# 5D Mark III with Continuous RAW Video Recording



## Canon Rumors Guy (May 13, 2013)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=13460"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=13460">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>From Magic Lantern

</strong>Magic Lantern has unlocked RAW video recording in the <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/847545-REG/Canon_5260A002_EOS_5D_Mark_III.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">Canon EOS 5D Mark III</a>. From early reports the quality of the video files is pretty amazing and might be better than the C300 and definitely better than the BlackMagic Cinema Camera.</p>
<p>You can read about the workflow, see sample videos and more at EOSHD.</p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.eoshd.com/content/10324/big-news-hands-on-with-continuous-raw-recording-on-canon-5d-mark-iii" target="_blank">Read Mor at EOSHD</a> | <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/847545-REG/Canon_5260A002_EOS_5D_Mark_III.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">EOS 5D Mark III at B&H Photo</a></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## infared (May 13, 2013)

Ahhhh....The embarrassment.....for Canon....


----------



## bseitz234 (May 13, 2013)

In other news, canon discontinues the Cinema EOS line, 5d3 sold out everywhere...


----------



## baervan (May 13, 2013)

ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh panic! get me a 5dIII, now!


----------



## preppyak (May 13, 2013)

Definitely a potential game changer for some narrative work, and people doing really short clips. But anyone doing event work (weddings, etc) wouldnt really be able to use it. I remember how mad people were at the 4GB limit (which meant 12mins or so); no way they'd settle for 700 frames.

But, since I'm one of the people who records short clips, I'd love this capability in my 60D, even if its for 10-15s


----------



## dash2k8 (May 13, 2013)

As the linked article says, the world just turned on its head. To have a 5D3 outdo the much more expensive C300 is insane. I still can't wrap my head around it. I was planning to buy a C100, but this has changed everything.


----------



## LuCoOc (May 13, 2013)

The 1Dc is basicaly a 1Dx with other Software and a bigger heat sink.
I'm not sure if it is the same problem here but I'd be carefull not to damage my 5D due to more heat from the raw output.


----------



## AG (May 13, 2013)

preppyak said:


> Definitely a potential game changer for some narrative work, and people doing really short clips. But anyone doing event work (weddings, etc) wouldnt really be able to use it. I remember how mad people were at the 4GB limit (which meant 12mins or so); no way they'd settle for 700 frames.
> 
> But, since I'm one of the people who records short clips, I'd love this capability in my 60D, even if its for 10-15s



The thing to remember is this is still in early stages. 

They are already working on continuous shooting.
The other issue there is the size and costs of the 1000x and 1066x cards. 
I wonder if or when they get the HDMI out working as well, you could hook it up to an Ninja 2 and basically have no need for space or card issues?



LuCoOc said:


> The 1Dc is basicaly a 1Dx with other Software and a bigger heat sink.
> I'm not sure if it is the same problem here but I'd be carefull not to damage my 5D due to more heat from the raw output.


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.


----------



## AndrewReid (May 13, 2013)

I think a raw shooting DSLR is a very different beast to the C100 / C300, and to be honest I don't think many pros will be making the switch.

I wouldn't yet turn up to a pressured commercial shoot with a hack and raw though - asking for problems.

At the moment raw isn't practical for most projects where practicality / routine reliability comes ahead of image quality / art. The C100 is a very different camera to the 5D Mark III ergonomically and that more so than image quality is why pros love it so much. The broadcast ready codec on the C300 is also a big thing and raw is not a broadcast acquisition format because you cannot edit it fast or just drop it into the BBCs news workflow! The amount of data it generates is phenomenal.

I think the Blackmagic Cinema Camera now has a stern rival, but the Cinema EOS stuff plays in a different part of the park.

I won't be shooting my own short film / music videos on C300 now I have this on the 5D Mark III though. I am an image quality junkie and that matters more to me than the practicalities of getting it working smoothly, and delivering a quick commercial project.


----------



## Vossie (May 13, 2013)

I like the on-screen message (at 0:48 in the movie): "your camera will explode"


----------



## Etienne (May 13, 2013)

Great news ! ... my 5DIII has an even longer, and more productive future!

aside ... why doesn't Canon hire these guys (ML), and blow every other brand out of the water?


----------



## Archangel72 (May 13, 2013)

This is all beautiful, and I'm very happy for 5DMarkIII owners, but... what about Canon 1Dx ???
Double with price, and still with no Canon or ML firmware to some major upgrade in video for our expensive camera!?
Now, 5DMarkIII will have better video capabilities, better picture in video, raw video recording... and 1Dx - NO !
Great, just great... that's why 1Dx cost more than 2 x 5DMarkIII so we could have less quality for double the price.
Wonderful... beautiful... great... :


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (May 13, 2013)

Canon Rumors said:


> and might be better than the C300 and definitely better than the BlackMagic Cinema Camera.



The BMCC still has more than a stop better DR (than the 5D3), and as of now, more resolution for continuous shooting. And while the c300 is a much easier camera to use, BMCC's best image blows the c300 out of the water.


----------



## cayenne (May 13, 2013)

AG said:


> 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


----------



## Barrfly (May 13, 2013)

It's the kind of announcement that I'm glad to hear and apprehensive of at the same time.
Lets hope it's developed and shared before canon does something to put a cap on it .
Think about it, Canon cameras are capable of so much more then they enable with their firmware. Most of the features that ML enables Canon wants to sell us as separate items like accessories for shooting time-lapse movies and whatnot. 
I'm very happy about the add on features but worry Canon is going to try an nip it on the bud .


----------



## verysimplejason (May 13, 2013)

cayenne said:


> AG said:
> 
> 
> > They are claiming that heat is not really an issue, in reality the 1DX "should" be hackable and not have the heat issues too.
> ...



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!


