Author Topic: Canon 650D / T4i (Read 1635819 times)

davegravy · « **Reply #1225 on:** February 21, 2014, 05:24:47 PM »

Can I ask the help of someone who has Resolve 10 lite on their system? I need someone to load my project on their setup to see if they are getting the same artifacts that I am.

This was recorded with the latest ML nightly on my 650d, converted to DNGs using raw2dng cs2x2, and I'm getting dark pixellation in the overexposed areas that DOES NOT seem to appear in AE or Windows Photo Viewer.

Here's the .DNG stills (50MB):
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/30586759/bmd_help/m12-1831.zip

Here's the .DRP (project settings) file:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/30586759/bmd_help/bmd_help.drp

Thanks!

EDIT: As jonsium pointed out, the artifacts don't appear in adobe products because they run a bad pixel algo when you import DNG

Nyte · « **Reply #1226 on:** February 21, 2014, 05:49:59 PM »

Quote from: Walter Schulz on February 21, 2014, 04:49:38 PM

Nope

I see. Oh well, used Canons DPP for it, works fine.

venture · « **Reply #1227 on:** February 21, 2014, 07:36:24 PM »

Quote from: Nyte on February 21, 2014, 05:49:59 PM

I see. Oh well, used Canons DPP for it, works fine.

If it helps, you could use Exposure Fusion to preview the combination of your exposures in the camera in Play mode.

You can assign Exposure Fusion to the SET+MainDial function under Image Review Settings in the Prefs menu. You can then preview the combination of 2 or more sequential shots.

Nyte · « **Reply #1228 on:** February 22, 2014, 09:55:06 AM »

Quote from: venture on February 21, 2014, 07:36:24 PM

If it helps, you could use Exposure Fusion to preview the combination of your exposures in the camera in Play mode.

You can assign Exposure Fusion to the SET+MainDial function under Image Review Settings in the Prefs menu. You can then preview the combination of 2 or more sequential shots.

Thanks I'll give it a shot!

jonsium · « **Reply #1229 on:** February 23, 2014, 08:18:31 PM »

Quote from: davegravy on February 21, 2014, 05:24:47 PM

Can I ask the help of someone who has Resolve 10 lite on their system? I need someone to load my project on their setup to see if they are getting the same artifacts that I am.

This was recorded with the latest ML nightly on my 650d, converted to DNGs using raw2dng cs2x2, and I'm getting dark pixellation in the overexposed areas that DOES NOT seem to appear in AE or Windows Photo Viewer.

Here's the .DNG stills (50MB):
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/30586759/bmd_help/m12-1831.zip

Here's the .DRP (project settings) file:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/30586759/bmd_help/bmd_help.drp

Thanks!

Hey Dave,
I tried it on my mac using davinci 10.1, didnt' see any noticable difference between DR and AE or even lightroom (for raw/dng viewing). Can you post a screenshot?

jonsium · « **Reply #1230 on:** February 23, 2014, 08:33:28 PM »

Just a quick note to all those following ML development. Feb17th is a solid build to try if you've been hesitant to switch from the august alpha. Things are far more polished now, though there are still cosmetic glitches.

MLV rec/snd is still unusable. I get about 4-8 sec before skipping @ 720p where i can get continuous on rec_raw at the same settings. The testmode shows a massive drop in data throughput (22-28 depending on the B/M combination). Currently there are no tools available for macs to extract dng/audio from the MLV file either that are particularly robust...

EDIT: Should be noted that if you drop down a resolution level to 1152x648 you can get continuous.

Interesting bug: somehow the crop overlay for raw video was translucent, snazzy... couldn't tell if this was the intention though since it only showed up once then after a reset went back to solid black.

davegravy · « **Reply #1231 on:** February 23, 2014, 10:21:54 PM »

Quote from: jonsium on February 23, 2014, 08:18:31 PM

Hey Dave,
I tried it on my mac using davinci 10.1, didnt' see any noticable difference between DR and AE or even lightroom (for raw/dng viewing). Can you post a screenshot?

Thanks jonsium,

Here's a screenshot:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ijgu5z62cia2zzi/Screenshot%202014-02-21%2022.47.33.png

Wonder if it's an issue specific to Resolve and my specific video card. I'm on the latest nvidia driver and resolve version. What video card do you have? Mine is a NVIDIA GTX 560

jonsium · « **Reply #1232 on:** February 24, 2014, 03:08:19 AM »

Dave, I was able to replicate the issue after poking through frame by frame. After some testing and mucking around, i'm leaning toward a cs2x2 issue. AE doesn't show the dots because whenever you're working with DNGs it will automaticially run dot remover behind the scenes, thus a clean image. Actually, all adobe tools do this when working with raw/dng. I baked in the black dots using Davinci to export into a prores sequence and took that into AE and that made them visable.

