crop_rec on steroids: 3K, 4K, 1080p48, full-resolution LiveView

[Dmytro_ua]

Is there a build with 60+ FPS somewhere ?
Some GoPro camera clones, record up to 120FPS at 720p and its awesome.
I wish I had this option on ML

It's up to Canon, not ML

[swacklovesu]

Happy Holidays all! Is there any chance someone may have the copy of the August252020 Dannes' build here for download? I am trying to get a hold of it and I can't seem to locate the file. Any assisstance is appreciated. Thank you thank you!

[Danne]

In this thread it's possible to find builds and ask questions: https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=23041.msg233207;topicseen#msg233207

Recommended to use latest builds.

[ariaelf]

I am using the latest 1.2.3 experimental build for 3.5k / compression. When I select record indicator (REC Indicator) and select “remaining time” it is still showing elapsed time I believe. Is there a way to get an estimate on remaining  card?

I haven't been able to find any way to show "remaining time" on the 5Dmk3 with the latest 1.2.3 build. Nor "elapsed time".

Back when I was using ML on the 7D it didn't work then either. I thought a few years after others have requested this simple feature multiple times surely it would be implemented, but no such luck?

No matter which setting is selected under the "REC indicator" in the Movie menu, it doesn't work.

"Elapsed time" and "Remaining time" don't show either of those things.

"Avg Bitrate" and "Instant Bitrate" also don't seem to have any effect.

The bitrate (which is far less practically useful to creators) appears to be the only possible default option with the recording indicator. Whether it's "instant" or "average" I can not say. Maybe someone would like to see this in a debug mode for troubleshooting, but as long as the card status is "green" while recording, as a film maker I don't need the bitrate taking up my screen real estate. But I definitely need to know how much (approximately) recording time is left on the card, before messing up a critical long take because the card ran out of room.

The only indicator available is total GB used on the card, in the upper righthand corner BUT it DOES NOT UPDATE unless the whole camera is rebooted. This is very problematic for film work.

"Time Remaining on Card" feature has been requested multiple times, going back to 2013. Is there some reason why "time remaining" presents a particular challenge for the ML team, or do the developers just not realize how important this is for indie film makers, and therefore it hasn't been a priority?

My cast is ready to strangle me with how many times I've had to say "....OOPS, CARD RAN OUT..."  in the middle of a great take. It's very demoralizing to performers to have equipment failures get in the way of performances.

That said, I don't want to sound like I'm complaining. As a tiny no-budget indie film producer, I don't take what you've done for us lightly. We are beyond grateful for all the work you've put into ML - and I hope this feedback is helpful in making ML even more amazing for the creators it was designed to empower.

Cheers to you all,

~Aria

[Walter Schulz]

That's the kind of post making devs think about dropping out from the project

[wib]

It's more complicated than that. It all depends on what resolution, what bit, if raw or h264... with or without sound... all of that use different amount of space. It's not possible to quantify it as in "time".

Plus ML is based on pushing the limits of memory writing.

For example with experience I know more or less that 30 sec of 3.5K in 14 bits loss less is about 1GB.

You have to think in "space available "not in "time" and simply buy more stock of cards... I have 3 CF (2x64 GB and 128 go) and a 128 GB SD for card split record.

[masc]

@Walter Schulz: correct. And there are not many left.
@ariaelf: to what devs do you write? Nobody is working on these parts of ML since a longer time. But you could be the one... surely you can implement "this simple feature" soon.
And if it is so problematic: you should use something else for production work.

[Grognard]

"The only indicator available is total GB used on the card, in the upper righthand corner BUT it DOES NOT UPDATE unless the whole camera is rebooted.This is very problematic for film work."

Buy a larger size CF and reboot the camera to check remaning free GB when you suspect almost full card.

[ariaelf]

I am surprised at the extremely cranky replies given that my last paragraph was nothing but praise for ML and the hard work of the development team.

@masc I am offering feedback from the front lines - this is essential to creating anything great. If you can't handle honest feedback from actual users, then don't make anything.

Telling me to do it myself is childish. I am an indie artist, not a programmer.

ML was designed to empower "no-budget" artists and creators just like myself who are getting started, and don't have the $$$ for high end professional film cameras. The beauty of ML was that it can do so much of what far more expensive cameras can do, while costing nothing. But this is one of those critical features that makes it highly impractical for production work.

Wouldn't it be better to fix it, so that creators COULD use it on their productions without driving everyone crazy?

If I had to do it over again, maybe I would have gone a different route, but switching cameras and workflows mid-production isn't really an option either. When I started, I had no idea the features which were LISTED IN THE MENU simply didn't work!