----------



## RAWShooter126 (May 13, 2013)

Archangel72 said:


> This is all beautiful, and I'm very happy for 5DMarkIII owners, but... what about Canon 1Dx ???
> Double with price, and still with no Canon or ML firmware to some major upgrade in video for our expensive camera!?
> Now, 5DMarkIII will have better video capabilities, better picture in video, raw video recording... and 1Dx - NO !
> Great, just great... that's why 1Dx cost more than 2 x 5DMarkIII so we could have less quality for double the price.
> Wonderful... beautiful... great... :


The only reason ML doesn't release for the 1Dx is because Canon have made a very bold, public statement, that if any third party modifies any camera in the EOS 1 line at a software level then they will feel the might of Canon's entire legal team


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (May 13, 2013)

verysimplejason said:


> 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!



I wouldn't be surprised if Canon actually helped ML out with this. The timing is really suspicious. Right after the failed(or at least underwhelming) firmware upgrade, and just as BMCC is coming on strong.

This is something that we could have had 5 years ago on the 5D2(except maybe CF cards were not fast enough then)!!! 

Either way I'm happy, this means a new lease on life for my 5D for video.


----------



## crazyrunner33 (May 13, 2013)

Looking forward to this once there are faster and more affordable cards in the next year or so. Canon more than likely had zero involvement with this, it was discovered on accident while creating a histogram for RAW photography. Seeing this live DNG feed through the HDMI is not possible, this has been discussed extensively on the Magic Lantern forums. Heat is also not so much of an issue because the sensor is already pushing out the RAW feed.

BMCC will still be the way to go for RAW video due to it being more reliable and the easier workflow with compressed RAW, but this is a gamechanger for people on a budget or hobbyists.


----------



## Chosenbydestiny (May 13, 2013)

Etienne said:


> Great news ! ... my 5DIII has an even longer, and more productive future!
> 
> aside ... why doesn't Canon hire these guys (ML), and blow every other brand out of the water?



Because Canon only really competes with itself at the moment =P


----------



## peederj (May 13, 2013)

HurtinMinorKey said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > and might be better than the C300 and definitely better than the BlackMagic Cinema Camera.
> ...



Oh please not more BMCC Koolaid. The C300 image (especially recorded externally) is one of the cleanest 1080p images in the entire business with virtually no moire or false color artifacts and lovely color science. The BMCC fanboys (some of whom are or were apparently secretly in the employ of Blackmagic Design) keep repeating nonsense but repeating something ad nauseum does not make it true. IQ test: hand a better DP (who isn't taking money or gear from either company, and who didn't learn what they know from reading online forums) a C300 and a BMCC and see which one s/he hands to the intern to shoot BTS.

Yes even Andrew (who I think, to his credit, is too random a figure for anyone to consider buying off) has declared the BMCC dead with this new hack. It's just about as annoying to use as RAW on a BMCC and the 5d3's a much better sensor and camera. I think even the official HDMI out from the 5D3 recorded into a Ninja 2 is a superior image to BMCC RAW. 

RAW is really not all that as so many people insist. If the only choice is between RAW and JPEG, ok, we all choose RAW. But ProRes 422 HQ 10 bit with a log gamma is every bit as good as RAW in practice, and vastly more practical. JPEG (and the video version MJPEG) is very lossy like H.264 is, and 4:2:0 AVCHD is very constricting in post. But the system we have working today with the 5D3, recording the entire pixel-binned sensor in 8 bit 422 with Cinestyle onto a Ninja 2 in ProRes HQ is quite a nice image. (Though not nearly as nice, lowlight or otherwise, as the C series image externally recorded.)

This RAW hack will give only an incremental improvement over that, in one of two ways. You will get 12 bit color but still it will be subsampled to 4:2:2 (not exactly RAW in my book, which I define as "a lossless record of all sensor information"). And your dynamic range will be stored in full fidelity 14 bit as opposed to being mapped to a gamma...gaining you about 1 stop in practice and a bit less propensity for banding than using the Cinestyle/Ninja approach. Worth constantly swapping costly CF cards and then having huge post hassles for? Maybe in an extreme HDR run-n-gun situation where it would be more hassle to use gels/lights/reflectors/butterflies to control DR.

The other thing against this hack is, if they are using the full sensor, they must be downsampling (binning?) to 1080p or similar resolutions. Which will give at least some of the 5D3 soft video look. Either that or they are cropping (and I understand at least in some settings they are) to the native resolution of the sensor. This cropping to 1:1 pixel is going to be terribly noisy and will require NR in post. You can also get this cropping/digital zoom trick with the current HDMI out, by zooming in 5x or 10x in focus assist and recording the zoomed image (which comes out 4:3 but you can crop in post) and it is noisy too.

Overall I think this is a good development only because it silences a lot of idiocy coming from the Blackmagic fanboys. I don't know how their paid operatives will spin this, other than "We don't force you to use hacks! We're on your side!" Well the entire Blackmagic camera line is a series of hacks so that doesn't change much. If ML is able to make this really pleasant in practice (perhaps with a hi-def codec...I will have to see how MJPEG looks) then this will replace the HDMI out/Ninja option for people not needing long shooting times. But I don't see any scenario where this hacked 5D3 is a superior image to a C300 or C100 + Ninja 2 under any circumstances. That's silly talk.


----------



## cayenne (May 13, 2013)

crazyrunner33 said:


> Looking forward to this once there are faster and more affordable cards in the next year or so. Canon more than likely had zero involvement with this, it was discovered on accident while creating a histogram for RAW photography. Seeing this live DNG feed through the HDMI is not possible, this has been discussed extensively on the Magic Lantern forums. Heat is also not so much of an issue because the sensor is already pushing out the RAW feed.
> 
> BMCC will still be the way to go for RAW video due to it being more reliable and the easier workflow with compressed RAW, but this is a gamechanger for people on a budget or hobbyists.



