November 27, 2014, 09:35:43 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - planetMitch

Pages: [1]
1
This is intriguing but I have to admit ever since I bought my first 5DII a few years ago, I've been scared you-know-what-less to even think about putting ML on my bodies.  I'm now up to a 5DIII and still can't imagine putting unwarranted third party software on such an expensive device.  The prospect of turning my 5DIII in to a $3000 paperweight when something goes wrong is just too terrifying a prospect to contemplate.  And lest anyone accuse me of being a weak-kneed sissy on the subject, I have a master's degree in software engineering and work daily with custom-built, multi-million dollar software systems for the U.S. Air Force, some designed and written by me, some by others.  So I know the risks.  Software has often been described as the single most complex construct every devised by the mind of man.  The level of complexity and unpredictability in even the simplest software solutions can reach mind boggling proportions.  Once a software program advances beyond the typical, single line "Hello World" level of complexity, it can quickly become next to impossible to identify every possible execution path through the code, much less have the time and money to test all of those execution paths with every possible range of input and output parameters.  There are "best practice" approaches to keep the complexity level - and thus the testatbility, predictability, and maintainability - to within reasonable levels.  But in the end, it's still a might big risk to take if Canon is going to slam the door in your face when you come calling with a bricked and useless camera that got that way because you put a piece of unauthorized third party software on it.

I'm not saying anyone who uses ML should stop, but before I took that plunge, I sure would like to hear about the experiences - both good and bad - from a whole hell of a lot of people who have actually used it.

Magic Lantern is safe as you can get. As far as I've been able to tell, there aren't any bricks as a result of Magic Lantern. Not saying it can't happen, but as this is loaded in memory and memory gets wiped when you hard re-boot your camera (taking the battery out), the odds of it happening are pretty slim.

Will I guarantee it? No - but that's because I'm not a Magic Lantern developer and I don't know what is in the code. But my research hasn't found any bricked cameras because of Magic Lantern.

2
Video & Movie / Re: Incident on Marmont Avenue
« on: May 16, 2012, 07:52:20 AM »
The whole thing could have been trimmed to at least 13min with a few cleaner cuts. getting rid of some of the not needed beauty shots.

Speaking of which, the camera and lighting was just that beautiful.

Shame the same couldn't be said about the sound.

That was my biggest let down of the whole thing, the sound (which is 30% of the movie experience) just didn't feel right. Parts felt like it was recorded on camera others to an external recorder, foley was overdone and inconsistent.

Lets not forget the continuity issues like the fact he hears them upstairs through the monitor but he unplugged the monitor. Or when the kid was given the lollypop? When the sitter and the old guy come to check on her she doesn't, but then when the mom comes down she does again.
Strange, especially when he gives it to her when the old guy first gets there????

Again beautifully shot but a few issues that spoilt it overall.

Thank you for taking time to comment.

Unfortunately, you're not getting the timing of when things happened... some of the scenes with the creepy guy were shifted early in the short to make you think... the flashbacks are all in the proper sequence tho.

He doesn't hear things thru the monitor, he hears them thru the house, we tried to muffle the sounds as if they were from a distance, not thru the monitor. Maybe that didn't work as well as we wanted. None of the sound was recorded on the 5D3 - it was all done with external mics on booms.

He gives the girl the lollypop just before he hides behind the door when he hears Becca and Charlie coming down the stairs and in the hall but she hides it in the blankets and they don't see it. The mom sees it after he's long gone. There are a few minor continuity errors, but that's not one of them.

Thanks for watching and thinking about it!

3
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5D Mark III Light Leak?
« on: April 07, 2012, 09:48:50 PM »
I'm constantly amazed at the reactions.

The problem clearly isn't understood totally yet... and still people already demanding product recalls and claiming this is a huge problem for Canon's reputation.

No product is perfect! EVER

No product is ever fully tested before it is released - it is impossible to test every situation in the lab.

I'm not saying this shouldn't be investigated and potentially improved, but let's not over-react

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5D Mark III Light Leak?
« on: April 07, 2012, 03:20:12 PM »
Have read this thread and thread over on dpreview forum... people have not shown that it impacts the image in any way. I'm sure people will do more testing and maybe someone will find something.

but for me, so far, this is a non-issue. And Canon engineers may have accounted for this to begin with.

Wake me when something major comes along

Pages: [1]