Magic Lantern enables 14-bit RAW CinemaDNG on 5D

Samir Patel said:
Hey everyone, I haven't been keeping up with the nightlies for a while. Can anyone tell me if they've made it possible to capture a S35 framing yet? I know early on they made it possible to do 3X zoom but that was klunky when I was trying to use it.
Click to expand...

Samir, I don't know which camera you are asking about but I will try to answer concerning the 5D Mark III.

3X crop is still klunky, but I think it has improved. The 5D3 is best suited to full frame, full horizontal resolution recording. In particular the 5D3 makes really really nice looking 1:85:1, 2:1, 2:35:1, and 2:39:1 native full horizontal width (1920) footage. One of my new favorites is 1920x960 (2:1) (House of Cards). I can record that continuously even on a 600X UDMA 7 Transcend card.

I think in general ML Raw continues to slowly evolve and improve. The latest builds have removed the buffering messages from the image recording area of the screen and replaced them a small camera icon and smaller text that gives how long you can record at the current resolution.
 
Been out of the loop for a bit. Are these still beta builds or has there been an approved release build?
 
Thanks Celluloid Dream. I was asking about 5D3. I installed the Nov 2 build last night. I guess I will need to start tinkering with it a bit more. I think I also like the 2:1 like House of Cards and it should be able to squeeze that out with my current CF cards. I see their process changed for using the 3X crop from when I last used it. Still looks like a lot of steps but I will start playing with it.
 
Hi Samir, Yeah it still takes a lot of reading the ML forum and just trying things since ML is still evolving.

I will say though that recording raw video with the 5D3 is pretty damn solid now and has been for many months. All you really need to do is get CF cards that can handle it. The real challenge is deciding on and executing a good post workflow.

txdp, Magic lantern for the 5D3 is still in beta, and may never go beyond that. The lead developer considers it a hobby / experiment and has no desire to cater to a mass audience. We may never see what is considered a a "stable" release again, although the core functions in nightly builds (including raw video) have been very stable for a long time.
 
Just to add an update, the last couple of builds right up to the latest Nov. 3, the RAW Video in-camera playback is also improved.

After choosing file to view for playback, pressing SET starts the playback.

Press Pic Styles to show Controls, PLAY, PAUSE, HI(in color but slow),LO(grayscale faster) USE SET to SELECT.

Press Pic Styles again to remove Controls from screen. Press HALF Shutter to STOP Preview.
 
Ted Ramasola said:
Just to add an update, the last couple of builds right up to the latest Nov. 3, the RAW Video in-camera playback is also improved.

After choosing file to view for playback, pressing SET starts the playback.

Press Pic Styles to show Controls, PLAY, PAUSE, HI(in color but slow),LO(grayscale faster) USE SET to SELECT.

Press Pic Styles again to remove Controls from screen. Press HALF Shutter to STOP Preview.
Click to expand...

Just great. That's part of what it needed to take it to the next level. Good on them.
 
Thank you for these digests--they're super helpful. Still no reliable way to record audio internally in ML Raw, right?
 
Razz16mm said:
Black Magic is really stepping it up with Resolve. By far the most practical high quality workflow path for cinemaDNG at the moment. Looks like 10 has much better debayer quality than older versions.
Click to expand...

Is this the same Razz16 that thought Capture One was better like two weeks ago? =P

Just ribbin' ya, of course.

I can only see one reason why people are avoiding Resolve (Free/Lite), and that's the learning curve? Or maybe that's the only one, anyway.
 
Kholi said:
Is this the same Razz16 that thought Capture One was better like two weeks ago? =P

Just ribbin' ya, of course.

I can only see one reason why people are avoiding Resolve (Free/Lite), and that's the learning curve? Or maybe that's the only one, anyway.
Click to expand...

I'll test Resolve Lite 10 shortly, however ACR has really effective noise reduction during de-Bayer which preserves detail very well (better than Neat Video). Resolve Lite has no NR. How does the $1000 version with NR compare to ACR's NR? ACR also has Vibrance which I find looks excellent (nicer look than pushing saturation in many cases). Resolve isn't that hard to figure out (especially with all the free info via google search).
 
It's the learning curve for sure. It's just so weird to use when you approach Resolve for the first time, everything is different from every other program I've used. And the material I've found for learning is usually way too basic, I spent a couple of hours watching tutorials, then went on to try to use it, and quit in about an hour after I realized I just didn't know how to do what I wanted to do, and I was just fighting with the software. May give it another chance when I get a RAW camera: you can't beat the price!
 
jcs said:
I'll test Resolve Lite 10 shortly, however ACR has really effective noise reduction during de-Bayer which preserves detail very well (better than Neat Video). Resolve Lite has no NR. How does the $1000 version with NR compare to ACR's NR? ACR also has Vibrance which I find looks excellent (nicer look than pushing saturation in many cases). Resolve isn't that hard to figure out (especially with all the free info via google search).
Click to expand...

What's the current hive wisdom with respect to some ACR/LR controls being frame dependent? Does the ACR workflow only manage NR, WB and possibly color?

BTW, does anyone know what's the tallest vertical picture size (with width fixed to 1920) to reliably record on 600x cards (at 24p)?
 
cpc said:
BTW, does anyone know what's the tallest vertical picture size (with width fixed to 1920) to reliably record on 600x cards (at 24p)?
Click to expand...

Card performance vary, even if labeled with such and such, even with same brand cards there are some discrepancies. I have 2 brands of 1000x 32gig, and they don't have identical performance.
You should test it and determine your "sweet spot" settings.

On the mkII the max width is only 1872 with a height of 1054 for a 16:9 ratio. This is using a 1000x card.