I have read about the DNG feed not being able to be fed through the HDMI, but, I wonder if this 'raw' feed discovered here could be sent through the cable?

After all, it is just data...it would be the bee's knees (did I just really say that?) if they could push this data out of the HDMI, or maybe even the USB connection to the camera, to an external recorder.

At that point, all bets are off on this I'd say....

C


----------



## Chewy734 (May 13, 2013)

I wonder why the Canon legal team would look the other way on this hack since it's on the 5D3, but throw down the hammer whenever hacking the 1D X is mentioned?


----------



## Midphase (May 13, 2013)

preppyak said:


> Definitely a potential game changer for some narrative work, and people doing really short clips. But anyone doing event work (weddings, etc) wouldnt really be able to use it. I remember how mad people were at the 4GB limit (which meant 12mins or so); no way they'd settle for 700 frames.
> 
> But, since I'm one of the people who records short clips, I'd love this capability in my 60D, even if its for 10-15s



Just to clarify, it would appear that the amount of footage that the 5D3 is able to record is limited only by the card size. We're not talking about 700 frames, we're talking 24 minutes on a 64gig card (apparently with no overheating issues).

Stay tuned!


----------



## East Wind Photography (May 13, 2013)

Will be interesting to see if they can get RAW video out on the HDMI port as well. If so then that opens the world up to using a blade...forget the CF cards.

Regarding heat, they did not say that heat wasnt an issue. They said that they did not know if heat would be an issue or not. Canon does build in some safeguards to protect the camera from self destructing into a ball of flames. The issue here is now long will the 5D3 record RAW video before the camera shuts down. That's where the difference lies with the 1DC and CXXX series. They can pretty much shoot video all day without a heat problem.... STILL, the 5D3 may very well be an option when a budget is of concern and the videographer doesn't mind spending some down time to cool off.

Yes it's still early in the development and we may find out that this mode causes permanent damage to internal components due to inadequate heat dissipation....but if you are running ML then you already understand that could happen at any time for any reason.




AG said:


> preppyak said:
> 
> 
> > Definitely a potential game changer for some narrative work, and people doing really short clips. But anyone doing event work (weddings, etc) wouldnt really be able to use it. I remember how mad people were at the 4GB limit (which meant 12mins or so); no way they'd settle for 700 frames.
> ...


----------



## Midphase (May 13, 2013)

Chewy734 said:


> I wonder why the Canon legal team would look the other way on this hack since it's on the 5D3, but throw down the hammer whenever hacking the 1D X is mentioned?



I think it's because the two cameras are purchased by different types of people. I own a 5D3, but would not dream of buying a 1D X or 1D C...if I needed to shoot in 4K, I'd rather rent (probably a RED Scarlet or the upcoming BMCC Pro).

Canon understands that a hacked 5D3 will see a surge in sales due to Magic Lantern, but they also understand that a hack in the 1D X to match the 1D C specs would result in a drop in purchases for that camera.

Say what you will about Canon, but they're not idiots.


----------



## Midphase (May 13, 2013)

East Wind Photography said:


> Will be interesting to see if they can get RAW video out on the HDMI port as well. If so then that opens the world up to using a blade...forget the CF cards.




My understanding is that HDMI encodes data in such a way that it is not designed to transmit RAW. It does support 422 uncompressed, but as we have seen the results are not particularly stellar. I think there is a good deal of confusion as to the difference between RAW and Uncompressed.


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (May 13, 2013)

peederj said:


> Oh please not more BMCC Koolaid. The C300 image (especially recorded externally) is one of the cleanest 1080p images in the entire business with virtually no moire or false color artifacts and lovely color science. The BMCC fanboys (some of whom are or were apparently secretly in the employ of Blackmagic Design) keep repeating nonsense but repeating something ad nauseum does not make it true. IQ test: hand a better DP (who isn't taking money or gear from either company, and who didn't learn what they know from reading online forums) a C300 and a BMCC and see which one s/he hands to the intern to shoot BTS.



Look at the videos online, the evidence is overwhelming, the very best of the c300 is outclassed by the very best from the BMCC. And the DR advantage is a fact. 



peederj said:


> Yes even Andrew (who I think, to his credit, is too random a figure for anyone to consider buying off) has declared the BMCC dead with this new hack. It's just about as annoying to use as RAW on a BMCC and the 5d3's a much better sensor and camera. I think even the official HDMI out from the 5D3 recorded into a Ninja 2 is a superior image to BMCC RAW.



Now you are just talkin crazy. The 5D3 does not have a better sensor, it has a bigger sensor. The BMCC more than a stop advantage in DR, and a higher native ISO. 

Sure there are other codecs that are _almost _as good as raw, but you don't get those on any Canon Camera other than the c500.


----------



## Chewy734 (May 13, 2013)

Midphase said:


> I think it's because the two cameras are purchased by different types of people. I own a 5D3, but would not dream of buying a 1D X or 1D C...if I needed to shoot in 4K, I'd rather rent (probably a RED Scarlet or the upcoming BMCC Pro).
> 
> Canon understands that a hacked 5D3 will see a surge in sales due to Magic Lantern, but they also understand that a hack in the 1D X to match the 1D C specs would result in a drop in purchases for that camera.
> 
> Say what you will about Canon, but they're not idiots.



So, you're telling me that a hacked 5D3 won't cannibalize sales of their higher-end cameras and video recorders? I find that hard to believe. I also find it hard to believe that a large number of 1D C cameras are being sold, as opposed to the 1D X. People who need the 1D C to shoot video all day long will continue to buy the 1D C. People who want to occasionally shoot video on the 1D X should be allowed to use the potentially more unstable hack if they want.

Is it true that if there are any rules ML would be breaking by modifying the 1D X, it would be the same as when modifying the 5D3?


