Raw goals for cinematography

[mkrjf]

It seems like the direction of magic lantern raw is headed off track?
Is the goal cinematography or programming adventures?
If the former - then a stable 24fps HD raw with workflow that does not reduce quality should be primary objective. If you expose correctly with 14bits of dynamic range that is enough - the HDR and ISO bit tweaking needs to be motivated by quality issues. HDR requires high frame rate also.
Likewise for changes in raw format / in camera processing (demosaic).

My personal experience using June build on 5dmk3 is that there is more dynamic range seen by camera than makes it through workflow. Using ml member provided utilities (thx!) to get DNG and mov in one step - it sure seems like much less than 14 bits of data is making it to DNG and then mov is only prores 422. Maybe a test raw 'ramp' can be created to verify?
Is it not possible to carry 16 bits (14 data) to DNG and then full 4444 to prores?
422 is better than h264 in camera but not enough to use for indie feature work.

I have asked a couple times (no real answers) on actual processing of raw and actual bits of info in raw.
Based on ISO discussion it seems that there may be a few bits of dither 'noise' in the data. Can someone summarize that in one - two sentences?

I did a sunset test with June build with sun just over exposed and I was able to do light color grade and get a very nice crushed black and very natural looking highlight and midtone. I did not see a lot of noise in the black - but then I exposed properly and crushed the blacks a little (which will blend / eliminate minor noise in black).
So it seems the June build was close to usable - just needed some cleanup / documentation.
So what exactly is the goal of this development group?

Also I believe the frame rate is off and there appear to be some dropped frame effects even though the recording is continuous.
I will do sync sound recording (zoom or tascam) with head slate and tail slate to confirm (audio duration versus video duration between head and tail slate).

I think I would like a branch of the code that is purely targeted at indie cinematography.
Thx
Mike

[a1ex]

Duplicate? http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=7486

[Midphase]

Maybe he thinks that by posting here it will get more exposure...and he'd be right actually since I never have seen the other thread.

At any rate, I kinda find myself a bit in agreement here. Don't want to ruffle any feathers, and ultimately I will take what I can get and be extremely happy to boot. However I do see that there's a great deal of time and effort that's being put into some new functions, while some things might be getting a tad neglected.

For instance, dual-ISO is nice, but I think the 5D has already an awesome deal of latitude and personally I don't think the increased moire and extra post conversion step just to gain an extra couple of stops of dynamic range is necessary.

On the other hand, gaining audio back would be a huge positive even if all that we're going to use it for is as reference audio to make auto syncing external audio with Pluraleyes or Premiere Pro that much easier.

It would also be nice to switch to .mlv on all the builds. I feel that Adobe is not going to make any attempts at natively reading ML files in Premiere Pro until the new format is locked down...so the sooner the better IMHO.

I don't know if there's any additional optimization that can be done to make the writing speeds more solid. Right now they work fine on a decent CF card so I can't complain...but are they as good as they're going to get? More importantly, why aren't 1200X cards writing any faster than 1000X? Is this a Canon bottleneck or is there something that could be done? IMHO increasing the write speed even by a few megs would be considerably more desirable than card spanning which seems to add more complexity and more potential for file corruption.

And even though GUI and esthetics might seem like frilly things, I know more than a few DP's who don't want to use ML because they find the menus difficult to navigate.


I don't want to sound like I'm bitching, because I'm not. I'm a huge supporter and evangelist for ML...as a matter of fact I'm working to set up a live workshop here in L.A. to teach DP's how to work with ML raw.

However, I agree a bit with some of what the OP is saying. I think lately it feels like the developers are engaged in trying to figure out ways to squeeze more functionality out of the hardware which ultimately might or might not be as mission critical for real-life productions as they might think.

Just my $.02

[maxotics]

My 2-cents is the same.  BTW, he posted under "Dual ISO" And RenatoPhoto told him wrong board, so he moved it.

