Sean Cunningham Posted April 30, 2013 Share Posted April 30, 2013 I've done some tests with 1.2.1 firmware and it seems that the HDMI out is in fact 422. I'm a bit surprised the author of this site seemed to imply canon was publishing untruths in regard to this. Are you positive the Ninja isn't doing chroma filtering upon detection of a lower bandwidth stream than it's expecting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmcindie Posted April 30, 2013 Share Posted April 30, 2013 Are you positive the Ninja isn't doing chroma filtering upon detection of a lower bandwidth stream than it's expecting. A device like that will never do chroma filtering. Come on now. It can't detect if a signal is 4:2:2 or 4:2:0. If it would do filtering, then it would do it always. Detecting a lower bandwidth... The bandwidth is the same. HDMI always sends atleast 4:2:2, never 4:2:0. From my 5 second test, it also seemed like real 4:2:2 so I am backing Murray up 100%. People are mad towards Canon and spew lies. It's funny really. The difference in filesizes was telling. I recorded the ALL-i internal stream for 1 gigabyte. Same clip, at uncompressed 4:2:2 was 12 gigabytes. So the all-i is at 12:1. It's actually pretty good. Think about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JORSLUK Posted April 30, 2013 Share Posted April 30, 2013 Hi!! Just installed and tested official firmware and captured hdmi with bmd Ultrastudio express (PRORES HQ 23.976), also captured same footage ALL-I to compare. As I can see, captured prores has slight shift to green :(. ALL-I looks well white balanced. Definitively issue from new firmware, so post white balance should needed to correct this little shift. Also...NO AUDIO THRU HDMI on official release!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JORSLUK Posted April 30, 2013 Share Posted April 30, 2013 some frame grabs!! thank you!!http://www.boomly.com/ALL-I_VS_PRORES.jpghttp://www.boomly.com/table(green_shift).jpghttp://www.boomly.com/zoomed.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgharding Posted April 30, 2013 Share Posted April 30, 2013 nahua, Ian Anderson and Andrew Reid 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackrat Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 Although it's hard to see a difference comparing external vs internal with 1.2.1 which is what most of us naturally focused on first, I noticed that comparing internal 1.2.1 vs internal with the previous firmware does look different. It seems that 1.2.1 is a touch crisper and doesn't make 100% of the detail go to mush in less contrasty areas now (although it still doesn't seem like C300-level detail) and it seems like you need to back of sharpening a bit in post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackrat Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 Is it true that the beta 1.2.0 had audio over HDMI? If so, where did that go? Marketing? (OTOH someone else claimed the HDMI interface hardware isn't capable of supporting audio on the 5D3. Don't know which story to believe.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebv Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 Just found this green screen test http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zr8rICBYII0 Julian 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zach Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Just found this green screen test http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zr8rICBYII0 camera quality aside, this video cracks me up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
see ya Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 As I can see, captured prores has slight shift to green :(. ALL-I looks well white balanced. Definitively issue from new firmware, so post white balance should needed to correct this little shift. Green color shift? Pinks to Orange as well? Nothing to do with WB. Use the right color matrix luma coefficients for BT601 instead of BT709 which will the assumed for HD source on pixel count if BT601 is not declared in the stream. Or other way round if Prores is flagging BT601 and the source is BT709. Also is the source full range luma or not? Not sure if Prores even does full luma, but that's what the Canons output. JORSLUK 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlev23 Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 the one question i have is picture style, seemed that my user 3 profile gave me a second neutral setting, i wonder if this is what canon intended for us to use as a "best" hdmi output picture style? i was hoping for a canon log picture style that lets us view a rec 709, or does it do that anyway without using a picture style?anyone have any info or discoveries on this? im sick of using cinestyle and dealing with banding skies.thanks in advance! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmcindie Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 im sick of using cinestyle and dealing with banding skies.thanks in advance! Don't use Cinestyle. Use either prolost neutral (which is neutral with contrast and sharpness at minimum and saturation two notches down) or flaat10p. Those two are the best styles. Also if you use IPB please switch to ALL-i. IPB breaks up quite quickly and introduces banding and smoothing. Here is my extremely scientific test (a slight exposure difference as I was not actually testing IPB and ALL-i, but HDMI): ALL-i (named them accidentally other way around, but this is ALL-i) https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...otion_zoom.jpg IPB:https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...otion_zoom.jpg As you can see...IPB is shit. Huge amounts of banding on motion blur, everything smoothed out, pretty much like any AVCHD cam. ALL-i is probably one of the only consumer codecs on consumer cams that doesn't do that. Motion doesn't even have to