Topic: 5D Mark III with Continuous RAW Video Recording (Read 30012 times)
| Magic Lantern 1920 x 1080 full 1080P raw test Canon 5D Mark III Edit 2 | Small | Large |
Logged
I have a basic question: Which software can process the 5D3 RAW movie files? Can Adobe Premiere do this? Thanks
. There are probably other possible steps to take after raw2dng.
Logged
the videos look the same to me.
Logged
The A/B test to do is the RAW version vs. the HDMI out using Cinestyle, recorded to the Ninja 2 in 220Mbps ProRes HQ and graded in post with the proper LUT. Because anyone who cares about getting the most IQ out of the camera will be using that setup (or something very similar) rather than internal...of course the RAW is going to kill the miserable internal codec.
And BTW, all my testing has repeatedly shown ALL-I and IPB are 100% identical IQ on the 5D3 internal. Haven't seen anything credible to refute that...I think it's just Mbps marketing to counter the GH2 hack.
That is alot of misinfo.
1. The internal codec isn't what does much damage. Point at a static scene and record with Ninja 2 at ProRes HQ and record internally 1.2.1 and there is NOT much difference you can see at all. A little but it is all very subtle to be honest. It's vastly smaller compared to the difference between what this ML recorded stuff looks like compared to normally internally recorded video.
2. For static scenes or ones with just bits moving around in the frame all-i and IPB are pretty much the same and all-i is just a horrible waste of space, perhaps worse if anything. If you pan around or the entire scene is changing frame to frame then ipb totally falls apart and all-i holds up much better (as does say pro res on ninja 2).
Logged
The A/B test to do is the RAW version vs. the HDMI out using Cinestyle, recorded to the Ninja 2 in 220Mbps ProRes HQ and graded in post with the proper LUT. Because anyone who cares about getting the most IQ out of the camera will be using that setup (or something very similar) rather than internal...of course the RAW is going to kill the miserable internal codec.
And BTW, all my testing has repeatedly shown ALL-I and IPB are 100% identical IQ on the 5D3 internal. Haven't seen anything credible to refute that...I think it's just Mbps marketing to counter the GH2 hack.
That is alot of misinfo.
1. The internal codec isn't what does much damage. Point at a static scene and record with Ninja 2 at ProRes HQ and record internally 1.2.1 and there is NOT much difference you can see at all. A little but it is all very subtle to be honest. It's vastly smaller compared to the difference between what this ML recorded stuff looks like compared to normally internally recorded video.
2. For static scenes or ones with just bits moving around in the frame all-i and IPB are pretty much the same and all-i is just a horrible waste of space, perhaps worse if anything. If you pan around or the entire scene is changing frame to frame then ipb totally falls apart and all-i holds up much better (as does say pro res on ninja 2).
Please. I'm not the source of misinfo, I post to keep people honest. I have done quite scientific tests with the 5d3 and Ninja 2 (and the C100) to know very well what I am talking about, compared to the legions of people who have no idea how to properly ask these questions much less answer them. And dear Andrew is too animated in his disdain for Canon to claim any credibility on the matter if that's your authority.
For the hundredth time, video desperately needs an independent lab to publish fully controlled test charts and the like for us to work off objectively. A bunch of well-meaning enthusiasts and blowhards does not suffice. I will test the ML implementations when I get a fast card to do so and I will report back. While not a common net.idiot I am not a substitute for a lab either.
Logged
They are claiming that heat is not really an issue, in reality the 1DX "should" be hackable and not have the heat issues too.
The thing stopping them there is Canons legal team.
I wonder how long it will take before Canon come down on ML for releasing this.
It could put a large dent in C100/C300 sales.
Well, if ML is doing a clean room reverse engineer of the camera, that should be perfectly legal. He isn't doing anything that helps 'circumvent' safe guards....like people have come down on gaming mods for. This hack doesn't allow you to circumvent copyrighted material.
One is allowed to do what they wish with hardware they purchase (at least still for now, although the corps are trying more and more to infringe on that)....so, this should be perfectly legal.
However, Canon can still throw legal threats around if they wish, whether they have merit or not. These days, it doesn't matter if you have a legal case or not...it is deep pockets that often win.
However, if Canon were to do this, the "Streisand Effect" might take place, especially if he's released the code open source and other people take the code and join in the efforts. Canon might get more spread and publicity of this type code rather than stiffling it.
But generally, if you're doing a clean room reverse engineer on hardware you bought and own, with no NDA's signed, etc...you should be perfectly legal.
If Canon legal comes knocking on ML's front door, I'd say first thing he might do, is contact the EFF and try to get them on his side with their legal help/advice.
My $0.02,
cayenne
I think Canon are secretly happy with this. ML has been around for quite sometime and Canon knows how much ML helped them sell a lot of 5D2s. Who knows, they might also profit by adopting those free codes to their new cameras thereby raising raising their value without even doing anything... Good times!
Logged
Logged
Logged
