600D/T3i Raw Video

[neofg]

I shoot Raw with my 8/16 GB SanDisk Ultra 30MB/s...
Nothing more than 3 seconds still at 960*540...
Doing the ML test and results that it write at 8MB/s...
How it's possible?

[Arthor]

This is my first post here, so: Hello everyone
Next: thanks to all the ML team. and respect You are doing great job here...
and now, to the point:
today I attached 37" TV to HDMI output of my 600d. During raw recording it's great for focus.
2013-05-24 build ([600D] Aspect Lock.zip), standard menu video size 640x480/25, sRAW, 960x540/25 (no fps override), hack on.
Found issues:
- additional-crop-rectangle is not in the middle of the screen and I cannot crop correctly. http://youtu.be/I9foDKlUckw
- RAW preview with monitor attached hangs up the camera. Need to remove battery.
And sometimes magenta frames...
But anyway: thanks a lot for your work...

[N/A]

I shoot Raw with my 8/16 GB SanDisk Ultra 30MB/s...
Nothing more than 3 seconds still at 960*540...
Doing the ML test and results that it write at 8MB/s...
How it's possible?

Could be an old card, misadvertised, or your settings may be wrong.

I've updated the first post to include info on cards. I'd say just buy the fastest thing you can possibly find lol, since newer cameras now support UHS speeds.

[N/A]

- additional-crop-rectangle is not in the middle of the screen and I cannot crop correctly. http://youtu.be/I9foDKlUckw
- RAW preview with monitor attached hangs up the camera. Need to remove battery.

Change the crop box by turning on panning mode in raw menu and adjust it accordingly.

Not sure about raw preview, sounds like a bug though.

[CFP]

1) The resulting dng I get are not clean when I open them up in ACR (of Cineform Studio) ie. they have a green "tint" (or red - depends on what program I am opening the dng's with). why is that ? I see the everyone here displays a "regular" picture...

2) in ACR, the file says : 8bit (on the info line). shouldn't it be like 14bit ?

3) in ACR, how do you turn on the thumbnail display (to the left) so one can synchronize all the photos ?

1) At the moment the white balance is just a placeholder. The .raw files have no metadata so raw2dng simply adds fake metadata which results in a wrong white balance. But a1ex is thinking about adding the correct metadata.

2) That's just what ACR suggest you to work with. Simply set it to 16-bit and you'll be fine (If you don't use elements).

3) To synchronize all photos just select all of them and then do the changes. Maybe there's a better way, I don't use ACR but LR.

I shoot Raw with my 8/16 GB SanDisk Ultra 30MB/s...
Nothing more than 3 seconds still at 960*540...
Doing the ML test and results that it write at 8MB/s...
How it's possible?

Your card is simply not as good as advertised by the manufacturer. No real surprise, isn't it? They want to sell these things so they make them look better than they are. A quite cheap SD-card that actually has a write speed of more than 21 Megabyte/s:
- SanDisk Extreme 16 GB SDHC Class 10 UHS-1 45MB/s | Amazon.com

I use that myself and it works fine. The 95 MB/s version is said to be good too but ... you know ... 21 Megabyte/s write speed limit

Just did another RAW vs. H.264 comparison, and this is the biggest difference I've seen between the two yet. Exact same lighting conditions and exact same camera settings, but the RAW version is at least 10x better.

Same settings? So you didn't changed the focal length and simply croped the H.264 to match the raw image? If that's true, your comparison is completely useless. To compare H.264 and raw you have to count in the new crop factor you get with raw video! See here:

Width | Cropfactor | Multiple of H.264 crop

1734 = 1.60 | 1
1280 = 2.17 | 1.36
960 = 2.89 | 1.81
720 = 3.85 | 2.41

So if you shoot a video in 1920 X 1080 H.264 at 55mm and you want to compare it with a 960 X 540 raw video you have to change the focal length to 30mm (55 / 1.81 = 30).

Edit: Damn. No I tried to answer that questions and totally forgot what I wanted to ask

@1%: Since raw is a dead end on the 600D (Even with 8-bit compression we couldn't record higher than 1280 X 720 ), what's about recording YUV 422? Is anybody still working on that for the low speed cameras?

I mean, lv_rec still had the option to record YUV 422 "video". It was just to early to be good ... But now, wouldn't it be a nice to make a yuv_rec module for 600D/550D/60D(/6D)?

[1%]

Has to be investigated, esp lv_save_sndpass size. I wouldnt' say its dead. The 960x540 is about as good as H264.

[neofg]

Your card is simply not as good as advertised by the manufacturer. No real surprise, isn't it? They want to sell these things so they make them look better than they are.

Thanks N/A and CFP.
3 new SanDisk cards, 30MB/s... I thought they're perfect for the job... What a bad purchase. At 8MB/s they aren't even Class 10.
Thanks for the reply.