----------



## peederj (May 13, 2013)

Chewy734 said:


> I wonder why the Canon legal team would look the other way on this hack since it's on the 5D3, but throw down the hammer whenever hacking the 1D X is mentioned?



Well first of all the 1DC is just Canon's hack on the 1DX. I don't buy that there is some required heatsink, that's window dressing. They don't want 3rd parties competing for sales of hacks at that price point ($5,000+).

The second thing is the 1DX has a proper downsampler for its video rather than the 5D3's pixel binning. Which is necessary given the sensor dimensions (unless they wanted to go back to the hideous 1st gen line skipping). And so a hacked 1DX recording less lossy compression (with more actually distinguishable pixels, and more luma/color levels, in more situations) would give the C series a run for its money while this 5D3 hack is just going to please the ambitious kids that think they're getting a bargain. For those kids $3000 for a 5D3 is a lot of money and about all Canon can expect out of them. But people who will buy a 1DX are professionals that will prefer going C-series and Canon wants to usher them that way (for their own benefit I may add) rather than have them confused by kids and their hacks.


----------



## cayenne (May 13, 2013)

Chewy734 said:


> Is it true that if there are any rules ML would be breaking by modifying the 1D X, it would be the same as when modifying the 5D3?



Of course, IANAL....but if ML is doing a clean room reverse engineer of the hardware, and are not enabling the un DRM'd use of copyright material, and if they are to a lessor note, not breaking any encrypted software owned by Canon on the hardware, they they should be perfectly within their legal rights to 'hack' the hardware and run whatever software they want on it.

You buy a car...and you can do pretty much what you wish with it, and the manufacturer can't touch you for those actions. Largely, Canon can't stop you from doing what you wish with the hardware once you buy it.
If you want to install and run completely new software on it, your perfectly legal to do so.

There is no difference I can see, between doing it on a 5D3 or a 1Dxyz. 

However, as I posted before, often it doesn't matter if the company has legal standing or not, they can bring suit, and it is a contest on who has the deepest pockets for $$ that wins in the end, by dragging on the case endlessly.

But we need to remember, that at least to date....when you BUY hardware, nothing prevents you from opening it up, playing with it as you see fit or enhancing or destroying it.

It is YOURS.

Disseminating information or means for others, as long as it doesn't involve enabling copyright infringement, should be perfectly legal too.


----------



## Chewy734 (May 13, 2013)

peederj said:


> Well first of all the 1DC is just Canon's hack on the 1DX. I don't buy that there is some required heatsink, that's window dressing. They don't want 3rd parties competing for sales of hacks at that price point ($5,000+).
> 
> The second thing is the 1DX has a proper downsampler for its video rather than the 5D3's pixel binning. Which is necessary given the sensor dimensions (unless they wanted to go back to the hideous 1st gen line skipping). And so a hacked 1DX recording less lossy compression (with more actually distinguishable pixels, and more luma/color levels, in more situations) would give the C series a run for its money while this 5D3 hack is just going to please the ambitious kids that think they're getting a bargain. For those kids $3000 for a 5D3 is a lot of money and about all Canon can expect out of them. But people who will buy a 1DX are professionals that will prefer going C-series and Canon wants to usher them that way (for their own benefit I may add) rather than have them confused by kids and their hacks.



Perhaps you are right, but this would be similar to let's say...

BMW suing tuning companies for selling a $500 tune for their turbo-charged 335i cars, giving it a potential performance boost over their top-of-the-line M3 (which costs like $20k more). Does it cannabalize the sales for the M3? Sure. But people still buy the M3, and people still tune their 335i cars.

But, perhaps that analogy isn't equivalent, since the M3 also has suspension upgrades, etc. But, wouldn't that also be similar to the speculated heat sink upgrades on the 1D C, for example?


----------



## Chewy734 (May 13, 2013)

cayenne said:


> However, as I posted before, often it doesn't matter if the company has legal standing or not, they can bring suit, and it is a contest on who has the deepest pockets for $$ that wins in the end, by dragging on the case endlessly.



Ahh, yes... you are right about that. I didn't mean to go off on a tangent here, I was just curious if anyone knew why Canon was hell bent on protecting their 1D line as opposed to their more popular 5D line, that's all.

That being said, this is really cool news, and I hope that Canon doesn't curtail this project.


----------



## East Wind Photography (May 13, 2013)

So let's be clear... ML does not modify the camera firmware with perhaps the exception that it needs to be able to boot from the card. ML software rides on top of the firmware so it's considered and Add-on.



Chewy734 said:


> Midphase said:
> 
> 
> > I think it's because the two cameras are purchased by different types of people. I own a 5D3, but would not dream of buying a 1D X or 1D C...if I needed to shoot in 4K, I'd rather rent (probably a RED Scarlet or the upcoming BMCC Pro).
> ...


----------



## cayenne (May 13, 2013)

East Wind Photography said:


> So let's be clear... ML does not modify the camera firmware with perhaps the exception that it needs to be able to boot from the card. ML software rides on top of the firmware so it's considered and Add-on.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sure and good point!!

However, if ML changed and became a firmware replacement....there is nothing illegal about that at all.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 13, 2013)

Holy crap! Beyond speechless!
AWESOME NEWS!!!!




(How the holy heck is that hackers with no documentation or even access to Digic can pull this off in like 3 weeks and Canon has had this locked away for over a year??

Man if they released the camera like this this thing would've still be permanently out of stock to this very day and made 5D2 sales look like a joke! There wasn't even remote competition for this when the 5D3 had first been released! Black Magic may not even have gotten off the ground.)


----------



## Marsu42 (May 13, 2013)

I am always hesitant to post new ML features from the dev stage here because general users aren't advised to use the stuff yet - but since the news ended up here anyway:

Another great feature of this discovery is the *raw histogram* which will let you actually see if anything is under- or overexposed _in raw_ and not just in jpeg like with the vanilla Canon fw.


