5D Mark III with Continuous RAW Video Recording

[peederj]

Look at how awful the false color artifacts (rainbow colors) are on the BMCC sensor vs. the 5D3 RAW rendering the pebbles on the path up the middle:
http://nofilmschool.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/cinema5D_5D_Mark_iii_BMCC.jpg

Hmm is this a general issue with Black Magic sensors? Or is it a contrived example?

It tends to be a problem with sensors that work at or near native resolution. The BMCC sensor is only 2.5 megapixels and as a result has no downsampling approach to dealing with moire. At that low resolution, they decided not to use an OLPF because it would lose them their sharpness. With a bayer pattern sensor the grid of photosites tends to cause false color artifacts, which are hard to suppress...but Canon and Sony have learned how to do so quite well. Not so Blackmagic.

Blackmagic has a camera in development that shoots 4K video and is Super 35 sized. However the inexpensive sensor they chose for that is not particularly great at dynamic range. The core ergonomic problems of the BMCC design have also not been addressed in that camera. They have a pocket camera coming out that competes with the GH3 but has the same problems as their current sensor.

What Blackmagic is extremely good at is internet marketing. Not cameras.

 

[Rienzphotoz]

Magic Lantern RAW video for the Canon EOS 5D Mark III comes to the Mac & OSX
http://blog.planet5d.com/2013/05/magic-lantern-raw-video-for-the-canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-comes-to-the-mac-osx/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Planet5dBlog+%28Planet5D+Blog%29

 

[dirtcastle]

Magic Lantern RAW video for the Canon EOS 5D Mark III comes to the Mac & OSX
http://blog.planet5d.com/2013/05/magic-lantern-raw-video-for-the-canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-comes-to-the-mac-osx/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Planet5dBlog+%28Planet5D+Blog%29

This was very helpful. It looks like the RAW workflow is starting to take shape!

I want to preface my next question by saying that I'm a video n00b. Should I do most of my tonal/color adjustments in ACR, or should I wait until I have the footage in AE/Premiere and do most of it in Davinci Resolve, MB Looks, etc.? Does it matter where I do it? My instincts tell me that there are two competing issues:

1. Which program is better at a specific task (e.g., recovering blown out clouds).

2. Flexibility of not having to go upstream to make changes to footage and then re-import downstream. For example, if I do my tonal/color work in ACR, won't that mean I have to go back-and-forth, rather than being able to quickly make adjustments via plugin without the extra step of re-importing?

Again... I'm just a n00b here.

 

[cayenne]

Magic Lantern RAW video for the Canon EOS 5D Mark III comes to the Mac & OSX
http://blog.planet5d.com/2013/05/magic-lantern-raw-video-for-the-canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-comes-to-the-mac-osx/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Planet5dBlog+%28Planet5D+Blog%29

This was very helpful. It looks like the RAW workflow is starting to take shape!

I want to preface my next question by saying that I'm a video n00b. Should I do most of my tonal/color adjustments in ACR, or should I wait until I have the footage in AE/Premiere and do most of it in Davinci Resolve, MB Looks, etc.? Does it matter where I do it? My instincts tell me that there are two competing issues:

1. Which program is better at a specific task (e.g., recovering blown out clouds).

2. Flexibility of not having to go upstream to make changes to footage and then re-import downstream. For example, if I do my tonal/color work in ACR, won't that mean I have to go back-and-forth, rather than being able to quickly make adjustments via plugin without the extra step of re-importing?

Again... I'm just a n00b here.

I'm of the thought, at least for me. If I can get it from the camera, in the raw-est form possible to Davinci Resolve Lite, I'd like to do that...color correct/grade there, and then use in FCPX for editing...and round trip it from there if needed for tweaking....

Man, this looks like it may actually happen here in the not too far off future.

I do IT for a living, but I'm not familiar enough with this type of hardware hacking..so, waiting for something a bit more refiled to be released from ML.

I rarely with $$ equipment, test the waters with both feet.


Cayenne

 

[STFNX]

Some Footage filmed with the help of Magic Lantern on Sunday...

https://vimeo.com/66568137

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Magic Lantern RAW video for the Canon EOS 5D Mark III comes to the Mac & OSX
http://blog.planet5d.com/2013/05/magic-lantern-raw-video-for-the-canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-comes-to-the-mac-osx/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Planet5dBlog+%28Planet5D+Blog%29

This was very helpful. It looks like the RAW workflow is starting to take shape!