If you havent gotten a card yet, I suggest you get a 1000x to get full benefit of what your cam is capable of.
 
cpc said:
What's the current hive wisdom with respect to some ACR/LR controls being frame dependent? Does the ACR workflow only manage NR, WB and possibly color?

BTW, does anyone know what's the tallest vertical picture size (with width fixed to 1920) to reliably record on 600x cards (at 24p)?
Click to expand...

1. Not sure what you are asking, but try the visionlog camera profile.

2. Using a Transcend 600X UDMA 7 card on a 5D3, you can get about 75MB/s write speed, which allows for 1920x960 (2:1 ratio) 23.976 continuous with small hacks on, global draw off. That freaking card has a faster write speed than some of the so called 1000X cards.
 
Thx, Ted and Celluloid Dream.
Can't really test cards extensively, don't own the camera. I am considering renting a mark 3 for a short though. Will certainly do some tests beforehand.
How's in-camera playback, btw? Apparently it is "slow", but what does "slow" actually mean? I guess I am asking how practical is it.
Also, are there any issues with monitoring related to raw recording?

Celluloid Dream said:
1. Not sure what you are asking, but try the visionlog camera profile.
Click to expand...

LR and ACR tonal adjustments like highlights, whites, etc seem to depend on the frame being processed, i.e. -50 whites in one frame is not the same as -50 whites in another frame. If you batch a shot and there is some significant difference in tonal distribution in the individual frames (a pan shot, for example), you probably risk flickering. So I was asking if there is any development in regard to this issue, as I don't closely follow the ML raw community.

Actual 75MB/s seems pretty good for a 600x card, good to know.
Any idea what does the "small hacks" option do?
 
Kholi said:
I can only see one reason why people are avoiding Resolve (Free/Lite), and that's the learning curve? Or maybe that's the only one, anyway.
Click to expand...

Or they're like me. I spent all of my funds on cameras and lenses and nothing left over to upgrade my crap computer to a better one. Can't even get resolve to boot up on my computer. Anyway at least I can capture the image. ;) On another note installed the Nov 2nd building and wow they really have advanced this a long way.
 
cpc said:
Thx, Ted and Celluloid Dream.
Can't really test cards extensively, don't own the camera. I am considering renting a mark 3 for a short though. Will certainly do some tests beforehand.
How's in-camera playback, btw? Apparently it is "slow", but what does "slow" actually mean? I guess I am asking how practical is it.
Also, are there any issues with monitoring related to raw recording?
Click to expand...

cpc,

the in-camera playback plays around 10-15 fps ish, not really sure, but it would be enough to assure you that your frames are not corrupted and theres no issues with color.
The color LUT they use for the raw preview is pretty basic, a bit flat-ish looking, I think its averaged, practical and useful for confirming the shot.

in using external monitor, you can use an external monitor via HDMI. on the mkII and mkIII the ML frame guides don't work well so you have to disable it by turning GD OFF and mask your ext monitor the old fashioned way with tape or acetate.

In shooting RAW the HD out display no longer turn to SD or low res when recording and stays in HD all time.

Do not preview footage via ext monitor as this locks up the camera, remove HDMI cable to playback footage.

Also, you mentioned you'll be renting a mkIII for your shoot, make sure it already has ML bootflag enabled if not, you better ask the owner if you can install ML on it because, last time I checked, installing ML on the mkIII will affect wake up time from stndby, with ML installed on the mkIII wake up time becomes 1.5 to 2 seconds. This is bad for those using their cameras for stills as that delay will make them miss a shot. AND there is no way to remove the bootflag for now.

This only affects the mkIII.
 
cpc said:
Also, are there any issues with monitoring related to raw recording?
Click to expand...

The only thing that affects me is using the A/V out on my steadicam (I know I've got to rewire it for HD) is that it shows the ML runtime code over the image. Kind of neat to see whats running in real time but not useable for shooting. Now to get the soldering iron out and HD my sled!
 
jcs said:
I'll test Resolve Lite 10 shortly, however ACR has really effective noise reduction during de-Bayer which preserves detail very well (better than Neat Video). Resolve Lite has no NR. How does the $1000 version with NR compare to ACR's NR? ACR also has Vibrance which I find looks excellent (nicer look than pushing saturation in many cases). Resolve isn't that hard to figure out (especially with all the free info via google search).
Click to expand...

When you reduce the noise reduction setting in ACR, compare the two images in R9 (not even R10 here) they looked the same as far as noise went. It's just that ACR was auto-set to noise reduction, which in the end I did not like at all, personally.

Likely that I didn't look hard enough, but the workflow of a still-image processing application was never going to sit well with me.. That's just me.

And, no, Resolve isn't that hard to figure out, which is why it confuses me when people want to pay for apps that have a tenth of the power Resolve 9 had, and even less when compared to R10 when it comes to moving images. That's what we're working with, a steady stream of images, things change over the span of frames. Or, I guess anyway?

Noise Reduction in R10 is great, but processor intensive. I'm probably going to sell off some hardware (Cameras) to get a new Mac Pro or similar so that I can run the more laborious tasks in R10 without too much of a time burden.

Samuel H said:
It's the learning curve for sure. It's just so weird to use when you approach Resolve for the first time, everything is different from every other program I've used. And the material I've found for learning is usually way too basic, I spent a couple of hours watching tutorials, then went on to try to use it, and quit in about an hour after I realized I just didn't know how to do what I wanted to do, and I was just fighting with the software. May give it another chance when I get a RAW camera: you can't beat the price!
Click to expand...

You should've tried R8. xD 8 to 9 was a massive jump... for me, R8 was way too complicated. R9's cake, 10's an even more streamlined process and whatever magic BMD's stuffing into that thing works... when it's not crashing on you. haha
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top