My best suggestion would be to take the source footage and without using cs2x2, or any PDR for that matter, check the frames. Sure it'll have pink dots but it will identify the issue: either Davinci's raw engine is wonky (not that likely) or its cs2x2 (more likely).

davegravy · « **Reply #1233 on:** February 24, 2014, 09:43:34 PM »

Quote from: jonsium on February 24, 2014, 03:08:19 AM

Dave, I was able to replicate the issue after poking through frame by frame. After some testing and mucking around, i'm leaning toward a cs2x2 issue. AE doesn't show the dots because whenever you're working with DNGs it will automaticially run dot remover behind the scenes, thus a clean image. Actually, all adobe tools do this when working with raw/dng. I baked in the black dots using Davinci to export into a prores sequence and took that into AE and that made them visable.

My best suggestion would be to take the source footage and without using cs2x2, or any PDR for that matter, check the frames. Sure it'll have pink dots but it will identify the issue: either Davinci's raw engine is wonky (not that likely) or its cs2x2 (more likely).

Thank you! Seems you are right, it IS raw2dng. I wasn't aware that adobe was running a dot-remover - makes a lot more sense now.

I guess it's time for me to finally learn C++ and dive in to trying to fix raw2dng. I like the workflow I have with raw2dng and Resolve and I really shouldn't be using the copy of AE that I found on the side of the road (nor do I want to buy it)

jonsium · « **Reply #1234 on:** February 24, 2014, 10:28:58 PM »

Quote from: davegravy on February 24, 2014, 09:43:34 PM

Thank you! Seems you are right, it IS raw2dng. I wasn't aware that adobe was running a dot-remover - makes a lot more sense now.

I guess it's time for me to finally learn C++ and dive in to trying to fix raw2dng. I like the workflow I have with raw2dng and Resolve and I really shouldn't be using the copy of AE that I found on the side of the road (nor do I want to buy it)

Glad I could help! If you have a mac nearby, the best tool i've found so far is PDR interp by rewind. It's written in java so i'd assume it would run on a PC as well? It's very robust and produces superior results (imo). It certianly can be difficult to find though, as its buried in a PDR topic somewhere on the forum. I can re-up it if its beneficial, or someone can reply to this with a forum link if they find it.

Sidenote, if you're affiliated (even remotely) with an educational institution, you can get Adobe CC for $19/mo if cost is an issue with adobe's suite of stuff. I'm not particularly a fan of leasing software... but its an option.

davegravy · « **Reply #1235 on:** February 25, 2014, 05:09:21 AM »

Quote from: jonsium on February 24, 2014, 10:28:58 PM

Glad I could help! If you have a mac nearby, the best tool i've found so far is PDR interp by rewind. It's written in java so i'd assume it would run on a PC as well? It's very robust and produces superior results (imo). It certianly can be difficult to find though, as its buried in a PDR topic somewhere on the forum. I can re-up it if its beneficial, or someone can reply to this with a forum link if they find it.

Sidenote, if you're affiliated (even remotely) with an educational institution, you can get Adobe CC for $19/mo if cost is an issue with adobe's suite of stuff. I'm not particularly a fan of leasing software... but its an option.

The MAC version of PDR continues to work with the latest nightlies? The windows version used to work but stopped after a certain version of ML (for reasons unbeknownst to me) so I switched to raw2dng...

jonsium · « **Reply #1236 on:** February 25, 2014, 12:44:49 PM »

Quote from: davegravy on February 25, 2014, 05:09:21 AM

The MAC version of PDR continues to work with the latest nightlies? The windows version used to work but stopped after a certain version of ML (for reasons unbeknownst to me) so I switched to raw2dng...

Indeed it does, its been pretty consistent. I was suprized to also see that it also admirably handles the resolution below 720 as well (cant remember exactly what resolution that is off hand). If I recall, anything that wasn't 720 was all sorts of no good. However, that doesn't seem to be the case in my limited test. I haven't looked too closely at IQ pre/post PDR, but it certianly cleared up the pink dots at a casual glance!

Nightly Build: 02/22/2014
[PDR] https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9ri28Sd2H7fUkMwb2QzWkw1S0k/edit?usp=sharing
[RAW] https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9ri28Sd2H7fTDNUdk90X21wSTA/edit?usp=sharing
I dont think google will display them accurately, but you can download and then compare.

HrRaiko · « **Reply #1237 on:** February 26, 2014, 05:18:22 PM »

In January was there audio meters in sound options, where is it gone?

mk11174 · « **Reply #1238 on:** February 26, 2014, 05:23:09 PM »

Quote from: HrRaiko on February 26, 2014, 05:18:22 PM

In January was there audio meters in sound options, where is it gone?

