Magic Lantern Raw Video

[Germy1979]

Hello guys!  I’ve been out of the loop for a while on ML raw capabilities.  I really just want to shoot 1080p 14-bit raw at 24p on the Mark 3.  (Maybe some occasional 60p).   I was curious if you can preview clips in real time yet without the choppy black & white that i remember.  This is for the Mark 3 with a good card.  

[mercer]

@Germy1979 oh yeah, full continuous 14bit 1080p at 24p is completely stable with clean, color liveview. Once installed, on an SD card, recording with a 1066x CF works like any camera on the market... except you get Raw video and every other goody that ML included. 60p is also possible at a lesser resolution but I don’t think it’s continuous at 14bit. With the new Lite modes, you can supposedly record it in 10 or 12bit though. But I haven’t tried the Lite modes yet. If you can handle a choppy liveview, you can record continuous Lite Raw in crop mode at 3.5K. Andrew has a post about it on his blog.

https://www.eoshd.com/2017/09/the-eoshd-5d-mark-iii-3-5k-raw-shooters-guide/

 

[Germy1979]

39 minutes ago, mercer said:

@Germy1979 oh yeah, full continuous 14bit 1080p at 24p is completely stable with clean, color liveview. Once installed, on an SD card, recording with a 1066x CF works like any camera on the market... except you get Raw video and every other goody that ML included. 60p is also possible at a lesser resolution but I don’t think it’s continuous at 14bit. With the new Lite modes, you can supposedly record it in 10 or 12bit though. But I haven’t tried the Lite modes yet. If you can handle a choppy liveview, you can record continuous Lite Raw in crop mode at 3.5K. Andrew has a post about it on his blog.

https://www.eoshd.com/2017/09/the-eoshd-5d-mark-iii-3-5k-raw-shooters-guide/

 

You righteous soul!  Thank you:)  You can get lost in all the forums on ML raw, lol.  We're shooting a short this winter and I have a 5D3 with ML raw at disposal.  It would be pointless though if I couldn't watch what I just shot

[mercer]

7 minutes ago, Germy1979 said:

You righteous soul!  Thank you:)  You can get lost in all the forums on ML raw, lol.  We're shooting a short this winter and I have a 5D3 with ML raw at disposal.  It would be pointless though if I couldn't watch what I just shot

Yeah, I love ML but the forum isn’t the most friendly of places... or organized. You should definitely test it with one of the new, nightly builds.

Full disclosure, I thought you were referring to LiveView while recording, not for playback. Stupidly, I trust my shots and haven’t tested playback, but I am pretty certain it works fine.

[mercer]

@Germy1979 I may have a few minutes to test it for you tomorrow. I’ll let you know. 

[kaylee]

omg i didnt even know there WAS playback~! ?

[Ty Harper]

Mmm I think playback is still the choppy Black and White... at least on mine it is but I also haven't upgraded in a while.

[tomekk]

Hi guys,

Could someone tell me how 1080p ML RAW looks compared to 4K footage from other well-known cameras on 1) 4k TV (55"+) 2) 4k computer screen.

I don't want to buy anything lower quality than my latest Panasonic plasma but want my footage to be future proof too, especially for the big screen TVs.

I would assume, due to viewing distance from the TV, 1080p ML RAW should look really close to a good 4K camera but probably not as good compared on 4k computer monitors. Is it true?

[webrunner5]

Well not to sound snide it pretty much depends how big of a computer monitor you have. I use a 30" 2k HP IPS screen. That is close to a 32" TV that a lot of people still watch TV with. But yes if you are 12' away from it even a 42" it would be less sharp than right up in front of it. My son uses a 42' Plasma TV as his "gamer" monitor. He is less than 6 feet from it, so just about anything looks good that close LoL.

ML 1080p is sharper than normal Canon 1080p output. That would not be hard to do. Canon has never been known for razor sharp 1080p. But i doubt any 1080p is ever going to look as sharp as 4k no matter how good it is. I mean we are talking 4x the resolution which on paper should be twice as sharp. But some Blackmagic and Canon Raw 1080p stuff I have seen is pretty damn good.