I want to preface my next question by saying that I'm a video n00b. Should I do most of my tonal/color adjustments in ACR, or should I wait until I have the footage in AE/Premiere and do most of it in Davinci Resolve, MB Looks, etc.? Does it matter where I do it? My instincts tell me that there are two competing issues:

1. Which program is better at a specific task (e.g., recovering blown out clouds).

2. Flexibility of not having to go upstream to make changes to footage and then re-import downstream. For example, if I do my tonal/color work in ACR, won't that mean I have to go back-and-forth, rather than being able to quickly make adjustments via plugin without the extra step of re-importing?

Again... I'm just a n00b here.

I think the stills software tends to have more powerful sliders when it comes to saving highlights, changing brightness, shadow, curves, contrast, etc. The CS6 version of ACR has some very powerful tools that are not just simple dials, pre-sharpening, NR, etc. And then do a few more tweaks in Photoshop itself if needed. Photoshop also hs some very powerful plug ins for creating B&W and such (although I'm having trouble getting the NIK stuff to batch so that is not working out yet). I'd try to get it right as much as you can with those controls. Then you can use AE to save it out to Cineform 12bit or something and do the rest in Premiere. Once it's save into video you can't use ACR or Photoshop on it anymore I don't think (without doing crazy stuff at least).

 

[cayenne]

Magic Lantern RAW video for the Canon EOS 5D Mark III comes to the Mac & OSX
http://blog.planet5d.com/2013/05/magic-lantern-raw-video-for-the-canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-comes-to-the-mac-osx/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Planet5dBlog+%28Planet5D+Blog%29

This was very helpful. It looks like the RAW workflow is starting to take shape!

I want to preface my next question by saying that I'm a video n00b. Should I do most of my tonal/color adjustments in ACR, or should I wait until I have the footage in AE/Premiere and do most of it in Davinci Resolve, MB Looks, etc.? Does it matter where I do it? My instincts tell me that there are two competing issues:

1. Which program is better at a specific task (e.g., recovering blown out clouds).

2. Flexibility of not having to go upstream to make changes to footage and then re-import downstream. For example, if I do my tonal/color work in ACR, won't that mean I have to go back-and-forth, rather than being able to quickly make adjustments via plugin without the extra step of re-importing?

Again... I'm just a n00b here.

I think the stills software tends to have more powerful sliders when it comes to saving highlights, changing brightness, shadow, curves, contrast, etc. The CS6 version of ACR has some very powerful tools that are not just simple dials, pre-sharpening, NR, etc. And then do a few more tweaks in Photoshop itself if needed. Photoshop also hs some very powerful plug ins for creating B&W and such (although I'm having trouble getting the NIK stuff to batch so that is not working out yet). I'd try to get it right as much as you can with those controls. Then you can use AE to save it out to Cineform 12bit or something and do the rest in Premiere. Once it's save into video you can't use ACR or Photoshop on it anymore I don't think (without doing crazy stuff at least).

How do you go about color grading/correcting THAT many images?

Do you select a bunch of them at a time, that appear to be 'similar' for some things? I was just thinking that it would be nigh impossible to do a lot of layer masks on a bunch of images, etc...since things would be moving and you'd have to do it frame by frame...?

I could see in bulk doing a mass change in global things, like total contrast, white balance, etc...but if you had say, a blown out window, that would take a lot of work to restore that frame by frame wouldn't it?

If you could get that footage, still raw where Davinci could do it, then you could use their tools to have tracking done for you on that window, etc....

So, just curious can you give some more in depth on what all changes you manage with PS and the like? I like the idea, but can't imagine the workflow...

Thanks in advance!!

cayenne

 

[Axilrod]

How do you go about color grading/correcting THAT many images?

Do you select a bunch of them at a time, that appear to be 'similar' for some things? I was just thinking that it would be nigh impossible to do a lot of layer masks on a bunch of images, etc...since things would be moving and you'd have to do it frame by frame...?

I could see in bulk doing a mass change in global things, like total contrast, white balance, etc...but if you had say, a blown out window, that would take a lot of work to restore that frame by frame wouldn't it?

If you could get that footage, still raw where Davinci could do it, then you could use their tools to have tracking done for you on that window, etc....

So, just curious can you give some more in depth on what all changes you manage with PS and the like? I like the idea, but can't imagine the workflow...