Why list them as features in the recording indicator menu if they don't exist or are impossible to implement? ML should be transparent about what it can and can not do. You have no idea how many hours of my life I have wasted searching these forums for an answer as to why the listed features didn't work, and wondering if I was the only one with this problem.

[Walter Schulz]

ML was created by Trammel Hudson because he was unpleased with his 5D2's options.

Now be quiet, troll!

[ariaelf]

That's the kind of post making devs think about dropping out from the project

If my respectful, honest feedback about a broken, miss-advertised feature which included heaps of praise and appreciation makes devs want to quit, then they probably should find something else to do.

Why list something as a feature if it doesn't work? I spent countless hours looking for information and answers on these forums, wondering if I somehow had the wrong settings or a bad build... Everytime the exact same question came up by a user on these forums, it was ignored and skipped over. Shame on you guys... just remove the non-existent feature from the menu, and be honest that it doesn't exist instead of explaining how something works in the help documents which in actual fact does NOT work for anyone! What is the point of pretending it's "a thing" if it isn't??

[Walter Schulz]

And a second one for the twit filter.

[Danne]

@masc I am offering feedback from the front lines - this is essential to creating anything great.

Where´s your portfolio? Please share all your work for us to see.

Rest assure that if something was easy work it would have been in the ml builds already. Even if it´s hard work it would be.

Also:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

[ariaelf]

It's more complicated than that. It all depends on what resolution, what bit, if raw or h264... with or without sound... all of that use different amount of space. It's not possible to quantify it as in "time".

Yes, I understand that it would be very difficult to make it exact, but users have been asking for even a rough ballpark (plus or minus a minute would be totally fine for my workflow) since 2014.

I know that a 64G card will hold roughly 12 minutes of footage for me. Just having a simple time counter on the display keep track of how many minutes/seconds of actual recorded takes on the camera so far would be a game-changer. Instead I see how many seconds long each individual take is while it's recording, but then the information disappears. I'm asking for those numbers to be added together and a running total be visible for the user.

There is a lot that happens between takes and it's impossible for me to try to keep track in my head whether 30 short takes in we're close to the limit of the card or not, whether the recording was accidentally left to run after saying "cut" or whatever. No one is going to stand there with a stopwatch to keep track of how many minutes and seconds have added up between each "action" and "cut" so that we don't screw up a sequence when the card finally runs out.

Therefore a ballpark timer of live recording time elapsed on the ML menu would be extremely helpful, so that takes aren't potentially ruined when the card is near capacity.


If no one wants to work on this, or it's for some reason impossibly difficult, at the very least, remove everything in the recording indicator menu and the help documents that doesn't actually exist as a real feature, so creators are not mislead about what ML can actually do. "Elapsed time" "Remaining Time" flat out don't work, but instead of admitting that fact, I'm being called "a troll" by devs.

There's no excuse for this. Grow up. Be honest. Fix mistakes. Listen to users. Move forward. ML was an amazing community when I first started using it, it's sad to see this is the current state of affairs.

[ariaelf]

Where´s your portfolio? Please share all your work for us to see.

Rest assure that if something was easy work it would have been in the ml builds already. Even if it´s hard work it would be.

Also:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

I'm perfectly happy to share my work, but it would be off topic in this thread.

We've done incredible things in spite of the limitations of hacked ML cameras, learned lots along the way, and no doubt captured an image quality that would have been impossible without it. Do I need to restate this every time for the delicate egos? I had no idea that respectfully pointing out a critical flaw would cause such a defensive, emotional backlash from the team. This isn't personal. It's rational feedback from a film maker. Chill.

Yes, I understand it "isn't easy". So then remove the fake feature from the menu and stop pretending it exists when it never has. Or is that also impossible to implement??

[Danne]

What fake? It works for H.264.
The way you describe and command your selfish wishes related to your work has nothing to do with what is going on here. Even if that is your strong belief.
Open source initiatives here going on for years with nothing expected in return but maybe respect and some gratitude. Please read the link I provided. It explains most, if not all, what to expect in return.
And no thanks. No pm. Create a forum post and present your work there. I´d rather look at indie "greatness" than troll around.

Edit: Also consider taking the time to "clean" up all inappropriate info you can find by testing each and every feature systematically. Write down your findings and create a list of changes you would suggest for the community. This would be nice and effective user feedback probably useful for a lot of users. This place is in need of users digging in more actively.

[ariaelf]

Broken features have nothing to do with "my work", or it's relative "greatness" either way. And unlike straight answers to users questions about the remaining time and elapsed time functions, my work is easy enough to find online with a simple search.

Fact are facts. If you can't bear to hear rational feedback, without ranting and raving about supposed lack of "appreciation," and trying desperately to bully the messenger, that's your problem.