be that fast, regular handheld does it too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlev23 Posted May 6, 2013 Share Posted May 6, 2013 Don't use Cinestyle. Use either prolost neutral (which is neutral with contrast and sharpness at minimum and saturation two notches down) or flaat10p. Those two are the best styles. Also if you use IPB please switch to ALL-i. IPB breaks up quite quickly and introduces banding and smoothing. Here is my extremely scientific test (a slight exposure difference as I was not actually testing IPB and ALL-i, but HDMI): ALL-i (named them accidentally other way around, but this is ALL-i) https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...otion_zoom.jpg IPB:https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...otion_zoom.jpg As you can see...IPB is shit. Huge amounts of banding on motion blur, everything smoothed out, pretty much like any AVCHD cam. ALL-i is probably one of the only consumer codecs on consumer cams that doesn't do that. Motion doesn't even have to be that fast, regular handheld does it too. wow, interesting, the neutral setting that newly popped up in my user def 3 is configured exactly how you said prolost is, do you think they do anything extra in the gamma curve of that profile other than use neutral with sharpness, contrast and saturation turned down? i dont know, most post people i work with demand cinestyle, it also seems like you gain a full stop using it, im just surprised they dont give us the canon log as a picture style now, since we have the hdmi out, it would only make sense. update: got my answer through google, ill try this setting from now on! its interesting that when i upgraded firmware that these exact settings where put into my user def 3 though! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
see ya Posted May 6, 2013 Share Posted May 6, 2013 It's funny to read when people mention the 'Prolost' Neutral as if it were a 'Picture Style'. I'm pretty sure when Stu named it that as a tongue in cheek sideways swipe at all the fancy pants picture profiles been knocked up and the 'slightly' exagerated claims made about them. He's long since suggested the 'flat' approach on prolost.com and before that in the DV Rebels Guide and the fact that just flattening neutral down a bit can be done without the need for a laptop to load the PS out in the 'field', to set in numerous cameras when a group get together to shoot adhoc. They'll be many out there with dialed down Neutral not even knowing they were using 'Prolost', and not only on Canon DSLR's but the for runners in the budget indie shooter hands such as the Canon HV range, :-) Sean Cunningham 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgharding Posted May 7, 2013 Share Posted May 7, 2013 As you can see...IPB is shit. Huge amounts of banding on motion blur, everything smoothed out, pretty much like any AVCHD cam. ALL-i is probably one of the only consumer codecs on consumer cams that doesn't do that. Motion doesn't even have to be that fast, regular handheld does it too. One of the reason I-frame is kinda essetial for a film-like look. Every other kind of codec smears the frames together. Film frames didn't do that! I do use Cinestyle though, if you use an LUT in something like resolve your banding doesn't seem so bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bioskop.Inc Posted May 7, 2013 Share Posted May 7, 2013 I've stopped using Cinestyle, it was ok for a while but the banding & other issues got to me. I've now migrated to Visioncolor's 'VisionTech' & sometimes use their other profiles - they seem to hold up much better IMO. If you didn't know, Canon have actually produced some other picture styles (i haven't tried them): http://www.canon.co.jp/imaging/picturestyle/file/index.html And if you have the time here's 123 different PS: http://davidstafford.wordpress.com/2011/07/24/123-free-canon-dslr-picture-styles/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgharding Posted May 7, 2013 Share Posted May 7, 2013 Wow! That's a lot! I like the look of Visioncolor's profiles though, maybe I'll give them a shot, they seem to have FilmConvert settings too. I tend to use Cinestyle as it has a LUT from Technicolor, there are settings for it in Filmconvert, and it's a known factor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurtinMinorKey Posted May 7, 2013 Share Posted May 7, 2013 One of the reason I-frame is kinda essetial for a film-like look. Every other kind of codec smears the frames together. Film frames didn't do that! I do use Cinestyle though, if you use an LUT in something like resolve your banding doesn't seem so bad. I don't this is necessarily true. Don't they use inter-frame compression on blue-ray? I guess it has more to do with the implementation. In camera it is probably done very crudely. Funny, I've always thought the consensus with the 5d3 was too shoot inter (IPB), because it suffered from less macro-blocking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcs Posted May 7, 2013 Share Posted May 7, 2013 A decent implementation of IPB will always look better than I-Only if IPB is allowed up to I-Only bitrates. For fast motion (even moderate motion), the information that lower bitrate IPB has to throw away to hit the target bitrate generally can't be seen when played in real-time (except in extreme cases or bad implementations). I tested IPB vs. I-Only when the 5D3 first was released. IPB was clearly more detailed and had less macroblocking (I posted frame grabs as well): http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?278746-ALL-I-vs-IPB-IPB-Wins This could have changed with the new firmware. When I want the best quality I skip the 5D3 and use the FS700 with Speed Booster and Canon lenses (the FS700 isn't perfect but produces a real ~1920x1080 image vs. the 5D3's ~1620x910 image). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.