I know a lot of people say from that far away you can't tell the distance but I was in Best Buy to buy some GoPro accessories a few days ago and they had a Samsung 55" 4k OLED HDR TV there that was breath taking 50 foot away. I walked all the way over to look at it and it stood out like a sore thumb next to the rest of the 4k TV's around it. So that is 4k next to 4k and it was a Big difference. 1080p would have, well not been so hot I would guess.

[kaylee]

17 hours ago, tomekk said:

Hi guys,

Could someone tell me how 1080p ML RAW looks compared to 4K footage from other well-known cameras on 1) 4k TV (55"+) 2) 4k computer screen.

I don't want to buy anything lower quality than my latest Panasonic plasma but want my footage to be future proof too, especially for the big screen TVs.

I would assume, due to viewing distance from the TV, 1080p ML RAW should look really close to a good 4K camera but probably not as good compared on 4k computer monitors. Is it true?

i would say that in general 1080p ML raw is not for highly detailed shooting – the 5d3 is resolving way less detail than the current competition.

a highly resolved 4k image looks worlds clearer than a 1080p one on my 1080 plasma; on a 4k screen the difference will be even more significant and the screen will be far less forgiving overall, so be prepared for that

[seku]

also remember that 1080p RAW is less than 1080p video in resolution... debayering eats resolution.

But ML RAW's forté lies elsewhere, as we know

[Stathman]

The guys at the ML forum are having progress on the digic 6.

Hopefully santa will come with an 80D! 

[hyalinejim]

My short documentary The Cloud of Unknowing, shot on 5D3 Magic Lantern, has been nominated for "Best British / Irish Short Film" by the London Film Critics' Circle. The awards ceremony is on January 28th... so fingers crossed for that!

Here is a short extract from the film with some info about it:

And here are some more details on the award nomination.

http://www.iftn.ie/news/?act1=record&only=1&aid=73&rid=4291381&tpl=archnews&force=1

Thanks Magic Lantern! 

[mercer]

Congratulations @hyalinejim I just watched it on your Vimeo page after watching your GH5 wedding video.

It looks beautiful and thoughtful. Good luck with it.

[hyalinejim]

Here is a set of LUTs based on Ektar 100 for use on ML DNGs in Resolve

https://bitbucket.org/hyalinejim/ml-log/downloads/ML%20BMD%20to%20Ekt100.zip
 

Set up your project something like this:

 

What's the deal with these luts?

These luts fairly accurately emulate Ektar 100 film, as scanned by a specific lab and at various exposures. With negative film as exposure increases so does colour and contrast. And there are different colour casts in the shadows, midtones and highlights at different exposure levels. The five luts here emulate these changes in colour and contrast from two stops underexposed to two stops overexposed. I've labelled them A to E and added plus or minus marks to indicate the exposure level. I've also carefully adjusted the tonality and white balance of each lut so that middle grey falls at the same point for each one. Applying the minus two lut won't make your footage look underexposed, nor will the plus two make it look overexposed. However, you'll notice that the minus two has very milky blacks, a generally cool tone and muted colours. The plus two is much more contrasty with overall warmer tones and hyper saturation, especially in the reds. It may be too much for skintones, as is often the case with real Ektar 100 film. The middle exposure lut has the most neutral colour cast.

How to approach the luts in post

There are two things you're going to want to be able to do to work with these:
1. Manipulate white balance somehow (both on the orange-blue axis and red-magenta axis). Lumetri is good for this. You can also try a three way colour corrector in the midtones
2. Manipulate black, midtone and white levels. I like to use curves, but levels or lift-gamma-gain controls are also good

Both of these should be done before the lut. So don't feel that you're stuck with a particular colour cast or contrast level with a given lut. If you like the colour of "D +" (one stop over) but find it too contrasty, just lift the black point and lower the white point before the lut to lower overall contrast. Use the midtones control to adjust overall exposure.