No one is getting ML to record in H.264. The "elapsed time" and "remaining time" recording indicator feature is broken for RAW video recording and should be clearly listed as such in the help files, and removed from the menu when RAW video is "ON".

Those who ask questions on the forums about why these features aren't working in RAW mode should be given a straight answer, instead of being dismissed or ignored. At least now they can find my comments on the matter, and not waste as many hours as I did wondering why selecting "elapsed time" or "remaining time" did absolutely nothing, searching through these forms for non-existent answers, reading help documents, trying different builds, etc.

And I think you've made it very clear to everyone how end users are treated here.

[Danne]

...my work is easy enough to find online with a simple search.

Code is to be found with a simple search. That´s also a fact.

[a1ex]

Aria,

The issue here wasn't with the feedback you provided. That was actually welcome - reporting bugs properly is something that actually helps - especially considering that those who write the code might not be using it for filmmaking, so they might not have ran into your issue. (I, for one, record H.264 for my own needs - and that happens like 2 or 3 times per year).

The issue was with your expectations: you seem to think we somehow have a duty to fix what's not working for you. That is, the part about demanding that we should do something about it - whether it's removing a menu item, or fixing the feature, or whatever. That's unreasonable in an open source community, and no amount of praise would change that.

Here's a long answer:

https://mikemcquaid.com/2018/03/19/open-source-maintainers-owe-you-nothing/

- The way the software is today is all that the maintainers ever agree to provide you (bugs and all)
- The maintainers provide no assurances that the software will ever work for any user or use case (even documented ones)
- The maintainers are never liable for any problems caused by any use of the software (including damages that require you to pay for repairs)
- You must agree with the above to have any right to use the software

Open source initiatives here going on for years with nothing expected in return but maybe respect and some gratitude.

Exactly this - here's an even longer answer:

https://snarky.ca/setting-expectations-for-open-source-participation/

Everything in open source should be a series of kindnesses

To reiterate, just because open source software is free for you doesn't mean someone else hasn't paid some price on your behalf to get you that code.

Since open source is paid for by others in effort and time, that would suggest that there really shouldn't be any expectations on your part from what you get out of an open source project that you choose to use. You could view everything in OSS as a kindness that someone has done for you and others. Putting things into that perspective takes away the feeling of expectation and entitlement. This frames open source participation as someone doing something nice for the community and project, as someone having done a kindness for you.

As soon as you start demanding or expecting something from open source you have stopped viewing it as it was intended, and that distortion can be poisonous. When I choose to donate my precious time to open source I do it voluntarily as a nice thing that I enjoy doing. I didn't do it because someone demanded it of me, and the instant I feel that my time is not appropriately appreciated as the gift that it is, I stop enjoying doing open source. And when someone stops enjoying their contributions to open source, they burn out and quit.

Taking the altruistic view of open source keeps things grounded and healthy. Viewing open source as a kindness someone else has done for you gives the appropriate perspective that this is something nice and no one has any expectations from it. It's like when I hold the door open for someone. Ultimately I don't expect anything in return (although a "thanks" is always appreciated). And the person passing through the door doesn't expect anything else from me either. But when someone in open source makes demands it's like the person passing through the door criticizing how I held the door open. It's pointless and simply leads to people no longer being willing to hold open doors for others.

To reiterate, you should view open source as a series of kind acts people have done altruistically. That means you cannot make any demands or hold any expectations of an open source project. Or as Evan Czaplicki, the creator of Elm, put it, "Remember that people do free work because it is fun, not to get stressed by strangers".

BTW, you've actually received useful feedback on what you - as a non-programmer - can do to help the project:

Edit: Also consider taking the time to "clean" up all inappropriate info you can find by testing each and every feature systematically. Write down your findings and create a list of changes you would suggest for the community. This would be nice and effective user feedback probably useful for a lot of users. This place is in need of users digging in more actively.

And you actually did, to a small extent - and I appreciate that. Lack of good feedback over what works and what not, has been a problem here for years. But it should have been done without demanding that we should do something about it. From the same article:

And this extends to bug reports and feature requests. It's a kindness when you report a bug so that I have a chance to try and fix it. But just because you reported a bug doesn't mean I specifically owe you anything. I should try to thank you, but there is no contract here that says I have to address your bug or feature request. My kindness was to provide my time and effort for the open source project up until now, but there's no expectation beyond that of my time and effort. Open source really should be viewed as self-service unless I choose to help further. If something doesn't work for you then you are free to take the code and modify it to meet your needs; that's a key tenet of open source. So the idea that any open source project owes anyone anything is a misunderstanding of what open source fundamentally is.

Hopefully the above makes it clear where the backlash comes from. Also, you may want to review our older ML's Goal thread - which feels surprisingly up to date, even if it's from 2013 - and this particular piece as well.