Thanks in advance!!

cayenne

Yeah if you're just doing global stuff you can make adjustments to one image and then copy and paste the attributes to all of the other ones. As for doing a blown out window, I'd add a mask to an adjustment layer and then keyframe from there, simple as that. Well not really simple if you don't know what you're doing, but it's an "easy" solution that may get overlooked.

 

[dirtcastle]

I think the stills software tends to have more powerful sliders when it comes to saving highlights, changing brightness, shadow, curves, contrast, etc. The CS6 version of ACR has some very powerful tools that are not just simple dials, pre-sharpening, NR, etc. And then do a few more tweaks in Photoshop itself if needed. Photoshop also hs some very powerful plug ins for creating B&W and such (although I'm having trouble getting the NIK stuff to batch so that is not working out yet). I'd try to get it right as much as you can with those controls. Then you can use AE to save it out to Cineform 12bit or something and do the rest in Premiere. Once it's save into video you can't use ACR or Photoshop on it anymore I don't think (without doing crazy stuff at least).

I was wondering about that too. I've done a lot of heavy stills post in ACR/PS/LR. I've seen what ACR can do. Now I'm also wondering about Lightroom, as I tend to prefer that workflow over ACR/PS for global adjustments.

By the way, I hadn't even thought about Nik. I'd be curious to see footage run through SilverEfex. Cheers for all the great info.

 

[cayenne]

I think the stills software tends to have more powerful sliders when it comes to saving highlights, changing brightness, shadow, curves, contrast, etc. The CS6 version of ACR has some very powerful tools that are not just simple dials, pre-sharpening, NR, etc. And then do a few more tweaks in Photoshop itself if needed. Photoshop also hs some very powerful plug ins for creating B&W and such (although I'm having trouble getting the NIK stuff to batch so that is not working out yet). I'd try to get it right as much as you can with those controls. Then you can use AE to save it out to Cineform 12bit or something and do the rest in Premiere. Once it's save into video you can't use ACR or Photoshop on it anymore I don't think (without doing crazy stuff at least).

I was wondering about that too. I've done a lot of heavy stills post in ACR/PS/LR. I've seen what ACR can do. Now I'm also wondering about Lightroom, as I tend to prefer that workflow over ACR/PS for global adjustments.

By the way, I hadn't even thought about Nik. I'd be curious to see footage run through SilverEfex. Cheers for all the great info.

I don't have adobe tools yet, but I do have the NIK plugins for Aperture. I'm just curious about the workflow with this...are you doing this frame by frame for every image for a video? That sounds VERY time consuming and impractical for any shoot of any reasonable length...?

cayenne

 

[preppyak]

\I'm just curious about the workflow with this...are you doing this frame by frame for every image for a video? That sounds VERY time consuming and impractical for any shoot of any reasonable length...?

cayenne

As they mentioned, the key is to do it with a scene that you can apply global adjustments too. So, I can edit picture number 1 of 240 in my 10s clip, then apply it to all the other images (ACR has synchronize, other programs have a similar feature). Takes just as long as a normal grade, maybe even faster, but you get much more powerful tools.

 

[peederj]

ACR workflow in Photoshop:

http://www.cinema5d.com/?p=18065

 

[dirtcastle]

Finally... I got it to work. Thank you helpful people!

 

[AlexeyD]

Shot some videos yesterday in Prague. The weather was bad, no sun
https://vimeo.com/66968079
Here are some DNGs from it to play with:
http://fil.io/FL5t3/DNGs%20and%20h264

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Magic Lantern RAW video for the Canon EOS 5D Mark III comes to the Mac & OSX
http://blog.planet5d.com/2013/05/magic-lantern-raw-video-for-the-canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-comes-to-the-mac-osx/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Planet5dBlog+%28Planet5D+Blog%29

This was very helpful. It looks like the RAW workflow is starting to take shape!

I want to preface my next question by saying that I'm a video n00b. Should I do most of my tonal/color adjustments in ACR, or should I wait until I have the footage in AE/Premiere and do most of it in Davinci Resolve, MB Looks, etc.? Does it matter where I do it? My instincts tell me that there are two competing issues:

1. Which program is better at a specific task (e.g., recovering blown out clouds).

2. Flexibility of not having to go upstream to make changes to footage and then re-import downstream. For example, if I do my tonal/color work in ACR, won't that mean I have to go back-and-forth, rather than being able to quickly make adjustments via plugin without the extra step of re-importing?