I love this Magic Lantern stuff and am grateful, like everyone here, and try to pay back the ML team by raving about them in my videos.  However, whenever anyone seems to say anything the least bit critical they are admonished by the forum moderators.  I feel a forum is a social contract, so to speak, so the devs, even though they're the reason we're here, should be held to the same expectations of communication.  That is to say, when a poster, like the OP of this thread goes off track, he is criticized.  But when a dev gives some flippant comment about a question he/she is not.  In short, the Magic Lantern forums are a bit clique-ish. 

A little bit of organization and shared goals would do much to improve ML.  But I feel the moderators are more interested in protecting the devs from stupid questions, and throwing their own weight around (sorry to say) then they are in building a strong ML community that makes ML RAW more popular, not the domain a few.

I look at H.264 video and it depresses me that it has become the norm.  The world would be a better place with ML RAW video.  I hate to sound overly romantic, but there it is.  The day I shot some high dynamic range of my 50D changed my life (and I'll take any change for the better, no matter how small).  More people could enjoy this.  But we have to talk about what the OP talks about.  What do indie filmmakers need to use this technology?  ML RAW is not even remotely easy (and I've worked in tech my whole life, I'm in my fifties).  I think they need ML RAW in a state where they can focus on what they want to express. 

Maybe those of us who think the same way can start a thread where we create all the manuals, tips, than are missing.  I've tried to do this in my own small way.   I believe, if ML RAW did grow the devs would get more satisfaction out of what they do.  But they need help.

Anyway, I'm very happy I'm not the only way who feels this way. 

[reddeercity]

My 2-cents is the same.  BTW, he posted under "Dual ISO" And RenatoPhoto told him wrong board, so he moved it.

I love this Magic Lantern stuff and am grateful, like everyone here, and try to pay back the ML team by raving about them in my videos.  However, whenever anyone seems to say anything the least bit critical they are admonished by the forum moderators.  I feel a forum is a social contract, so to speak, so the devs, even though they're the reason we're here, should be held to the same expectations of communication.  That is to say, when a poster, like the OP of this thread goes off track, he is criticized.  But when a dev gives some flippant comment about a question he/she is not.  In short, the Magic Lantern forums are a bit clique-ish. 

A little bit of organization and shared goals would do much to improve ML.  But I feel the moderators are more interested in protecting the devs from stupid questions, and throwing their own weight around (sorry to say) then they are in building a strong ML community that makes ML RAW more popular, not the domain a few.

I look at H.264 video and it depresses me that it has become the norm.  The world would be a better place with ML RAW video.  I hate to sound overly romantic, but there it is.  The day I shot some high dynamic range of my 50D changed my life (and I'll take any change for the better, no matter how small).  More people could enjoy this.  But we have to talk about what the OP talks about.  What do indie filmmakers need to use this technology?  ML RAW is not even remotely easy (and I've worked in tech my whole life, I'm in my fifties).  I think they need ML RAW in a state where they can focus on what they want to express. 

Maybe those of us who think the same way can start a thread where we create all the manuals, tips, than are missing.  I've tried to do this in my own small way.   I believe, if ML RAW did grow the devs would get more satisfaction out of what they do.  But they need help.

Anyway, I'm very happy I'm not the only way who feels this way.

I would have to say that i agree,
I do may best to help the people to understand Workflow and
Problems with the operations of Raw on the  Camera, So the Important
Guys at Magic Lantern can Focus on improving & developing the system!
I know any time that i have tried to communicate Problems,
or suggestions i was given a Cold Response.
Don't get me wrong i'm a Big FanBoy of ML Raw,
And i puff out my chest when i talk about it to people every where i Go.
So every one on this form Needs to communicate better to achieve this Goal.
Thanks to All the People that make this Happen!!
On a different note, You can import 14bit CDNG's directly in to Final Cut Pro X
and play the time line in real time 
and today i Saw My documentary, that i film in Raw back in Late June in a 2K Movie theaters
on a  Christie CP2220 DLP Digital Cinema Projector
I could not believe the image i was seeing, it was truly amazing  OMG
And for that reason alone i will Never Stop using ML Raw no matter how
Difficult the Workflow my be .