However, I do agree the community could have handled it a lot better, rather than starting with a dismissive answer, without any context. Hr, hr

A small bit of history: yes, there are some features that were written before raw video was even imagined in our community. Some of them still work with raw video, others don't. Somewhere in 2014, I've actually started to disable the menu features that are not compatible with raw video (menu-raw-yuv-features) - but for some reason, the changes weren't well received by the reviewers at that time (one of them even commented that I'm trying to "dumb down" the user interface - yes, I remember these words very clearly even today). So, it quickly went to the back burner, and since I wasn't hitting this particular issue during my regular use of the camera, it hasn't been a priority - for me. YMMV.

I am also well aware of card free space not updating on its own, at least on some camera models. I know Canon firmware has some way to update it (iirc, if you open the Format dialog), but currently I have no idea how to call or trigger this procedure. One might be able to reproduce the issue in QEMU and figure out how to trigger the free space update from there, but... it does require programming skills and time for research - code doesn't grow on trees.

[nomadfilm]

Hi All,

Very basic question here.  I've scoured the forum and I might have just missed it.  I'm looking to move from magic lantern nightly 2018 Jul03 build to crop_rec_4K (5D31.1.3).  The information that I seem to have found suggests that I simply copy and replace the crop_rec_4K ML folder, autoexec.bin and MLsetup.fir onto the SD card.  Is that correct?  If anyone could point me in the direction of a post or resource that would explain the process I would be very grateful.  Many thanks and apologies for the beginner question.

[wib]

Hi All,

Very basic question here.  I've scoured the forum and I might have just missed it.  I'm looking to move from magic lantern nightly 2018 Jul03 build to crop_rec_4K (5D31.1.3).  The information that I seem to have found suggests that I simply copy and replace the crop_rec_4K ML folder, autoexec.bin and MLsetup.fir onto the SD card.  Is that correct?  If anyone could point me in the direction of a post or resource that would explain the process I would be very grateful.  Many thanks and apologies for the beginner question.

yes totally, just take the new files and delete what was in your card. you will probably have to adjust the settings again, according to you taste, as the pref file will be new too.

[nomadfilm]

Thanks you so much!  I assume that the same applies to all of Danne’s 4K build, right?  Again, greatly appreciate the response.

[michaelfilm]

Hello everyone!
I have been filming for many years - also professionally, exclusively with Magic Lantern.
I am extremely grateful to the whole team here!!!
I have a question about a small problem and maybe someone can help me.
(Since I'm not English-speaking (deepL) there's a good chance that the question has already been covered enough
 - however, I can't find it.)

I am filming with
5dmk3
1.1.3
crop rec 4k Build 2018-07-22 13:09
mostly 3072x1320 crop (5x) or FF-HD
12Bit losless

The thing: When I filmFF-HD in 12Bit losless it comes to "vagabond" pixel errors at prominent - edgy spots that look like digital fireflies:)
If I use 14 Bit or 14Bit Losless instead (with FF-HD) then I have the problem that the ColorScience tilts clearly to reddish from ISO 800...

In short: Which setting (or build) is best for a clean FF HD shot.
Although 12 bit losless is a bit coarser from the noise, I prefer the sunnier, fresher tint and it would be my choice....

I hope I'm not getting on anyone's nerves - maybe someone has a hint.
A thousand thanks for the great work here!
Volker Schmidt

https://vimeo.com/user10183773

[Bender@arsch]

Try Danne's Build, it is the newest Built and can much much more.

https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=23041.msg216899#msg216899

For example :
- Cardspanning: simultaneously record on CF and SD Card
and SD Card overclocking - writespeed in my Test up to 139mb/s!
- up to 5.7K Anamorphic mode (FF)
- 4K 1x1 (3840x1536)
- 3.5K, AR: nearly 2:1 and possible 5x zoom preview ( without global draw)
... And much more

[far.in.out]

Hi. I'm sorry for such a silly question but is pixel binning real?
I saw a video recently where a guy is talking about how he is shooting RAW full sensor wide with pixel binning on 700D and there is no aliasing. I've been scanning some related threads here but I didn't find a details on how this feature works, on what cameras and on what builds. Could anyone please clarify this?

What are the requirements for this? I see that there is an older crop_rec build and this newer one with 4K. Do they both support pixel binning?
What cameras support this feature and what camera (among the affordable) would be a good option for this? I remember 50D being a great bang for the buck thanks to fast CF write speeds and low price. Is this still the case? Or maybe a newer camera is a better option now? Perhaps some newer Digic features are more important now than card recording speed?
Does pixel binning also work for h264 movies and for HDMI out? Does the preview work OK?

Is it now really possible to have (almost) artifact free full sensor raw video on the cheap?