Version with Audio Meters is here, it is up to date with latest repo as of today Feb 26 2014
https://bitbucket.org/mk11174/t5i/downloads

Until our audio chip gets programmed yoo probably wont see audio meters in the nightly build any time soon, this is why I try to keep my version updated for anyone that wants a build with them.

jonsium · « **Reply #1239 on:** February 26, 2014, 10:26:57 PM »

Quote from: mk11174 on February 26, 2014, 05:23:09 PM

Until our audio chip gets programmed yoo probably wont see audio meters in the nightly build any time soon, this is why I try to keep my version updated for anyone that wants a build with them.

If you got it working, how come they haven't merged it?

mk11174 · « **Reply #1240 on:** February 27, 2014, 01:29:21 AM »

Quote from: jonsium on February 26, 2014, 10:26:57 PM

If you got it working, how come they haven't merged it?

Because it is considered a temp patch, its just best to wait till the audio chip is programed so full control of audio will be available then merge that. This patch is just a way to turn meters on so we can use them.

jonsium · « **Reply #1241 on:** February 27, 2014, 08:56:20 AM »

Quote from: mk11174 on February 27, 2014, 01:29:21 AM

Because it is considered a temp patch, its just best to wait till the audio chip is programed so full control of audio will be available then merge that. This patch is just a way to turn meters on so we can use them.

Ahh, that makes sense. I swear, everyone who has contributed to ML is awesome! You all have done some really impressive work

It's hard to imagine that the first build was only a few months ago.

amp650d · « **Reply #1242 on:** February 27, 2014, 09:06:03 AM »

Quote from: mk11174 on February 27, 2014, 01:29:21 AM

Because it is considered a temp patch, its just best to wait till the audio chip is programed so full control of audio will be available then merge that. This patch is just a way to turn meters on so we can use them.

Thank you very much to all magic lantern developers and specially to mk11174 for the audio meters updated builds while it is included in magic lantern nightly releases. Go ahead!!

Nautilus · « **Reply #1243 on:** February 27, 2014, 06:36:52 PM »

Quote from: amp650d on February 27, 2014, 09:06:03 AM

Thank you very much to all magic lantern developers and specially to mk11174 for the audio meters updated builds while it is included in magic lantern nightly releases. Go ahead!!

Right, all we need is now headphone monitoring.

HrRaiko · « **Reply #1244 on:** February 28, 2014, 11:40:31 AM »

Quote from: mk11174 on February 26, 2014, 05:23:09 PM

Version with Audio Meters is here, it is up to date with latest repo as of today Feb 26 2014
https://bitbucket.org/mk11174/t5i/downloads

Until our audio chip gets programmed yoo probably wont see audio meters in the nightly build any time soon, this is why I try to keep my version updated for anyone that wants a build with them.

Thanks man

lucawen · « **Reply #1245 on:** March 06, 2014, 05:54:32 PM »

Sorry for my question, who to use Digital Zoom in the 650D? It's possible??

Rythmtech · « **Reply #1246 on:** March 12, 2014, 11:07:07 AM »

"Sorry for my question, who to use Digital Zoom in the 650D? It's possible??"

Digital zoom is a waste on DSLR's and is just OK for pocket cams that don't have access to decent tele-zoom lenses. You are better off just taking your pix with your 70-300 at the tele end and crop in software....unless you are talking about "Magic-zoom" which is activated by using the +magnifying glass button next to the thumb rest and is only zoomed in live-view for focusing purposes.

lucawen · « **Reply #1247 on:** March 12, 2014, 05:51:56 PM »

This is true, my 70-300 is very good, same i need to more zoom... Thanks for you help.

claudelec · « **Reply #1248 on:** March 12, 2014, 09:48:58 PM »

There is only a "crop mode" around x3 and not a digital zoom; and only for video in 1920x1080.
In that respect, image is very good and you can use a 100mm macro in place of your 300mm..., with higher optical quality.

jonsium · « **Reply #1249 on:** March 13, 2014, 07:16:26 AM »

I know this is not helpful at all for answering the question, but I suppose it would be beneficial to point out that a digital zoom is literally just a normal ol' image cropped and scaled up... which is functionally identical to just about every picture editor or ms paint equivalent out there.

pixels are pixels, sadly you cant record an image in higher (or even equivalent) definition using a digital zoom. In fact, the on-camera version of digital zoom would likely be lower quality than using photoshop for an array of reasons regarding compute power/algorithms.

Sorry, i couldn't directly answer, but at least this is an alternative.

News:

Author Topic: Canon 650D / T4i (Read 1635819 times)