caseywilsondp

I have made posts and posts about it in the "your ideal nx1 settings" thread. scientific depends on your definition of what a proper scientific approach would be, but i felt i was pretty methodical in trying to get the best image out of the camera possible. the problem is because I didn't apply a crazy filmy looking lut the end result, I dont think anyone cared

I have made posts and posts about it in the "your ideal nx1 settings" thread. scientific depends on your definition of what a proper scientific approach would be, but i felt i was pretty methodical in trying to get the best image out of the camera possible. the problem is because I didn't apply a crazy filmy looking lut the end result, I dont think anyone cared

as I've found lower contrast to be more beneficial to a compressed image, that's what I've tested the most, and has really been the source of most of my gripes with the camera. The ability to lower saturation hasn't seem to yield many benefits in regards to post work, so I've only tried lowering it maybe to -5 at the most extreme, and I didn't see much benefit so I usually leave saturation at 0 now.
With -5 contrast, 0-255, -10 sharpness and 0 saturation I've found the least amount of negative effects on the image, while gaining the most extra latitude. I have not found gammaDR to yield particularly better results (in regards to grading latitude).

last years favorite was the nikon 28-70 2.8 (still taken from a7s video):


this years most used are some of the sony cinealta t2 pl lens set (my buddy bought them) (stills from nx1 video)


dream? tough. i'd love to shoot on some panavision anamorphic lenses.

The new Sigma-Art lenses. Currently the 50mm/1.4 (i.e. for my little girl), true Zeiss-quality.
Apart from that of course the 18-35mm/1.8 on the D7100 and NX1. If only it wasn't that huge and heavy...
The 35mm/1.4 on the D810 is no wimp either.