----------



## RGF (May 13, 2013)

For those of us who still shoot stills, wonder if they can do anything to improve the camera. Like bracketing focus for focus stacking, ...


----------



## Midphase (May 13, 2013)

Chewy734 said:


> So, you're telling me that a hacked 5D3 won't cannibalize sales of their higher-end cameras and video recorders? I find that hard to believe.



What I'm saying is that they are different cameras for different types of users. I think that maybe we could say that the $5k price is the demarcation line (some would argue that it's $3k). Pretty much every indie filmmaker that I know owns a 5D2, a 7D or one of the cheaper models. Practically nobody that I know owns a 1D C, a C300, or a RED (unless they're a rental house). I think Canon understands this market demarcation, and they know that a hacked 5D3 will not cannibalize sales of their higher end cameras...we were never going to buy them anyway. They also know that higher end cinematographers don't really want hacked gear, people who shoot commercials or medium to high budget films use Alexas, or RED's or the 1D C, and those guys will not be "tempted" by a hack...no way.

As I said, I think Canon is many things (not all positive), but I don't think they're idiots.


----------



## Barrfly (May 13, 2013)

14-bit RAW on Canon 5D Mark III vs. factory default - Night Image Quality & Dynamic Range on Vimeo


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 13, 2013)

Barrfly said:


> 14-bit RAW on Canon 5D Mark III vs. factory default - Night Image Quality & Dynamic Range on Vimeo



wow, interesting


----------



## sanj (May 13, 2013)

AndrewReid said:


> I think a raw shooting DSLR is a very different beast to the C100 / C300, and to be honest I don't think many pros will be making the switch.
> 
> I wouldn't yet turn up to a pressured commercial shoot with a hack and raw though - asking for problems.
> 
> ...



+1


----------



## peederj (May 13, 2013)

Barrfly said:


> 14-bit RAW on Canon 5D Mark III vs. factory default - Night Image Quality & Dynamic Range on Vimeo



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.


----------



## GuyF (May 13, 2013)

RAWShooter126 said:


> Archangel72 said:
> 
> 
> > This is all beautiful, and I'm very happy for 5DMarkIII owners, but... what about Canon 1Dx ???
> ...



I'm not disputing what you say about Canon and their desire to protect their intellectual property but is it not a case of, I bought the product therefore I can do whatever I like with it? Sure, if it were rented that's a different case altogether but isn't it a bit like someone buying a family car and turning it into a monster truck? The manufacturer no longer owns the vehicle therefore as long as the owner is aware the warrantly is toast then who gives a crap?

Let's say the hacked firmware gets out into the wild - how could Canon know the "end product" video comes from a hacked camera unless they had access to the raw data? If you see a video on TV or the web, can you tell what it was shot on just by the look of it?

Kinda makes you think Canon are just scare-mongering. Time will tell.

Regards.


----------



## RendrLab (May 13, 2013)

I think that it's a bit naïve to think that Canon's R&D team is not fully aware of what exactly their cameras are capable of producing. They have been doing this a long time and I'm sure there's a room full of engineers laughing amongst themselves every time one of these "hidden jewels" are revealed to the masses.
If Canon bombarded us with all of the OEM features presently available, plus all of the things that the Camera's internals/sensor is capable of doing (ML additions included), I believe we would whine more because we would expect more with every camera release.
To me, ML is the old "unlock your GeForce making it a Quadro" trick. Sure the ability is there to make the GeForce graphics card do more than it's advertised/marketed to do, but there are subtle reasons that it's not the same thing as physically having the Quadro graphics card. Just because there is no commercial EOS camera with all of the bells & whistles ML adds to the mix, doesn't mean that Canon doesn't have hardware in the Government or Aerospace sector that we don't have privy to.
Or maybe they have begun to purposefully leave a lot of these features out because the wonderful ML crew are doing what they are doing and what better test bed than us consumers using our cameras that we paid for with our money, providing massive amounts of end user data and feedback. If someone has a problem with a ML feature, the world knows and an update may come out fixing the issue. Canon knows this too but it doesn't cost them a penny to fix because they technically do not support said feature.
So, when 5 different cameras come out over the next x amount of years carrying the DiGiC 6/7/whatever processor, all with varying amounts of features, I won't be surprised in the least to see some polished ML originals in my cameras menu.
For the record, I love ML & I did hack my GeForce back in the day. Long live the hacker!


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 13, 2013)

peederj said:


> HurtinMinorKey said:
> 
> 
> > Canon Rumors said:
> ...



The quality of the samples posted here looks amazing. I don't know why you are talking about softness and noise. Look at the comparisons, in both cases it's way better than recording to camera internally through normal software or through recording over HDMI to Ninja2 (in fact it is the latter internal vs Ninja 2 where the difference is very slight; ML vs not using ML is huge).


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 13, 2013)

cayenne said:


> crazyrunner33 said:
> 
> 
> > Looking forward to this once there are faster and more affordable cards in the next year or so. Canon more than likely had zero involvement with this, it was discovered on accident while creating a histogram for RAW photography. Seeing this live DNG feed through the HDMI is not possible, this has been discussed extensively on the Magic Lantern forums. Heat is also not so much of an issue because the sensor is already pushing out the RAW feed.
> ...



That would be awesome if they could get a super crisp 1920x1080 with slightly better DR over the HDMI, pu tthat into a ninja 2 and it would be quite practical. Of course to a CF card and RAW would be best, but you could have a half way there option that would be easier to use when you value that more.


----------



## cayenne (May 13, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> cayenne said:
> 
> 
> > crazyrunner33 said:
> ...



You know, the more I think about this...the more I wonder if it would be possible for ML to output the 'raw' video out through the USB port.