Again... I'm just a n00b here.

I think the stills software tends to have more powerful sliders when it comes to saving highlights, changing brightness, shadow, curves, contrast, etc. The CS6 version of ACR has some very powerful tools that are not just simple dials, pre-sharpening, NR, etc. And then do a few more tweaks in Photoshop itself if needed. Photoshop also hs some very powerful plug ins for creating B&W and such (although I'm having trouble getting the NIK stuff to batch so that is not working out yet). I'd try to get it right as much as you can with those controls. Then you can use AE to save it out to Cineform 12bit or something and do the rest in Premiere. Once it's save into video you can't use ACR or Photoshop on it anymore I don't think (without doing crazy stuff at least).

How do you go about color grading/correcting THAT many images?

Do you select a bunch of them at a time, that appear to be 'similar' for some things? I was just thinking that it would be nigh impossible to do a lot of layer masks on a bunch of images, etc...since things would be moving and you'd have to do it frame by frame...?

I could see in bulk doing a mass change in global things, like total contrast, white balance, etc...but if you had say, a blown out window, that would take a lot of work to restore that frame by frame wouldn't it?

If you could get that footage, still raw where Davinci could do it, then you could use their tools to have tracking done for you on that window, etc....

So, just curious can you give some more in depth on what all changes you manage with PS and the like? I like the idea, but can't imagine the workflow...

Thanks in advance!!

cayenne

Well obviously if you need to do tracking masks and so on leave that stuff for video editing programs, but you can do an awful lot, awfully well with ACR/PS. The new ACR sliders almost work like mini-HDR.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I think the stills software tends to have more powerful sliders when it comes to saving highlights, changing brightness, shadow, curves, contrast, etc. The CS6 version of ACR has some very powerful tools that are not just simple dials, pre-sharpening, NR, etc. And then do a few more tweaks in Photoshop itself if needed. Photoshop also hs some very powerful plug ins for creating B&W and such (although I'm having trouble getting the NIK stuff to batch so that is not working out yet). I'd try to get it right as much as you can with those controls. Then you can use AE to save it out to Cineform 12bit or something and do the rest in Premiere. Once it's save into video you can't use ACR or Photoshop on it anymore I don't think (without doing crazy stuff at least).

I was wondering about that too. I've done a lot of heavy stills post in ACR/PS/LR. I've seen what ACR can do. Now I'm also wondering about Lightroom, as I tend to prefer that workflow over ACR/PS for global adjustments.

By the way, I hadn't even thought about Nik. I'd be curious to see footage run through SilverEfex. Cheers for all the great info.

I heard someone tried it with SilverFX and it was said to have come out wicked awesome!! But they said it took like years to render a short little thing.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

If you do AE/ACR or PS/ACR workflow make sure to check my post in the video forum here as you will get a mismatch between sRGB tone response and gamma 2.2 so after all the hard work perfecting things it will suddenly look wrong in Premiere Pro or played back by most video software since your monitor/HDTV is probably set to gamma 2.2 or so but AE/ACR and PS/ACR worklflows can get you stuck in footage saved as sRGB TRC so you get a slight contrast and saturation boost and shadows and lower mid-tones look too dark. The difference is surprisingly noticeable at times. But there are ways to force those workflows to save out in gamma 2.2. See my posts.

 

[dirtcastle]

I heard someone tried it with SilverFX and it was said to have come out wicked awesome!! But they said it took like years to render a short little thing.

SilverEfex is slow with stills, so it's no surprise. I will test it out. I haven't messed with Resolve, but I'd be curious to know if it has capabilities beyond ACR or LR.

If you do AE/ACR or PS/ACR workflow make sure to check my post in the video forum here as you will get a mismatch between sRGB tone response and gamma 2.2 so after all the hard work perfecting things it will suddenly look wrong in Premiere Pro or played back by most video software since your monitor/HDTV is probably set to gamma 2.2 or so but AE/ACR and PS/ACR worklflows can get you stuck in footage saved as sRGB TRC so you get a slight contrast and saturation boost and shadows and lower mid-tones look too dark. The difference is surprisingly noticeable at times. But there are ways to force those workflows to save out in gamma 2.2. See my posts.

Yup, I'm struggling with this color space issue too. I've been getting a washed-out look after running the RAWs through Lightroom and QuickTime7. I will try a bunch of settings variations, including some you've mentioned. Sometimes I just experiment until I get the best results.