman
  • *****
  • Posts: 64
Re: Magic Lantern RAW - Bad quality
« Reply #11 on: March 21, 2015, 08:57:53 PM »
Actually with the EOS-M in raw non-crop mode it only records a vertically squeezed image due to 3x5 line skipping e.g. it records every 3rd column but only every 5th row and such the image has to be unsqueezed by 5/3=1.666 to get the correct ratio again.

chmee

  • Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1031
  • raw2cdng
Re: Magic Lantern RAW - Bad quality
« Reply #12 on: March 21, 2015, 10:19:58 PM »
addendum to @walter_schulz
if you use non-cropped modes, you use the lineskipping and/or bining of the internal system, its nearly the same as you re using mv/h264 recording but with more latitude/bitdepth, without compression and the internal "optimizing".

regards chmee