I'm pretty sure it is only usb2, but perhaps that still would be fast enough to push out the raw data that ML is capturing from the sensor?

Just wondering and pondering....

C


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 13, 2013)

peederj said:


> Barrfly said:
> 
> 
> > 14-bit RAW on Canon 5D Mark III vs. factory default - Night Image Quality & Dynamic Range on Vimeo
> ...



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).


----------



## LOALTD (May 13, 2013)

cayenne said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > cayenne said:
> ...



Unfortunately USB 2.0 is bottlenecked around 40-45MB/s  I thought the same thing for a second. Too bad they didn't put a USB 3.0 port on there!


----------



## Marsu42 (May 13, 2013)

RAWShooter126 said:


> The only reason ML doesn't release for the 1Dx is because Canon have made a very bold, public statement, that if any third party modifies any camera in the EOS 1 line at a software level then they will feel the might of Canon's entire legal team



Completely wrong, while Canon gave ml a "hint" there was really no pressure needed. The (afaik majority of the) ml devs feel that backporting the 4k feature would be stealing from Canon since this cuts away the main feature of the 1dc, and Canon is free to set up their camera line as they want it.

As for the 1d line: "_Magic Lantern is a community project aimed to enhance the low- to midrange DSLR cameras, not to save money for rich people. We only want to make our great cameras even better - and share these modifications with you._"

... but of course since ml is open code other people might grab it and port it to the 1d, but the current ml team won't.



RGF said:


> For those of us who still shoot stills, wonder if they can do anything to improve the camera. Like bracketing focus for focus stacking, ...



Focus bracketing is available in the dev/nightly builds (actually I added the original version myself to ml since I wanted it that badly)


----------



## cayenne (May 13, 2013)

I've been poking around. Apparently the Lexar 1000x cf 64GB cards are 'on sale' now for about $299.

Hmm...I wonder if it might be a good idea to pick up one of these in anticipation of ML raw video coming online soon.

It isn't like I couldn't be using it right now for normal video/stills photography.....

Hm......


cayenne


----------



## Rienzphotoz (May 13, 2013)

AWESOME


----------



## eyeland (May 13, 2013)

This is so sweet, a pain having to wait for new CF's to ship before trying it out


----------



## scrup (May 13, 2013)

Only a Canon will get better as it ages.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 13, 2013)

cayenne said:


> I've been poking around. Apparently the Lexar 1000x cf 64GB cards are 'on sale' now for about $299.
> 
> Hmm...I wonder if it might be a good idea to pick up one of these in anticipation of ML raw video coming online soon.
> 
> ...



The two packs of 32GB cards are less, 64GB total for $250.


----------



## cayenne (May 13, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> cayenne said:
> 
> 
> > I've been poking around. Apparently the Lexar 1000x cf 64GB cards are 'on sale' now for about $299.
> ...



Interesting...got links for those?

Then again...thinking.

From what I understand, with this 'raw' recording, you're gonna get basically 15min per 64GB card, which would make 32GB only about 7 Min.

I could make due with 15min at a time, swapping out with 2x cards shooting at home (one in camera, one uploading to computer), but I think only 7 min at a time would cause a lot of stoppage.

I'll need to find out what those times vs space numbers are.....

C


----------



## neighborsgoat (May 13, 2013)

East Wind Photography said:


> ... Canon does build in some safeguards to protect the camera from self destructing into a ball of flames.



Hmm, right about now comes into my mind that piece of black duct tape Canon used to fix the light leakage merely one year ago! That for sure must have been a fire proof duct tape


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 13, 2013)

cayenne said:


> I've been poking around. Apparently the Lexar 1000x cf 64GB cards are 'on sale' now for about $299.
> 
> Hmm...I wonder if it might be a good idea to pick up one of these in anticipation of ML raw video coming online soon.
> 
> ...


I bought mine for $278 last fall from Adorama, so $299 is not much of a sale. I'd wait for a better price.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 13, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> I am always hesitant to post new ML features from the dev stage here because general users aren't advised to use the stuff yet - but since the news ended up here anyway:
> 
> Another great feature of this discovery is the *raw histogram* which will let you actually see if anything is under- or overexposed _in raw_ and not just in jpeg like with the vanilla Canon fw.



Wait. Is the Trammel Hudson heavily involved with all of this the very same famed hacker of old Atari 8 bit days Tram Hudson??


----------



## cayenne (May 13, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> cayenne said:
> 
> 
> > I've been poking around. Apparently the Lexar 1000x cf 64GB cards are 'on sale' now for about $299.
> ...



HEY!!!

Thanks for the heads up!! 
I'll definitely be on the lookout for price drops on these then more to that ballpark!!


cayenne


----------



## bp (May 13, 2013)

I keep seeing occasional posts about how Canon should put these guys on the payroll.

Frankly, at the rate they're going in the direction of high bitrate recording, the company who should seriously consider subsidizing ML is LEXAR

;D


----------



## Marsu42 (May 13, 2013)

bp said:


> I keep seeing occasional posts about how Canon should put these guys on the payroll.



Canon fw and Magic Lantern have completely different approaches (market stratification & ultra-conservative stable fw vs. customization, features & backports). Any of the ml devs would probably go crazy after working one month for Canon  so let's hope that Canon at least stays out of ml's way if they decided not to help.


----------



## @!ex (May 13, 2013)

Not sure if anyone has posted this yet but I had to share. Check out the difference in dynamic range from the 5D mk3 with canon firmware output (i-frame):

Canon 5D Mark III i-frame video test

Now here is the same scene shot with magic lantern firmware using the new 14 bit RAW output. He is able to completely recover all the shadows and highlights. Crazy.

Canon 5D Mark III i-frame video test

You'd probably need a lot of 1000x CF cards to hold all that data though.


