550D/T2i raw video recording port official thread

[pavelpp]

thanks! I read up on ETTR and indeed, it makes a huge difference

[David J. Fulde]

Here is some RAW video tests I threw togethe to show off the higher resolution you can get (Higher than the 'official' spec at least) with continuous recording:

not perfect (Far from it), but it should give you an idea.

Here is how it worked:

1: Have a very past card. at least 133X.
2: go to 720P mode
3: turn on FPS override and set it to 23.98
4: start at a low resolution (like 960X540)
5: work your way UP to 1280 at 2/35 (1280X388)
6: Boom! continuous recording at 1280X581!

EDIT: Very important note: This dies not need to be done for each clip, only when you first insert the card (Or if it crashes).

I don't know if this needs to be done with each, individual, card, since I only have one card that can handle the data loads ha ha

[CFP]

Here is some RAW video tests I threw together

No offense but this comparison video seems quite pointless

I mean, it is supposed to show ... what exactly? In this test, it looks like the squished 1280 X 388 RAW videos would be better than regular 1920 X 1080 H.264 videos in terms of sharpness and detail. And that's just not the the case. Why did you downscale the H.264 footage? And why did you bulred it so hard? Why is the field of view so different in many shots? Did you crop the video, or did you actually changed the focal length?

I don't want to say that the comparison is horrible. But you should tell us exactly what we are seeing and what it is supposed to show.
That would make the video more interesting and helpfull.

By the way, if you film in the squished 720p mode, be carefull. It can give way worse aliasing than the unquished modes.
I would use it only if I needed a really shallow depth of field.

[David J. Fulde]

No offense but this comparison video seems quite pointless

I mean, it is supposed to show ... what exactly? In this test, it looks like the squished 1280 X 388 RAW videos would be better than regular 1920 X 1080 H.264 videos in terms of sharpness and detail. And that's just not the the case. Why did you downscale the H.264 footage? And why did you bulred it so hard? Why is the field of view so different in many shots? Did you crop the video, or did you actually changed the focal length?

I don't want to say that the comparison is horrible. But you should tell us exactly what we are seeing and what it is supposed to show.
That would make the video more interesting and helpfull.

By the way, if you film in the squished 720p mode, be carefull. It can give way worse aliasing than the unquished modes.
I would use it only if I needed a really shallow depth of field.

I downrezzed the 1080, mainly, to give it a bit of a chance. It looked horrendous when kept at 100% and, for web delivery, 720P is very common, so I decided that a downres would make the most sense.

I was filming in the squished 720P, there IS more aliasing/moire, but it is something I can definitely deal with for the extra detail in everything else. (Reolution baby!)

Some of the shots are not identical as I changed focal lengths to try and account for the crop that happens when filming RAW like this and, frankly, did my math wrong. (This is brought up in the youtube video description ) Oops?

The 720P mode needs much less data, so you can get more resolution out of it, compared to 1080P which limits you to near standard-def.

 

[Nachelsoul]

Hi guys, I´m a little lost. Where I can find the newest builds (nightly) fot the 550D?. I scrolled the forum and the last I found is Rewind's 21/6. Thanks.

[dlrpgmsvc]

Hi guys, I´m a little lost. Where I can find the newest builds (nightly) fot the 550D?. I scrolled the forum and the last I found is Rewind's 21/6. Thanks.

The nightly builds are only for the unified (no raw video module). If you want the latest nightly build with raw video inside it, you must compile yourself and take the latest raw module to add.

[Nachelsoul]

The nightly builds are only for the unified (no raw video module). If you want the latest nightly build with raw video inside it, you must compile yourself and take the latest raw module to add.

Thanks dude.

[Fringuello]

Il mio test

[pavelpp]

The nightly builds are only for the unified (no raw video module). If you want the latest nightly build with raw video inside it, you must compile yourself and take the latest raw module to add.

