Andrew Reid

  Leica 50mm F2.0 on that one. Cheers

Not denying any of that pee.   Also I am not criticising Laforet in the way you're insinuating. I suggest you re-read the blog post!   You clearly haven't seen the DNG files if you're not sure it provides more resolution or dynamic range than the HDMI out with log gamma!!!   You don't need a chart test just use your bloody eyes mate!

Yep does seem to be a bug.   I am running Windows under VMWare for when I need it.

Raw compression is most likely impossible in-camera as it requires very powerful processors like the Epic and a fan for cooling, neither of which the 5D Mark III has.   Even Motion JPEG still requires more processing than raw does!

Great test Neumann, any Vimeo version of this with downloadable file?   YouTube compression muddies the water a bit. To me the 5D Mark III looks much better than the GH2 even on YouTube.

Yes, the SD is definitely capable of faster write speeds than 22MB/s.   Not a card bottle neck, looks like controller one.

  Yep, bad wording on my part, it is not what I meant.   What I meant was "route of a entrepreneur rather than a hired hand".   And BTW, nothing wrong with either route and not one is superior to the other, it just depends what turns you on.

Why do you need HDMI 50p out when you have internal 50p raw?   Raw 1080p 50p is very unlikely it requires very high data rates. I have 1280x540 at 50p working OK though, in raw.   H.264 1080p 50p - no idea if possible.   Peaking is already in there but I use it on the SmallHD DP6 via HDMI for monitoring.

Sure it is not the space in path to file that is causing the problem not the 2GB file size?

6D is reaching 40MB/s. Double 600D, but still half of what common 1000x CF cards achieve on the 5D Mark III (80MB/s+) so not good enough for 1080p raw.   Alex thinks it is card controller limit not card on 600D. So it may be stuck at the lower resolutions. Let's wait and see.

  I have been saying this for 5 days now.

  Any other requests boss??!

That's not what I am saying at all HurtinMinorKey. Art and commerce are not separate endeavours.   I am an independent professional with my own projects. It isn't abject nonsense it is a statement of fact. I decided not to enter the established commercial filmmaking world and to concentrate on my OWN projects and making money that way instead like an entrepreneurial filmmaker. Tom Lowe is another one. Seems you don't understand oh dear.

  I actually like it and will be posting reasons why in later blog :)

  Hang on. Why are you taking early pre-alpha dev code like it is a final conclusion?   A bit early to judge no?

1D X would be interesting sure, but I think the focus of ML is on the more affordable cameras at the moment.   It was only a Canon rep / salesman who made the remark about 'full force of legal team' if anyone modified the 1D X. He was ill informed and doesn't have any authority. Ignore.

  Ridiculous comment.

Canon won't sue their own customers. They will just refuse any liability for Magic Lantern cameras and probably won't honour warranties.   In my view the hardware isn't stressed, isn't overheating, batteries won't burnt into flames. Canon should know this - their engineers will - although maybe some of the advisors and reps will think otherwise. Software directly blow up silicon. Heat does that. Heat is a by product of software that stresses the hardware. Raw is not processor intensive. Compression is! Why do you think Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera can do raw with no fan in a tiny case for $999 and the Epic with compressed Red Code raw has to have a very powerful ASIC, big fans and massive heat sink?   The weight of public opinion will be heavily against Canon on PR if they do try to shut the hack down, but really the best they can do towards that end is to scare the devs with legal talk or encrypt the firmware on future DSLRs. There's a precedence here. When Canon tried to shut down Canon Rumors over legalities (trademark), public opinion was against it and they backtracked, quite wisely.   Canon should understand Magic Lantern before making a decision and make the decision for the good of their customers not for political reasons.   It makes perfect business sense to support the excellent third party software running on their cameras. Where would a Mac be without Adobe software?   Should Apple try to sue Adobe because they don't want Premiere running on a Mac? No. Crazy. So why should Canon consider doing so with Magic Lantern. It isn't a liability, it's an asset!!   A potentially huge money spinning one at that.