----------



## mrmarks (May 14, 2013)

I have a basic question: Which software can process the 5D3 RAW movie files? Can Adobe Premiere do this? Thanks


----------



## risc32 (May 14, 2013)

the videos look the same to me.


----------



## matt2491 (May 14, 2013)

Yea he accidentally posted the same video twice. Here is the raw video:

Magic Lantern 1920 x 1080 full 1080P raw test Canon 5D Mark III Edit 2


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 14, 2013)

mrmarks said:


> I have a basic question: Which software can process the 5D3 RAW movie files? Can Adobe Premiere do this? Thanks



first raw2dng then into After Effects as a batch load and then written out as an uncompressed video file and then into Premiere ;D. There are probably other possible steps to take after raw2dng.


----------



## westr70 (May 14, 2013)

risc32 said:


> the videos look the same to me.



+1. I was seriously underimpressed. The "new" one is great.


----------



## peederj (May 14, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> peederj said:
> 
> 
> > 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.
> ...



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.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 14, 2013)

peederj said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > peederj said:
> ...



I compared them all myself. All-i vs IPB is hugely different if there are major frame to frame changes (granted during such motions the eye isn't as adept at noticing things are wrong at full speed) although for static yeah not much. Ninja 2 did way better than IPB for frames that huge changes as well (didn't get to compare to all-i for that yet) but for static stuff it doesn't look so different and even for most grading it doesn't seem super different yet, better but it's modest. These ML RAW video samples I mean wow the difference leaps out at you and hits you over the head.


----------



## wickidwombat (May 14, 2013)

verysimplejason said:


> cayenne said:
> 
> 
> > AG said:
> ...



I think you are right they are probably reading the news of this and going right o boys better crank up the L glass production sales volumes are gonna go UP! sure some people will go with alot of good 3rd party glass but at the end of the day everyone loves some nice L glass

if anything this is gonna help propel 5Dmk3 sales well ahead of the nikons so I would think Canon should be very happy and they didnt have to lift a finger


----------



## risc32 (May 14, 2013)

they should be. i hope they don't get any stupid ideas of shutting it down. It's a real + for them to have people like ML doing this.


----------



## dslrdummy (May 14, 2013)

So why is he wearing a helmet?


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 14, 2013)

*New 5D3 Raw video samples mind blowing!*

http://www.eoshd.com/content/10324/big-news-hands-on-with-continuous-raw-recording-on-canon-5d-mark-iii

He updated the samples! Quality is just insane.

Just like that this may have become the best video DSLR ever. By MILES. And even outdo many of the more (even much more) expensive mid-tier video offerings.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 14, 2013)

dslrdummy said:


> So why is he wearing a helmet?



because the quality of this camera is now mind blowing and he wants to retain his brains


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 14, 2013)

http://www.eoshd.com/content/10324/big-news-hands-on-with-continuous-raw-recording-on-canon-5d-mark-iii

The updated video there now is beyond insane.

The 5D3 may have just become the greatest DSLR in history!!!!

(OK if you like video and stills; otherwise if you only care about still then 1DX for fast action, 7D for wildlife reach and D800/D600 for low ISO high DR work)


----------



## Marsu42 (May 14, 2013)

cayenne said:


> 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.



Nope, the contract for a fw upgrade (the current cannot be extracted out of the camera) it says you mustn't reverse engineer it at all.


----------



## ChilledXpress (May 14, 2013)

*Re: New 5D3 Raw video samples mind blowing!*

Insane !!!


----------



## dirtcastle (May 14, 2013)

*Re: New 5D3 Raw video samples mind blowing!*

Stunned.


----------



## NormanBates (May 14, 2013)

*Re: New 5D3 Raw video samples mind blowing!*

This is insanely awesome.

But keep in mind:
* no audio recording
* only 24 minutes of 1920x1080 24fps RAW video in a very expensive 128GB 1000x CF card
* when editing on a very fast computer, playback is around 1.5fps


----------



## dirtcastle (May 14, 2013)

*Re: New 5D3 Raw video samples mind blowing!*



NormanBates said:


> * when editing on a very fast computer, playback is around 1.5fps



Can you elaborate on this? I'm wondering what this will mean for workflow.


----------



## Chosenbydestiny (May 14, 2013)

Funny how in previous threads everyone wanted RAW video on Canon DSLRs, and now that it can be done everyone in this thread is so MEH about it, hahaha.


----------



## jayvo86 (May 14, 2013)

*Re: New 5D3 Raw video samples mind blowing!*



NormanBates said:


> This is insanely awesome.
> 
> But keep in mind:
> * no audio recording
> ...



Personally, I don't have interest in a RAW workflow. However, it'd be nice to start with that an convert to Apple Pro Res 422 10 bit before I entered post and be way ahead of stock H.264.


----------



## iso79 (May 14, 2013)

I shoot mostly stills so I don't really care either way. It's a nice hack I will neve use.


----------



## pastadipizza (May 14, 2013)

Can we use this version of ML with the new firmware version of 5D Mark3?


----------



## cayenne (May 14, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> cayenne said:
> 
> 
> > 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.
> ...



Hmm...what contract? I've never signed a contract with Canon for anything. Are you saying ML signed some contract with Canon?

And I was referring to reverse engineering the hardware, not the software as such. If someone wanted to write a clean room firmware to *replace* the firmware provided by Canon, there's nothing illegal about that..


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (May 14, 2013)

*Re: New 5D3 Raw video samples mind blowing!*



LetTheRightLensIn said:


> http://www.eoshd.com/content/10324/big-news-hands-on-with-continuous-raw-recording-on-canon-5d-mark-iii
> 
> He updated the samples! Quality is just insane.
> 
> Just like that this may have become the best video DSLR ever. By MILES. And even outdo many of the more (even much more) expensive mid-tier video offerings.



