Formats?

[videobro]

Hi everyone :-)

I was wondering what formats magic lantern on the 5dMkII can save video in? I know raw... and I'm assuming h.264 is still there... but is there any middle ground?

Also- I know raw via hdmi is impossible (I've been scouring the forums!) but has ml found a way to get anything more than 8 bit 4.2.2? Using the Atomos would rock!

Thanks!

[chmee]

short answer. no.

[videobro]

Do you mean there are no other formats? Or that 4.2.2 8 bit is the most out of HDMI for the 5d3?

[Stedda]

At this point in time the Devs are unable to access the HDMI chip or little is known about it.

[videobro]

Ok thanks! So hdmi is still 8-bit 4.2.2...

What about saving in different files. Can you save in ProRes? That would be a gooooodsend! Or really any "middle ground" between h.264 and balls-to-the-wall raw.

[dmilligan]

This gets asked a lot because people don't realize how extremely computationally intensive video encoding is and how extremely limited the CPUs in these cameras are. Real time video encoding is impossible to do in software on these little ARM CPUs (it's hard to do even on a desktop CPU). The only options are using the hardware encoders that are present in the system or doing no encoding at all (raw). The only hardware video encoder is h264. There is a JPEG encoder (obviously) so it might be possible to do MJPEG, but it's a long shot. Somebody's got to figure out how to use it and it's got to be fast enough.

Search the forum for more information there are no shortage of threads on this topic

[videobro]

I'm going to be doing corporate videos, etc. for clients.

Is 8bit 4.2.2 enough for my purposes?

Do you suggest a BMCC or the 5D3 with ML? Or with an atomos field recorder?

Thoughts?

[Walter Schulz]

Isn't this an answer only your clients can give after seeing your productions?

Ciao
Walter

[videobro]

Technically? I guess. But there probably aren't many clients who are looking for a YouTube video that are looking for a 3D ARRI Alexa system, so even with that, though "my clients would be the final say", I would not get the system.

So again for corporate work, is 4.2.2 8 bit good (via atomos)? Is raw a better choice? Is the bmcc a better choice?

Etc.

[dubzeebass]

Better how? It's all subjective man. Just do your thing and maybe it will be good. Maybe not. It's not the tools. It's how you use them.

[videobro]

Yah I agree but at a certain point, some things are not subjective. For example, broadcast standard is 4.2.2 50mb/s. At the same time, we have "subjective" things that aren't subjective-- ie I'm not going to offer SD VHS to clients either.

That's why I'm looking for a baseline of sorts...

"8 bit doesn't work unless you want to offer budget video."
"Raw is complete overkill unless you're doing real estate."

Etc.

[dubzeebass]

Raw is overkill unless you're filming your dog at home or your foot to test focus pulling. 8bit video is a waste of time; just look at Black Swan and any movie made before the advent of >8 bit digital sensors.

[Rshred]

H.264 can still produce good results. It just depends on how picky your clients are.  If you want to be safe and you have enough for a camera that has better raw capabilities, go for it. In my opinion the lens used and the camera-operator are much more important than the camera (for the most part). Some of my favorite videos that I have ever seen are shot in H.264. 

Here's one I shot in H.264 during high-school. Some shots are overexposed/underexposed, but I was in the learning-curve at that point and most likely always will be.

https://vimeo.com/67948776

Good Luck with your work,
Rob