I don't think I currently have the experience or time to successfully modify the NX1/NX500 firmware. I don't even have one of those cameras. However it would be a shame to let the interest in this die, so I guess I'll post some of my notes/thoughts about the firmware in hopes that it might help keep the ball rolling.
Note: if you aren't into technical minutiae, the only interesting part of this wall of text is the bulleted list at the end detailing what is and is not possible in my opinion.
Here are the files listed in the header of nx1.bin (version 1.4.0):
version.info:    offset=0x0          size=0x3F   (same as found in /etc/version.info)
linux image:    offset=0x0130       size=0x00624748
idk:                   offset=0x624878     size=0xD8E9
linux image:    offset=0x632161     size=0x3192E8
linux image:    offset=0x94B449     size=0x638518
idk:            offset=0xF83961     size=0x01FF10
idk:            offset=0xFA3871     size=0xB35140
rootfs:         offset=0x1AD89B1    size=0x117A89FF     (lzo compressed ext4 filesystem image)
opt:            offset=0x132813B0   size=0x58E91C   (lzo compressed ext4 filesystem image)
pcachelist:     offset=0x1380FCCC   size=0x7000 (PAGECACHELIST, preceded by a header, I think)
idk:            offset=0x13816CCC   size=0x35BCC44  (lzo compressed. header indicates swap image?)
Anyone with the skills to reverse engineer a camera could figure this out pretty easily, but it was fairly tedious so maybe this will save someone 20 minutes of poking around in a hex editor. If anyone knows what's up with the files I've labeled "idk," I would love to hear about it.
The checksum algorithm is fortunately unchanged from the NX300 as far as I can tell.
As documented at sites.google.com/site/nxcryptophotography/diy-firmware
"width=32 poly=0x04c11db7 init=0xffffffff refin=true refout=true xorout=0x00000000 check=0x340bc6d9 name="JAMCRC""
"jacksum -x -a crc:32,04c11db7,ffffffff,true,true,00000000 [file]"
The main camera app binary is (I'm pretty sure) located at /usr/apps/com.samsung.di-camera-app/bin/di-camera-app in the rootfs. It seems to access the hardware through a relatively high-level API with the /usr/lib/libmm* libraries. libmmf-camcorder.so is particularly interesting. The function I've focused my attention on is mmf_camcorder_set_attributes(), which comes from libffm-camcorder and is used repeatedly in di-camera-app. It conveniently (and strangely IMO) takes strings as identifiers for the attributes that are apparently being set (why not just an enum? I suppose I shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth...). Some of those attributes include "target-time-limit," "audio-encoder-bitrate," and "video-encoder-bitrate." The guy who successfully removed the recording time limit on the NX300 did it by modifying the instructions that set the variable being passed along with "targe-time-limit." I found the control flow instructions he mentioned in that thread, so it should't be hard to get rid of the time limit on the NX1, provided the camera accepts the modified firmware. The NX500 is probably similar. The "video-encoder-bitrate" attribute also looks promising, though it would take some more advanced reverse engineering to figure out where the values are being set.
So from what I've seen and read, here is what I think is and is not possible to modify on the NX1 and NX500:
Remove time limit: Highly likely. Seems to be the same as the NX300. Pretty easy too, if there aren't any new security measures in place. Increased bitrate: Possible. Needs some real reverse engineering to find where the rates are set for each resolution and quality. Noise reduction and sharpening: Possible. Haven't seen anything that looks like it's controlling these, but if setting the bitrate works, this should be possible too. FWIW I think that increasing the bitrate would help with the noise reduction issues. H.265 tends to smooth things out a lot to achieve low bitrates. Re-enable 2.5k on NX500: Plausible but difficult. It depends on whether they just removed it from di-camera-app, or if they removed it from the underlying libraries as well. Either way it would likely require actually adding control flow to the binary, which opens a whole new can of worms. Beyond my current ability, for sure. Focus peaking for NX500 4k: Maybe? I have no idea, really. There might be a good reason they didn't include it, there might not. 4k crop on NX1: Plausible but even more difficult. We know the hardware can do it, but it was probably never implemented on the NX1, even in pre-production. Gamma profile on NX500: Plausible. Similar to porting the NX500's 4k crop to the NX1, I think. 6k 24fps H.265: Highly unlikely. The H.265 encoder would have to support frame sizes larger than DCI 4k and be able to handle twice the pixel rate (clock speed) of 4k. Furthermore it would require implementing a brand-new video mode at a very low level. I can't say for sure it's categorically impossible, but don't get your hopes up. 10bit H.265: Nope. The H.265 standard does indeed allow for 10bit encoding, but I highly doubt Samsung would include the significantly larger (wider busses, more complex encoding) hardware necessary to do it. It would be a miracle if Samsung had really decided to go to all that effort and not use it. 6k or full sensor 4k at more than 30fps or 1080p at (significantly) more than 120fps: Impossible. The image sensor simply isn't fast enough. If you hope for this you will just be disappointed! RAW Video: Not really. It might be theoretically possible to dump the live-view feed as in Magic Lantern. Who knows how fast the SD card interface is, though. Certainly no more than 1080p. I can imagine tricking the GPU into packing 12bit 4k RAW into 1080p 444 HDMI like Apertus, but consider that a pipe dream. Don't get your hopes up. Anyway, that was longer than I expected, but I enjoyed poking around in the firmware, so I don't regret it even if it comes to nothing. It's a shame Samsung appears to be dropping the NX line; they are cool little cameras.
p.s. If you know anything I've said is wrong, please correct me; I'm learning this as I go along.

Was driving passed my old neighborhood today, where the "Building of Moire" lays.
I had the NX500 in my bag and the R1 buckled in the back seat. I also had some Magic Lantern shots at home.
So I stopped.
 
The Cameras are:
Sony NEX5t
Sony a6000
Sony FS100
Sony AX100
Sony A7
Sony A7ii
Panasonic LX100
Panasonic HMC151
Panasonic GM1
Canon XC10
Canon EOS-M Raw
Canon EOS-M Crop
Blackmagic Pocket
Blackmagic 4K Production
Digital Bolex
Samsung NX1
Samsung NX500 HD
Samsung NX500 4K Crop
LG G Flex 2 at 200mbps
Red One MX
 

A link to footage I shot of the aurora in Saariselka (Lapland, 3rd Jan 2016).
Not claiming it's cinematic or has any artistic or technical merit. But the A7S impressed me.
Unfortunately the Manfrotto video head froze (-28) so the camera movement isn't great. 
Slog at 25/40k iso recorded in Shogun with Samyang 24mm T1.5. 
All realtime and graded to look as it was. 
 
https://click.email.vimeo.com/?qs=ff270841caf6f31e744cb88599a9d8de085489b11b5dbc3463e3bbbeb700f83f45a0e34df8e2abf53c8965fc89d1490a

Hey araucaria,

You shredded me and my post, but I'm gonna do you a respect here.

