Interesting D5 Mark II (cap)abilities -- more/new (careful) footage

joe 1008 said:
Hi Lee!

You did post the wrong link, it leads to the original footage. This is the right one:

http://www.vimeo.com/2069928
Click to expand...

Whoops ! + Thanks for spotting that !


joe 1008 said:
At first sight it looks perfekt. But watching the legs of the man leaving the frame of the first shot you can see an odd movement, his left leg is literally jumping out of the frame. The same happens in the second shot, when the last girl of the group of three enters the frame. The right girl of that group also makes an odd movement when her right leg is passing along her left leg.

As I understand it, it is difficult for interpolation software to interpretate objects that enter or leave the frame or that get hidden by other objects inside the frame. Some programs allow you to mask such objects (like Twixtor) to "explain" to the software, where they come from, where they are and where they go to. But doing so in every situation would suppose a heck of additional work, I suppose.

Said this I must add that, in this footage at least, these are minor flaws I could live with. And thanks a lot to you, Lee, that you postet this example, I was waiting a long time for something like this and I hope more converted footage will follow because it might become a very important workaround with the 5D.
Click to expand...

Good points, quite subtle temporal artefacts, but still there.

I tried going from 60 frames to 100 frames and then back to 50 frames (so 2 seconds NTSC to 2 seconds PAL via 100 frames) - but it looked no better than simply going from 60 frames to 50 frames without first converting to 100 frames.

Bear in mind I just hit 83.333333% on the footage length and switched frame interpolation on - I did no other work.

In the Timewarp plug-in you have much more control and - as you say - Twixtor also has much more control, so maybe with some good settings even these slight temporal glitches could be addressed ?

To be honest I didn't even notice them untill you pointed them out and I had to watch a few times to see what you meant ! I guess I just have low standards !! :cheesy:
 
In fact I had to sit down and watch the clip again and again to see the artefacts. I just was so keen on seeing a footage like yours that I really spent some time with it.

It would be nice to see more complicated footage converted to 25p like a big crowd walking, some footage of fast moving people (like baseball or soccer players), more footage of people entering and leaving the frame. I think it's essential to see how the conversion works with people because it's the most sensible issue IMO.

I'm sure one could get even better results and I wished I had some software myself to try so. But I'm quite convinced already that I will buy the 5D when it comes out in november, and if there is no 25p implementation I'll have to find the best workflow to get 25p. anyway :)

Ah, and one question Lee:

How long did the conversion take on your computer and how fast is its CPU?
 
About 1 minute for a 2 second clip (60 frames to 50 frames).

This is on a fairly old Mac G5 running at 2 x 2GHz (effectively 4GHz)

That spec is getting a little out of date as the current Mac Pros run at 8 x 3.2GHz (effectively 25.6GHz) - so I expect them to be a lot faster.
 
joe 1008 said:
It would be nice to see more complicated footage converted to 25p like a big crowd walking, some footage of fast moving people (like baseball or soccer players), more footage of people entering and leaving the frame.
Click to expand...


On the way . . . .




. . . . . . . . EDIT . . . . . . .

Here you go . . . http://www.vimeo.com/2072194 . . . I can see a few artefacts - but bear in mind that again I have done no tuning of any parameters or any masking etc.

This clip took 3 minutes 40 seconds to render on my Dual 2GHz G5.
 
Last edited:
Lee Wilson said:
I can see a few artefacts - but bear in mind that again I have done no tuning of any parameters or any masking etc.

This clip took 3 minutes 40 seconds to render on my Dual 2GHz G5.
Click to expand...

Funny, this time It's me who can't find any artefacts. Looks really good. The only drawback is that it's about 1 hour of rendertime for one minute of footage - not counting time for settings, masking and so on. I don't know how long it takes to prepare the footage perfectly but I suppose that could take serveral hours. Over night your computer would do the rest of the job. So in an extra day of work - if you don't want to buy the latest Mac - you could convert no more than 15 to 20 minutes. That would be fine for video clips and features or documentaries but if you make your living with wedding videos, for example, it's definitively too slow.
 
joe 1008 said:
Funny, this time It's me who can't find any artefacts. Looks really good.
Click to expand...

There are lots of artefacts in that second example ! Step through frame by frame, they are not hard to spot.

joe 1008 said:
The only drawback is that it's about 1 hour of rendertime for one minute of footage - not counting time for settings, masking and so on. I don't know how long it takes to prepare the footage perfectly but I suppose that could take serveral hours. Over night your computer would do the rest of the job. So in an extra day of work - if you don't want to buy the latest Mac - you could convert no more than 15 to 20 minutes. That would be fine for video clips and features or documentaries but if you make your living with wedding videos, for example, it's definitively too slow.
Click to expand...

If you make your living with wedding videos there is no real need to deliver at 24 or 25p (??) as most domestic DVD players handle both NTSC and PAL frame rates.

??
 
No, I generally don't do wedding vids. I just gave an example of a job where you have to deal with longer but not so time intensive footage. Take a daily news report in PAL land, a daily soap or what ever...

And could you please give me a hint where you found the artefacts? Maybe I'm simply too hungover today to see them...
 
joe 1008 said:
And could you please give me a hint where you found the artefacts? Maybe I'm simply too hungover today to see them...
Click to expand...

There are few of these kinds of things going on:

mejm1.jpg
 
Lee Wilson said:
There are few of these kinds of things going on:
Click to expand...

Thank you, Lee. These artefacts are strange and interesting. In the moving video they appear less, especially on your post on vimeo which was not in HD. Still hopeful that with more advanced software and better settings there is hope for flawless 25p on the 5D.
 
I'll say it again. DOF adapter is dead.. forget all the shortcomings of this camera, this image quality result makes it worthwhile to ditch the prosumercam+DOF adapter.
 
joe 1008 said:
Thank you, Lee. These artefacts are strange and interesting. In the moving video they appear less, especially on your post on vimeo which was not in HD.
Click to expand...

It is HD, but Vimeo has recently (in the last few days changed) and now only alllows 1 HD upload a week to show as HD - but you can still download my 1280x720 file that I uploaded.
 
booggerg2 said:
I'll say it again. DOF adapter is dead..
Click to expand...

not only agree but I sold my M2 HD kit as Nikon released the D90

Not only a HVX + M2 rig monster with a flipped monitor was a nightmare, it kills the low light that is so important to me and that the 5D is so outstanding

the 5D also kills the D90 in "sea footage" department

But I found 5D colors, as all Canon cams, very Michael Mann, I'm not very found of the Miami Vice look
 
beckspace said:
not only agree but I sold my M2 HD kit as Nikon released the D90
Click to expand...

I also looked into my crystal ball and saw the same thing!

So i jumped the gun and just sold my A1 along with my sgpro unit. Thought i sell it early and get maximum resell value before theres a flood in the "used" camera market by early 09.

I swear in a year from now... whos going to pay $4500, $3900, $3200 or even lets say $2000 for a used Letus Ultimate adapter?!?

I know its early but SELL SELL SELL before your shiz decreases in value.
 
Last edited:
That footage from the CanonMII camera looks like freakin film. Forgret about those little issues since most audiences won't even notice them, the overall look of this camera is amazing. I hope Nikon comes out with a better version soon. I'm still getting a D90 no matter what since I only own nothing but Nikon lenses but that Canon looks tight!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top