About the CFP ideas...
Is now possible to shoot H264 video with a 4:3 aspect ratio? I'm asking for this from a lot, but at that time A1ex said it's impossible.
If you shoot with anamorphic lenses in 4:3 and then stretch, you have a 2.35:1 video with the double of pixels...

[Drewton]

I shoot Raw with my 8/16 GB SanDisk Ultra 30MB/s...
Nothing more than 3 seconds still at 960*540...
Doing the ML test and results that it write at 8MB/s...
How it's possible?

Same. Cannot get mine to go over 12 mb/s.

[CFP]

I wouldnt' say its dead.

I'm sorry. I am a little pessimist

But if you have faith that there's still space to improve the feature, I'll believe you

[vicnaum]

@1%: Since raw is a dead end on the 600D (Even with 8-bit compression we couldn't record higher than 1280 X 720 ), what's about recording YUV 422? Is anybody still working on that for the low speed cameras?

I also wouldn't say it's dead. With 8bit we can get a full-sensor 1728x543 with lineskipping. Which then can be stretched to 1728x905, that is just a bit less than 16:9 ratio.

Now it's just that we still have only 14bit, and I'm losing hope that we ever turn it down to 12/10/8...

[CFP]

I have a question: Could you please add a width between 1120 and 960?

Because with an aspect ratio of 2.35:1 these both will give you 1120 X 476 (21.4 Megabyte/s) and 960 X 408 (15.7 Megabyte/s) and that's a big gap between 21.4 and 15.7 Megabyte/s. Especially because 1120 X 476 stops after ~ 1500 frames, even with hacked mode. Something like 1088 X 448 (2.43:1) would be nice. It would need only 19.5 Megabyte/s and it divides by 64 evenly

Or 1088 X 463 for real 2.35:1, if the Y-resolution doesn't matter for write speed. Would that work?

1024 X 436 (17.9 Megabyte/s | 2.35:1 aspect ratio) would be nice too since its X-resolution devides evenly by 64 and 128.

[apefos]

1104 x 470 (2.35:1) will be the same datarate of 960 x 540 (16:9)

1088 and 1080 are also great width options.

1024 x 512 (2:1) also deserves a try, almost the same datarate of 960 x 540 (16:9), just a little higher... (or 1016 x 508)

I also have suggestions to add new aspect ratios (1.85:1 was a great add):

2.37:1 because 2560 / 1080 = 2,37 (one of the new digital cinema standards)
2,22:1 because 2400 / 1080 = 2,22

960 x 540 upscales nicely to 1920 x 1080, very close to the quality of H264 MOV files in 1920 x 1080 in terms of resolution. If apply a small sharpening amount and noise reduction in the moment of RAW conversion to DNG, or in the moment of DNG conversion to Cineform (422 10bit avi) the results are excelent.

After some more tests I am still getting magenta frames in 960 x 540. it happens in fat32, exfat, formated cards, hacked mode on or off, sound always off, always in SRAW, magenta frames happens with all the 3 last builds... (but there is no skip frames)

Main development now seems to be to find a way to get rid of magenta frames forever...

[Scotty_Two]

I've got a Lexar SDXC 64GB with 133x write speed, class 10, I suspect won't be fast enough. I am guessing for the T2/3/4i the 400x should be fast enough, although I wish they'd stick to one rating or another.. like 30mbps or 100x, instead of both. Kind of confusing. I never know what 133x means short of it supposedly means 133 times faster than the slowest SD card.

All of the ratings (minus UHS) refer to minimum MB/s. Manufacturers just throw as many big numbers on them as they can to make them seem better.

Class rating = MB/s (Class 6 means 6 MB/s)
"x" rating refers to times faster than a standard CD-ROM drive speed of 150 kB/s (133x means 133 x 150 kB/s which is about 19.5 MB/s)
and of course MB/s is equal to MB/s

[gebo]

I'm using the "Still Sprinkle Free" build. It works fine. Much less black dots on image.
Unfortunately magenta frames are still there, they seem to pop up in a pattern: 1 magenta....5 normal ... 1 magenta .... 5 normal... I don't know what that means. But afterall it's not that bad, I just have to "hunt" those magenta dng and delete them.

I've been shooting at 960x540. Take a look at my last test:

[apefos]

GH2 / 600D card compatibility (I tested some format options):

when the sdhc is formated in the 600D, it works in GH2 also, even with Magic Lantern instaled on card.

when the sdhc is formated on computer in fat32, it works in 600D, but in GH2 camera says cannot record movies, but it records.

when the sdhc is formated on computer in exfat, and made bootable in eoscard.exe, it works in 600D, but it does not work in GH2.

Using Sandisk Extreme 32GB SDHC 45MB/s original card.

[apefos]

Magenta / Pink frames are the enemy / challenge now.