The real crazy thing is that this capability also exists on the 5D2, that means we could have had video like this 5 years ago. 

At this point I am convinced that Canon helped ML get this up and running. The timing is just too weird. 

I still don't think it's quite on par with the BMCC, but it's definitely debatable now (we need more tests), and it wasn't before. 

This is the coolest thing from Canon in the past 4 years, and ostensibly, they had nothing to do with it. ;D


----------



## awinphoto (May 14, 2013)

iso79 said:


> I shoot mostly stills so I don't really care either way. It's a nice hack I will neve use.



In the words of Sal Cincotta, innovate or die. About time you start to innovate starting with video. =)


----------



## cayenne (May 14, 2013)

*Re: New 5D3 Raw video samples mind blowing!*



NormanBates said:


> This is insanely awesome.
> 
> But keep in mind:
> * no audio recording
> ...



Yeah, I read about 15min on a 64GB card, which I think I'd do a couple of them to start with (right now, must one man banding it on private projects)...but could always have one in the camera, one uploading to the computer. I think that would work to start with.

No audio, not that bad...and I've heard possibly they might could do audio later? But even so...just use a clapper and sync in post with external audio....I've got a couple of Rode video mics (latest is the stereo pro still in box)...and I have an older Zoom H2. I'm looking to get a couple of good lav mics that I can hook to small dig recorders, or maybe even the iphone/ipod for micing up talent...

I was thinking workflow might be something along off camera, somehow into Resolve Lite...then out from that to ProRes for FCPX editing...?

Hmm...It might be time for me to build that loaded up Hackintosh I've been toying about for the past year or so....

C


----------



## jabbott (May 14, 2013)

Newmann Films just posted a really neat 5D3 RAW video example here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wm8A7FH2Qg4


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (May 14, 2013)

jabbott said:


> Newmann Films just posted a really neat 5D3 RAW video example here:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wm8A7FH2Qg4



Looks like someone who doesn't know what they are doing with RAW... The EOSHD clip is much better. I still want to see people's faces.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 14, 2013)

Chosenbydestiny said:


> Funny how in previous threads everyone wanted RAW video on Canon DSLRs, and now that it can be done everyone in this thread is so MEH about it, hahaha.



They are?? All I see is insane. Mind blowing. etc.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 14, 2013)

*Re: New 5D3 Raw video samples mind blowing!*



HurtinMinorKey said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > http://www.eoshd.com/content/10324/big-news-hands-on-with-continuous-raw-recording-on-canon-5d-mark-iii
> ...



I'm not sure about that. So far the 5D2 samples are all jumpy and most I've seen have the same really bad aliasing and moire. The 5D2 sensor doesn't bin and skips tons of lines.


----------



## peederj (May 15, 2013)

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

Game set and match for Canon.

This all comes out clearly on test chart shots but for some reason we are NOT to have test chart shots. Period!


----------



## Canon_Tabs (May 15, 2013)

This might be a dumb question, but will shooting continuous RAW kill off your shutter? From what I've seen so far, the camera captures raw images and you must compile them in post, so do all these raw files add to your cameras actuations? Would really appreciate some insight on this, thanks!


----------



## peederj (May 15, 2013)

Canon_Tabs said:


> This might be a dumb question, but will shooting continuous RAW kill off your shutter? From what I've seen so far, the camera captures raw images and you must compile them in post, so do all these raw files add to your cameras actuations? Would really appreciate some insight on this, thanks!



It will be no different than any other live view mode: mirror is locked up, as I think the shutter is too.

Everything the sensor is doing is 100% identical here...it's just the cripple codec that is being bypassed. Running the codec is actually more processor intensive than skipping it! So the only critical thing here performance wise is all the continuous write activity to the CF card. We will find out what the fast and reliable CF cards are soon this way...


----------



## Canon_Tabs (May 15, 2013)

peederj said:


> Canon_Tabs said:
> 
> 
> > This might be a dumb question, but will shooting continuous RAW kill off your shutter? From what I've seen so far, the camera captures raw images and you must compile them in post, so do all these raw files add to your cameras actuations? Would really appreciate some insight on this, thanks!
> ...



Thanks Peederj, I appreciate the explanation!


----------



## jabbott (May 15, 2013)

HurtinMinorKey said:


> Looks like someone who doesn't know what they are doing with RAW... The EOSHD clip is much better. I still want to see people's faces.


Did you see the clouds? Those would likely be blown out with regular video.


----------



## eyeland (May 15, 2013)

peederj said:


> 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?


----------



## peederj (May 18, 2013)

eyeland said:


> peederj said:
> 
> 
> > 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:
> ...



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 (May 18, 2013)

*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 (May 19, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> *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 (May 19, 2013)

dirtcastle said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > *Magic Lantern RAW video for the Canon EOS 5D Mark III comes to the Mac & OSX*
> ...



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 (May 21, 2013)

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

https://vimeo.com/66568137


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 21, 2013)

dirtcastle said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > *Magic Lantern RAW video for the Canon EOS 5D Mark III comes to the Mac & OSX*
> ...



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 (May 21, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> dirtcastle said:
> 
> 
> > Rienzphotoz said:
> ...



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 (May 21, 2013)

cayenne said:


> 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...?
> 
> ...



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 (May 22, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> 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 (May 22, 2013)

dirtcastle said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > 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 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 (May 22, 2013)

cayenne said:


> \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 (May 22, 2013)

ACR workflow in Photoshop:

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


----------



## dirtcastle (May 24, 2013)

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


----------



## AlexeyD (May 25, 2013)

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 (May 26, 2013)

cayenne said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > dirtcastle said:
> ...



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 (May 26, 2013)

dirtcastle said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > 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 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 (May 26, 2013)

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 (May 27, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> 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.



LetTheRightLensIn said:


> 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.


----------