[mkrjf]

Actually RenatoPhoto suggested moving to general chat but did not mention there was existing thread on same topic - so I will follow up there and not here.
BUT - reddeercity - I am really interested in the 2K ML shown in theatres Could you provide some links to a trailer or some overview of the post / finishing you used? That is my target not still photos (factory config is fine for still photos IMHO)
Thx.

[reddeercity]

Actually RenatoPhoto suggested moving to general chat but did not mention there was existing thread on same topic - so I will follow up there and not here.
BUT - reddeercity - I am really interested in the 2K ML shown in theatres Could you provide some links to a trailer or some overview of the post / finishing you used? That is my target not still photos (factory config is fine for still photos IMHO)
Thx.

i would be glad to share my information 
i will got all my detail notes together, and post in general chat.
I see you email me, so i will also sent that to there,
thanks for the interest in my workflow.
I'm Also going to product a  series Magic Lantern Tutorial for Raw.
Best practices, workflow, camera operations,  to install ML Card Procedures.
Because there is still people having problems with the  basics
I'm also thinking of Starting a new  thread
about the Final Cut Pro X Lossless workflow with CDNG's
Just with Apple products 

[dopepope]

I'd like to see (and if there is a way already, my bad I couldnt find it) to have the image come out of the camera in a log-c (or redlogfilm, aka really flat) type of curve. I know all the information is there, and i can go in an flatten the curve in photoshop raw, but it's nice to have everything really flat, then send to color last.
regardless of that, i'm loving the image that is coming from the mark 3, and with all the information that is there (despite the crunchy standard look) i'd say we're close to alexa latitude.

[reddeercity]

I'd like to see (and if there is a way already, my bad I couldnt find it) to have the image come out of the camera in a log-c (or redlogfilm, aka really flat) type of curve. I know all the information is there, and i can go in an flatten the curve in photoshop raw, but it's nice to have everything really flat, then send to color last.
regardless of that, i'm loving the image that is coming from the mark 3, and with all the information that is there (despite the crunchy standard look) i'd say we're close to alexa latitude.

I don't Know if you know this or not, bit the "raw2cdng" has options to convert 10bit Log, and 12 & 16 bit Linear.
i always use 16bit  Linear and go from there.
i choose to Keep my Dynamic Range as is.
i find that Photoshop ACR plugin can something make a mess of the image.
i limit my use of Adobe products, and just go into FCPX with dng's natively
and use "Open EXR tone mapper", it dose a better job.
Plus i have been  think about using  "ACES" in my workflow with Raw.

[dariSSight]

I don't Know if you know this or not, bit the "raw2cdng" has options to convert 10bit Log, and 12 & 16 bit Linear.
i always use 16bit  Linear and go from there.
i choose to Keep my Dynamic Range as is.
i find that Photoshop ACR plugin can something make a mess of the image.
i limit my use of Adobe products, and just go into FCPX with dng's natively
and use "Open EXR tone mapper", it dose a better job.
Plus i have been  think about using  "ACES" in my workflow with Raw.

Where do I find raw2cdng for Mac users?

[reddeercity]

Where do I find raw2cdng for Mac users?

Yes there is 
this the Beta version Link:
June 26, 2013 update: RAWMagic 1.0 beta 7b
http://www.mediafire.com/download/i58sm2p7jy0sohl/RAWMagic-beta7b.dmg
July 27, 2013 update: RAWMagic 1.0 is now available in the Mac App Store
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/rawmagic/id658860973?mt=12
You can find all info at this link:
http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=6218.0
I have not tried it yet , but i here very good thing about it.

Edit: the only thing is i don't know if you have the same output options as
the PC version like 10bit log,12,16bit linear

[dopepope]

I don't Know if you know this or not, bit the "raw2cdng" has options to convert 10bit Log, and 12 & 16 bit Linear.
i always use 16bit  Linear and go from there.
i choose to Keep my Dynamic Range as is.
i find that Photoshop ACR plugin can something make a mess of the image.
i limit my use of Adobe products, and just go into FCPX with dng's natively
and use "Open EXR tone mapper", it dose a better job.
Plus i have been  think about using  "ACES" in my workflow with Raw.

I did not know this, thanks for the info!