Everything is working fine, but magenta frames...

It would be good idea all developers concentrate in this major issue from now...

If 960 x 540 @ 24fps works reliable in 600D without magenta frames it will be good enough for a stable release.

[gebo]

I am also noticing exposure changes on the footage (you can see an example on the video I just posted at 0:32 sec).
Exp override is on, shouldn't that take care of it?

[vicnaum]

Magenta / Pink frames are the enemy / challenge now.
Everything is working fine, but magenta frames...
It would be good idea all developers concentrate in this major issue from now...

Global Draw Off? Do you record in Video mode with 640x480 canon resolution? PAL?

[Luiz Roberto dos Santos]

Magenta / Pink frames are the enemy / challenge now.

Everything is working fine, but magenta frames...

It would be good idea all developers concentrate in this major issue from now...

If 960 x 540 @ 24fps works reliable in 600D without magenta frames it will be good enough for a stable release.

There's something wrong ... I do not get magenta frames from a week ago.
What are your settings?

[apefos]

In my first install of the exFat version I got no magenta frames, but after some reinstalls magenta frames went back...

My settings:

camera 600D T3i
card format on camera and on computer (I did try both)
Fat32 or exFat (I did try both)
SRAW (camera rebooted)
global draw off
sound record off
skip frames off or on (did try both)
panning off
hacked mode off (I need to monitore the image on LCD)
960 x 540 (16:9)
canon menu: 1920 x 1080 24p ( I also did try 640 x 480 25p)
fps override off (I also did try on @ 24p)
last three raw video builds
focus frame off
exposure override off
iso: I did try all, from 100 to 6400
malloc total 96M
card: Sandisk Extreme SDHC 32GB 45MB/s
Lens: kit lens 18-55mm, auto focus off, IS off

camera records fine, no skip frames, but magenta frames happens...

It seems magenta frames is a random problem, comes and goes no matter the settings, no explanation yet...

It seems it is related to the "luck" you have in the formating and installing moment...

Advice: I found a bug in Exposure Override: the diafragm in the lens keep pulsing, opening and closing a little bit and exposure changes in recorded file, in raw or mov record, I reported this bug in the bug forum, so I am using Exposure Override off all time, I will use it just to get lower shutter speeds with manual focus legacy lenses without focus chip.

[N/A]

Are the corrupt frames on every raw video you shoot? I still get corrupt frames but only on the first raw video I shoot after start-up.

[Drewton]

Same settings? So you didn't changed the focal length and simply croped the H.264 to match the raw image? If that's true, your comparison is completely useless. To compare H.264 and raw you have to count in the new crop factor you get with raw video! See here:

Width | Cropfactor | Multiple of H.264 crop

1734 = 1.60 | 1
1280 = 2.17 | 1.36
960 = 2.89 | 1.81
720 = 3.85 | 2.41

So if you shoot a video in 1920 X 1080 H.264 at 55mm and you want to compare it with a 960 X 540 raw video you have to change the focal length to 30mm (55 / 1.81 = 30).

Edit: Damn. No I tried to answer that questions and totally forgot what I wanted to ask

@1%: Since raw is a dead end on the 600D (Even with 8-bit compression we couldn't record higher than 1280 X 720 ), what's about recording YUV 422? Is anybody still working on that for the low speed cameras?

I mean, lv_rec still had the option to record YUV 422 "video". It was just to early to be good ... But now, wouldn't it be a nice to make a yuv_rec module for 600D/550D/60D(/6D)?

Uh, I don't know about focal length but neither of them were cropped at all. And the RAW video was 1136x640.

Another comparison of some grass (only the RAW was cropped here), with the lower resolution RAW video as the clear winner:

[spoiler]
H.264


RAW[/spoiler]

EDIT: And another with some tree foliage. RAW is definitely better for nature.

[spoiler]
H.264


RAW[/spoiler]

[apefos]

"Are the corrupt frames on every raw video you shoot? I still get corrupt frames but only on the first raw video I shoot after start-up."

I don't believe we should think this way. A reliable system must record correctly since the first shoot and no failures, never.

And there is no time to keep watching every shoot in the set.

Imagine the situation you are paying two actors and one crew assistant for a day work (a minimum situation)... plus transport and food... how many money will you loose if you get magenta frames in an important shoot? for a low budget project, failures must be avoided!

And what about a wedding? there is no replay in a wedding...

The RAW video in Canon DSLR is promissing, but at this moment it is just a toy... We are in early Canon raw days... I believe the developers will find a way to make it reliable enough for serious production,

[1%]

Shoot LV off = no corrupt frames... memory got some overhaul... resolutions did too. 6D was a champ today... I have to add the changes for 600D.

[Alia5]

dont talk about relyability since this is bleeding edge stuff wich is in heavy development >.<