I think you are wrong. I use nightly builds with 550d all the time and raw is enabled there. http://nanomad.magiclantern.fm/nightly/

[glubber]

I think you are wrong. I use nightly builds with 550d all the time and raw is enabled there. http://nanomad.magiclantern.fm/nightly/

My latest ML is v2.3.NEXT.2013Jul15.550D109 Mercurial changeset : aa2ba85342fa (unified) tip Built on 2013-07-15 02:14:26 by nanomad@magiclantern.fm and i recorded some RAW-Videos with it.

@dlrpgmsvc: it would be interesting, if your own builds are better than the unified (although i guess the ingredients must be mostly the same)

I guess the confusing thing is:
Since the unified-nightlies don't contain RAW (nor ML itself) for the 5DIII  - and most RAW-talk is about the 5DIII -  there are a lot of post on the forum and the web about getting the ML-firmware from NON-nightly builds.

And it says in the Nightly thread (http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=3072.0): Nightly Builds - try the very latest stuff here -NOT FOR RAW

I'm reading the forum on a daily basis, but i'm doing real hard keeping up to date

[BrotherD]

Glubber, can you upload those videos and what specifics do you like about that nightly build from 7-15-2013?

[glubber]

Oh sorry, i guess i didn't express myself right...my skills in english are not the best.

I did not want to claim that the 15-july-build is the best one for 550D.
It's just the latest one i put in my camera. I just wanted to confirm pavelpp's post above.

Btw. i'm still working on my first Video to upload.   

[3pointedit]

Sorry for RAW noob Question, but we do have to shoot x5 zoom don't we? To get rid of all the false colors etc. and have sharp shots. Is that right?
As all my regular un-zoomed shots are sparkly crap

[deleted.account]

hi 3point, I believe 5x zoom is 1:1 crop out of non line skipped source and non 5x is a crop out of 1920x1080 line skipped source but line skipped is still generally more detail, sharper and uncompressed compared to h264. 5x zoom you'll need to be rock steady.

As for false color and all that, so much is down to interpretation of the raw source via whatever raw development tool is used that its not necessarily in the camera raw source but via crap raw dev process.

[3pointedit]

Thanks y3llow, yeah I'm cheating with TIFFs from the new portable (love that) app at http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=7825.0 but I gather that the developing is a bit simple? Thanks for the tip, I will ask the developer what process is going on under the hood.

[deleted.account]

The portable app is over the top for raw2tiff, dcraw will do it and with a lot more control. That app is really to cater for 600D & 650D's that dcraw supposedly doesn't like or if you want demosaiced raws that retain the ability to adjust WB etc ie: linear DNG for reasons such as Resolves crap demosaic of Canon raw.

Don't know what that app puts out in way of tiff but dcraw will give you 16bit open gamut linear RGB tiffs using any of a number of demosaicing algos, various color spaces gamma encoded if you wish.

libraw is another very useful raw library that emulates dcraw. dcraw-float another. Or ufraw on the CLI all depending what you want to bake into the tiffs.

A simple 5 line batch script will process a folder full of raws and give you tiffs and proxy DNxHD or Prores etc via ffmpeg

Don't get me wrong though the portable app like all the other DNG output batch converters have a use if you want to stay 'raw' or 'sorta raw' in the case of Force 'Linear' but for tiffs better options exist.

[3pointedit]

Oh so dcraw will decompress an ML RAW file (image sequence)? I can use dcraw as portable app or install? Any good places to find a brief how too then?

[deleted.account]

No, its a two step, raw2DNG app and then dcraw does DNG2tif but if done in a simple script you can delete the DNGs as tifs are created.

So yes the app does raw2tif great but at what cost to control. It crashes for me on Linux but worth testing output from dcraw versus the app.

