5D2 RAW video Builds 14-Bit

[dariSSight]

I'm going out this weekend to shoots some test scene for special effects and some potential scenery shots, I would like to have some advice on Resolution settings and aspect ratio setting. Now the native Canon 5D Mark II video output is a sensor downscale from 1880 RAW to 1920x1080p H.264, what would be the equivalent to that in our ML settings? What is the best possible Aspect Ratio and Resolution? From your research what's the hightest upconversion that can be don with the ML RAW setting for the 5D Mark II? I have the Cinestlye Picturestyle so what's the best option for DNG conversion, the Resolve workflow or Adobe Camera Raw workflow? Thanks for any info you guys give me, last I feel a.d's compile are great and does a.d compiles include Alex's also? Where are Alex compiles?

[coralio]

Hi there,

I used to be able to change the DNG's Camera Profile to "Neutral" or to any other profile in Lightroom and in ACR. Now I can't ("Embedded" is selected as the default profile, and it can't be changed). I don't know if this is the right thread, but could you give me a hint?

Thank you!

[noix222]

Just tested the new build from a.d laboratory working smooth no pink cast or anything! killing it !!! thanks devs

[Kabuto1138]

Getting 920 frames with 1880 frame size,
1600 frames with 1872 frame size

using a brand new Komputer Bay 64gb 1000x

BTW, can't find the way to open more than 4 gig files.  Read it a long time ago but forgot where it was.  Can anyone point me in the right direction?

thanks!

[noix222]

BTW, can't find the way to open more than 4 gig files.  Read it a long time ago but forgot where it was.  Can anyone point me in the right direction?

this might help you ..

http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=5655.0

[Kabuto1138]

this might help you ..

http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=5655.0

Thanks!

[ted ramasola]

Also, in ML menu make sure that centre framing mode is set to x5 mode

Doyle4,

I have tried switching this to SET to x5 mode and I see no benefit over OFF/center since current build still give you off centered framing when recording is started.
While preview-AUTO setting gives you ML grayscale when in 3x crop mode, framing your shot is possible.
When record is started. the screen gives you a grayscale image with realtime feedback but off centered framing and scaling.

[Africashot]

Doyle4,

I have tried switching this to SET to x5 mode and I see no benefit over OFF/center since current build still give you off centered framing when recording is started.
While preview-AUTO setting gives you ML grayscale when in 3x crop mode, framing your shot is possible.
When record is started. the screen gives you a grayscale image with realtime feedback but off centered framing and scaling.

Thanks for explaining this, I think due to not understanding this I may have ended up with a hell of a lot of oddly composed shots of my last job...

[Doyle4]

Doyle4,

I have tried switching this to SET to x5 mode and I see no benefit over OFF/center since current build still give you off centered framing when recording is started.
While preview-AUTO setting gives you ML grayscale when in 3x crop mode, framing your shot is possible.
When record is started. the screen gives you a grayscale image with realtime feedback but off centered framing and scaling.

Ahh sweet ill have to check this out, iv used x5 framing for all my crop shots, ill see what i make of it after changing somethings.

[Doyle4]

Iv read a few post's asking about the new Dual ISO for 5D mkiii and 7D and some people asking about the 5D mkii like my self... i found this to why its only thous two cameras.

From A1lex him self:

Works for both photos and raw videos on Canon EOS 5D Mark III. On Canon EOS 7D, photo only (since it can’t do raw video).
What are the benefits? more dynamic range (less shadow noise).
The functionality was not really in Canon firmware, but in the chip that samples the sensor. Canon firmware does not make any use of it (they just set both ISO “registers” to the same value). It was implemented on the hardware side though (and that’s why it works only on these 2 cameras, because only they have two ISO amplifiers)

[gnarr]

Here is a test I shot a few days ago:

[Doyle4]

Come on guys...

This is a community that we are all interested in and like to help one another, this is the first time iv witnessed this.

I think some people have read things wrong and taken in the wrong way, this happens, its apart of life, its hard to put feeling and emotion into text.

Lets start clean guys, theres enough crap going on in the world that we cant fix... but us on here should be sticking by each other and helping one and other.

Much love and peace. 

PS. Iv upset devs by mistake and not ment too, im dyslexic and disprastic and dont always read things correctly so when replying i look like im moaning, but i never take offence if a reply is upsetting to me, its my own doing of how i explain and type it, i just apologise and try and explain better next time around, these devs do alot and must be under alot of stress fixing and tweaking... and have PM messages that we dont see.

Sit back and smile its all about you knowing the truth, let others think what they want.. you are you and thats all that matters

[guentergunter]

Quote from: a1ex on June 27, 2013, 09:02:48 AM
@guentergunter: I have explained the reasons for mod16 resolutions, and I'll stick with that.

If a.d. wants to provide 1880, that's his own choice and I do not support it in any way. I know what trouble I had on 5D3 with random lockups because of DMA misalignment, so I'll stick with a portable solution that works everywhere.

As for the other options, some of them are good and will be added to vanilla builds (e.g. black bars, but in a clean way that does not fight with other overlays), others are just ugly hacks (e.g. dropping frames instead of optimizing playback code, or some status displays moved over ML overlays, therefore flickering like crazy if you enable both.