If you prefer using ACR, see this post:

https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=19338.msg192046#msg192046

 

[webrunner5]

I think it is pretty funny when I was you guys age we could not wait until something better looking came out, now everyone wants to go back to fuzzy looking stuff LoL.

[mercer]

1 hour ago, webrunner5 said:

I think it is pretty funny when I was you guys age we could not wait until something better looking came out, now everyone wants to go back to fuzzy looking stuff LoL.

Well some people like the look of real life. With some 4K cameras, on the market, the image is clearer and sharper than my eye would normally adjust to on a regular basis. I prefer a softer, filmic look.

I think that a lot of videographers are trying to emulate modern, high end video with these consumer cameras, and I think it’s an exercise in futility. No consumer camera, on the market, will look as good as an Alexa... even when shooting at higher resolutions than even the Alexa shoots at.

But I think even the lower end consumer cameras can emulate the “look” of 70s and 80s film... which is my favorite era of films. 

When you take that goal and mix it with a camera like the 5D3 with ML Raw, that goal is more easily obtainable and can closely resemble the properties of film.

And that’s the look I’m going for.

[webrunner5]

2 minutes ago, mercer said:

Well some people like the look of real life. With some 4K cameras, on the market, the image is clearer and sharper than my eye would normally adjust to on a regular basis. I prefer a softer, filmic look.

I think that a lot of videographers are trying to emulate modern, high end video with these consumer cameras, and I think it’s an exercise in futility. No consumer camera, on the market, will look as good as an Alexa... even when shooting at higher resolutions that even the Alexa shoots at.

But I think even the lowest end of consumer cameras can emulate, not perfectly, but closely emulate the look of 70s and 80s film... which is my favorite era of films. 

When you take that goal and mix it with a camera like the 5D3 with ML Raw, that goal is a lot easily obtainable.

And that’s the look I’m going for. 

I think yes the 5D3 in Raw looks great, but are you talking movies in a theater or on TV with consumer camera? I must admit the 70, 80's stuff looks like shit compared to the 40's, 50's films. So maybe a Canon T2i can look like a crappy Shaft movie back in the day! I guess they weren't shot in Technicolor or Panavision then?

[mercer]

6 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

I think yes the 5D3 in Raw looks great, but are you talking movies in a theater or on TV with consumer camera? I must admit the 70, 80's stuff looks like shit compared to the 40's, 50's films. So maybe a Canon T2i can look like a crappy Shaft movie back in the day! I guess they weren't shot in Technicolor or Panavision then?

I am referring to movies like The Paper Chase, or some Peckinpah like Picnic at Hanging Rock or Let’s Scare Jessica to Death. I even think with ML Raw, higher budgeted films like Jaws or Close Encounters is a look that could be emulated fairly well.

[webrunner5]

Ahh I see, yeah you can get the same or better look with a Canon T2i for sure. That is kind of like broadcast 480p or 720p that I was involved in. I am not sure how hyalinejim made a Canon 5D3 look so bad using ML LoL. Well turning sharpness down to -10 helps! To each his own. He is famous now and we are not LoL.

 Heck you can go on ebay and buy Broadcast cameras and decks for less money than a real camera cost and get the Real look of it! Some of those old Sony cameras are amazing to use and a good learning experience if you get the CCD ones. The tube ones usually have one tube bad and they have to be calibrated and warmed up for a hour before they "settle in" But they have a real smooth look to them the CCD ones don't. The tubes really need to be replaced as a 3 tube set to be balanced right. There are a Bunch of different ones.. The ENG cameras were 2/3" and the Pedestal cameras were 3/4" on average. They had really Long tubes in them. ENG ones were surprisingly short.

The old timers there hated the look of the new CCD ones LoL. Too digital, well they were digital! But you could turn one on and start shooting right away. Big plus for news gathering in the field.