If going to tiff or exr or prores etc I'd rather a two step with control over WB, sensor saturation point, channel clipping handling, demosaic algo, gamma or linear, black point, whether to normalize stretch 14bit levels into 16bit or not, highlight recovery stategy and possibly omit dcraw and go to tiff via ufraw with logish flat preset applied.

http://www.guillermoluijk.com/tutorial/dcraw/index_en.htm

http://www.libraw.org/docs/Samples-LibRaw-eng.html

http://ninedegreesbelow.com/photography/dcraw-float-command-line-options.html

[glubber]

Just a little hint if you want to use DCRAW.
The raw  converter Rawanizer has a built-in GUI for dcraw.

"Instead of lightroom, in RAWanizer I hit custom button which brings up a dialog for making settings for dcraw conversion. Tweak the settings and hit save. This is now the settings use for conversions. If I'm satisfied with the quality I choose to use a high quality codec and hit start. Now I have a file ready for my NLE"

[deleted.account]

Just a little hint if you want to use DCRAW.
The raw  converter Rawanizer has a built-in GUI for dcraw.

Yep and...

Only works on windows

Yet it...

is using raw2dng, dcraw and ffmpeg.

Where as this 8 line script, like many scripts on the forums here is portable, doesn't need installing any component or libraries, uses the same three apps (raw2dng, dcraw and ffmpeg), can be tweaked and extended without a whole development / compiling / recompiling cycle and setup, using nonsense proprietary OS specific development environment & libraries for a freaking batch converter and the script is pretty universal apart from syntax:

for file in *.RAW ; do
mkdir './Out/'$file'/'
wine ./raw2dng.exe $file './Out/'$file'/'
mkdir './Out/'$file'/yuv16'
   for out in "./Out/$file/*.dng" ; do
      dcraw -c -a -H 1 -o 1 -q 3 $out | ffmpeg -f image2pipe -vcodec ppm -r 24000/1001 -s 1152x482 -i - -f mov -vcodec prores -profile:v 2 -pix_fmt yuv422p10le -r 24000/1001 "./Out/$file/yuv16/$file.mov"
   done
done

Of coarse it's not as pretty, or has a GUI and may cause mac users a bit of trouble, :-)jk and no disrespect to RAWanzier or it's dev, who is providing a free tool which works for many and built in an application environment he/she knows well.

[Vilnius1998]

I have been able to manage to record 1728x648 for 60 frames instead of 24.

[Rewind]

I have been able to manage to record 1728x648 for 60 frames instead of 24.

I've just got 58 frames 1728x692 @23.976 fps

[mk11174]

Dual ISO seems to be working in PhotoMode on 550D

//  00 0000 406941E4  = 100
//  00 0024 406941F6  = 200
//  00 0048 40694208  = 400
//  00 006C 4069421A  = 800
//  00 0090 4069422C  = 1600
//  00 00B4 4069423E  = 3200

        PHOTO_CMOS_ISO_START = 0x406941E4; // CMOS register 0000 - for photo mode, ISO 100
        PHOTO_CMOS_ISO_COUNT =          6; // from ISO 100 to 3200
        PHOTO_CMOS_ISO_SIZE  =         18; // distance between ISO 100 and ISO 200 addresses, in bytes

http://www.mediafire.com/download/r32p2hsc9n83y2q/ML_550D_Dual_ISO_Aug_25_2013.zip

I get an interlaced looking image, when I run it through cr2hdr.exe I get a dng, maybe others can test to see if it really does anything?

I tried for Live View Info but I get crash when turning on ADTG module from Tragic-Lantern while in Live View, and I don't know how to look at the ATDG.BIN.

[Rewind]

Yes, it works. Congratulations, brotherhood! )

Examples below are from my first extreme test. Exposure pushed up in ACR all the way up to +5 f-stops.
First crop is from usual iso 100 cr2, second from dual iso 100-1600 dng processed with cr2hdr.exe



(exactly the same settings for both, no any noise reduction)

[pavelpp]

Guys, I can't find where to download the cr2hdr.exe from