--------------

1880 doesn't seem worth taking a chance on at this point. Not that I don't appreciate a.d's efforts, I just prefer to work with the most reliable code. I did direct comparisons between a.d. & A1ex's builds:

http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=6662.msg53551#msg53551

It's me, a1ex replied to.
I said: If there's no difference in performance, I would always prefer the highest possible resolution (equal quality, in my oppinion).
And since I at least record at 2:1 or even wider, I can in any resolution (without crop) record untill my 64GB Lexar 1000x is full. Thus I see absolutely no sense in throwing those 8 pixels away (which would also imply a slide crop).

Also, I think a.d.'s code is highly reliable. It's simply not that fast when it comes to 1880, but that's due to the architecture of the camera's chipset (which is by the way linked to the mod16-topic, what a1ex explained).

So a.d. simply gives us the possibility to get the highest possible resolution out of our 5D's. And since it's optional you can unhurriedly find out if it fits your setup (aspect ratio; CF-card; etc.)

Yes! Have been tested in 1880x940 (2:1) continuous recording over 10000f (over seven minutes) no frame skip, file size exceeds 30GB .. card is full. 

Same here with Lexar 1000x, both 32GB and 64GB.

[noix222]

it's not possible just to keep it in 1872 ? So it would be nice to get same aspect 1872 in normal crop and 3x crop mode... im running a.d's builds and i get no corruption frames, bad pixels or anything even without the greyscale. It freaks me black and white when i press rec kkkkk at this point all RAW thing have changed a lot the whole industry and even my business saving me some money on new equipment. So guys this is the future and all you dev's made this happen! You all should be super proud and all i have to do is spread the word and thank all you guys! keep on ROCKING !

ps: sorry my english is not as sharp as a raw file

[filmthatsheet]

Hey guys

When I hit the 5x crop button, my image punches in, but when I hit record, nothing changes.  I was under the impression that I could get proper framing before I hit record. 

I've had this same issue on the last 3 builds.  When I review the image, it's wider than what the live view displayed.  Is it just my ignorance, or do I have a legitimate issue? 

Thanks everybody

[Audionut]

I've just removed a bunch of off-topic nonsense from this thread, and a couple of you are lucky that I've been told I'm often to heavy handed, or else I would have handed out a bunch or warnings also.

Please keep the discussion on-topic.  Discuss misunderstandings in PM.  Use the report button, or ignore the post and go and enjoy some sunshine.

With regards to the differences between builds by a.d. and the official repo.  There are reasons why some of the features that a.d. provides do not make it into the official repo.  The official repo must maintain some form of safety for users.  Yes it's made quite clear that ML can brick your camera, but there is a clear difference between providing a warning, and pushing all manner of code to the official repo without sufficient testing and without a very clear understanding of the consequences of the code.

Also, individual developers might have ideas that do not fall within the scope of what the ML development team as a whole are trying to accomplish.

Endless bickering back and forth about specific features does not serve any purpose but to disrupt the flow of conversation.  If there is a specific feature in a build that is not yet in the official repo, you are welcomed to make a feature request.

[Doyle4]

@Audionut

Sweet man, Apologies also..

[Indianac]

Ok, I'm getting a dead pixel in my footage. Not sure if it's a h/w issue on the sensor, the build (July 11 A1ex), or the raw2dng.  I have the raw files from the camera if someone would like to take a look.  Let me know where to drop it. 

H/W: 5D Mark ii, Shot on various lenses, 64gb Komputerbay 1000x CF
Post: raw2dng ->davinci resolve lite 9 -> fcpx
Settings:
1880x800
2.35:1
1880: on
Frame Skipping: off
Small Hacks: on

(Posted in the post-processing forum as well as I'm not sure if it's hardware, ML or raw2dng).  Thoughts?

[a.d.]

it's a dead pixel: for example, post:raw2dng->aftereffects ...
adobe acr should remove it automatically.

[xNiNELiVES]

Good evening A.d. Compiling a new build?

[Indianac]

Thanks AD.  Darn, I suppose that only leaves me with the raw2dng->ACR workflow. Darn. With the new Davinci resolve, I was really hoping to cut my workflow time. Any other solutions?

Also, if the dead pixel is on my camera, have I just not noticed it before when not shooting in raw or does RAW just accentuate dead pixels?

[a.d.]

@xNiNELiVES
no code change => no new build

...
Also, if the dead pixel is on my camera, have I just not noticed it before when not shooting in raw or does RAW just accentuate dead pixels?

it's in the camera. in general canon firmware masked the bad pixel out (value=0)

[Doyle4]

@Indianac

If ACR is not removing it try the tutorial i found, using after effects and Wire removing.

Click on my name, choose show post's and there will be a dead/hot pixel fix tutorial

[Africashot]

is there something I am missing on how to treat larger then 4 GB files... I got three of the sort with the .R00 file but when I try to process it all I get is noise and then a black screen, also have looked in the forum but haven't found a way that seemed clear enough, thanks again!

[bnvm]

is there something I am missing on how to treat larger then 4 GB files... I got three of the sort with the .R00 file but when I try to process it all I get is noise and then a black screen, also have looked in the forum but haven't found a way that seemed clear enough, thanks again!

Make sure you merge the parts into 1 file before you run raw2dng. Checkout the first post in this topic.