  Same experience conversing with Phil myself. A lot of nasty tantrums over email and threatening behaviour. He needs to handle criticism far better than he is doing.   Really the issue is not that he doesn't need raw, or finds it impractical, or wants to constantly point that out.   The issue is that he is in a position to help us and help Magic Lantern, and all he can do is moan and post pictures of himself.

  Yes but I am in privileged position of being able to fund my own projects and I DP essentially for myself and my own art, not on a spec shoot for someone else. This was a conscious decision I made about 3 years ago to go down the route of an artist rather than a commercial shooter. Hence the term indie filmmaker. If it was not for my anamorphic guide and GH2 guide I wouldn't have been able to fund my filmmaking. So very thankful to all who follow EOSHD.   I understand the needs of fellow commercial filmmakers a lot of my fiends in Berlin and London, and in the US are working in the industry. I am more an industry outsider in the way I work. If you have a problem with that I suggest you go and follow a different filmmaker.   I'm not the only one to be offended by Philip's attitude. Luke who is close to Magic Lantern devs is and I think the whole team expected more enthusiasm from 'the guru' https://www.facebook.com/NeumannFilms/posts/476670929070347

  Download the sample DNG frames from continuous raw video on the 600D Though most of the development at Magic Lantern has been focussed on the powerful 5D Mark III, the latest firmware builds have also been ported to the 600D. How does it perform for raw video? [url=http://www.eoshd.com/content/10421/a-look-at-raw-video-on-the-canon-600d]Read the full article here[/url]

CineForm workflow - http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=5479

Sorry but respect is earned. If Vincent hasn't earned it with that particular forum member, he's entitled to have an opinion that is disrespectful.   Logical no?   PS I respect the guy, like him personally. Don't always have to AGREE in order to respect someone.

I come from the North of England where the whole ethos is to be self depreciating. I grew up from a working class background. I couldn't give a shit about egos. Trust me this is not about ego. It is about what is right for the DSLR community and what is good advice and what is useful to Magic Lantern and that they should deserve better from someone like Bloom.   Hyperbole? C100 is not raw or full frame or $3k. It's a whole different ballgame creatively. I've shot with the C100, the image is mush compared to raw on the 5D Mark III. You are looking at compressed 5D footage in the DVX comparison. You try grading a DNG from the 5D Mark III and a AVCHD frame from the C100 and see what happens.

Of course Philip is hiding behind a relevant argument but still hiding nevertheless. I think he is using story and practical shooting issues as smokescreen for the fact he doesn't understand raw workflow and cannot ably deal with it on the technical side. The very capable James Miller has to fill in for him on the technical stuff.   90% of his raw coverage is about the practical and commercial considerations of using it rather than the IMAGE and actual tips and help. How is this useful advice? It's like a broken record. Yeah big file sizes. Yeah... whatever. It isn't that hard to deal with anyway.   Yes that Cinema EOS china teapot is nice but what about the elephant in the room?   He is avoiding the main subject, which is the fact that raw is here to stay. Raw is here and all he can do is moan and warn people off it.   I think you have misunderstood my post. I said it’s unnecessary for most of people’s work. I have to be honest Sam. I would rather spent that extra time working on the ideas behind the film than dealing with it in post. If you are able to do both then great!   Again a straw man argument. Yeah yeah story is important, so are ideas. Hang on. Pink Floyd didn't sacrifice the soundscapes for lyrics or time constraints. They're purists, artists.   If he has commercial realities to think about then that's his problem. The rest of us can make a living off shooting raw no problem. Red users have been doing it for YEARS!   On price...   Of course Bloom would rather use an F5! It's all very well if you can spend $36,000 on a Sony F55 or Epic. F5 is small change so is 1D C! How is that useful advice to us? So his advice is to avoid the best possible image on a $3000 camera and spend $30,000 on making it a bit more convenient!? What kind of filmmaker would spend $100,000 on equipment but end up shooting H.264 for convenience?