First, drop the anger and smugness. I'm not "Telling you to"...I'm just asking you to. I'm asking....could ya?
Earlier on you made a good point that most people didn't focus on. Piracy in certain other countries. 
You mentioned Turkey, but I'd like to add China and India to that, because historically those two countries were hotbeds of huge amounts of movie piracy. 
At first, the worldwide movie selling industry didn't even attempt to get into those countries because the Governments really didn't let them. So the worldwide movie industry grew for decades without them. (Of course China and India have made their own great movie industry - but that's not what we're talking about here.)
There's a difference now - the difference is that all of the countries that DID support the worldwide movie industry are now DRASTICALLY increasing their participation in piracy and so they are reducing the industry's ability to earn it's money fairly.
I never said we "Have to give up our Privacy" but I did say "What society has or does accept as any sort of privacy on the Internet is going to have to change RADICALLY or we risk losing one of the most cherished aspects of our modern life - Movies." 

We don't really have all that much privacy online already anyway - and I only suggest that what we "accept" as privacy (cuz it ain't really much already) is going to have to change IF...IF...we want to keep our movie world going as great as it has been.

I have been a monetary supporter of the Electronic Frontier Foundation for 8-years now, so I am ABSOLUTELY on the side of Internet privacy and freedom.
So, I understand and respect your position of NOT wanting to relinquishing any more online privacy. No one is saying that's "wrong". Although maybe it seems that's what people are saying - it's really not. What we ARE SAYING - is that it is going to be one or the other. One or the other. We will NOT be able to keep both. That part is already obvious. Pick one, and understand that you will be saying goodbye to the other. 
If you ONLY like 'flag pole" (big budget) films like superhero movies, then you'll still be happy. But if you like the other varieties of movies too then maybe you won't be so happy when no one will make those anymore. YOU ARE FULLY ENTITLED to only like superhero movies if that's your thing. No judgement of you there.
You're on this forum, right? So I'm kinda guessing that you have an interest in all varieties of movie making. We all just want to see those movies continue to get made, and NONE of us has the answer yet of how that's going to happen.

 

This is partially the cost we're playing paying for the entry level into the industry being so low. Not but 15 years ago the cost of filmmaking, heck of making a reel, was exponentially higher than it is today. A kid in highschool with $2000 worth of gear and some talent can make a spec that would rival the industries best in the 90s.
That same jump in technology and low entry level means we have a harder time not only standing out, but means we're having to fight piracy at a level unimaginable 15 years ago.
 

what are your export settings? i feel like the look and colors are there, but you're right, something is getting destroyed when you upload it.

So the phone hacking guys at xda often have "bounties" for various things, like rooting or unlocking a boot loader. That method I think could be very successful for us. We find an arbiter that we trust, maybe kidzrevil since he started the thread, and pool our money into something like venmo, so that people are actually committed. The bounty would be for something specific like "installable firmware that can increase bitrate to 150 Mbps and increase frame rate to 60fps at highest stable bitrate at 4k". People that want that feature pool their money into that. Once real money can be seen, we might see bigger interest from developers. Of course if everyone wanted we could make the bounty for more or less features... My vote would be to keep it pretty realistic at first.

So the phone hacking guys at xda often have "bounties" for various things, like rooting or unlocking a boot loader. That method I think could be very successful for us. We find an arbiter that we trust, maybe kidzrevil since he started the thread, and pool our money into something like venmo, so that people are actually committed. The bounty would be for something specific like "installable firmware that can increase bitrate to 150 Mbps and increase frame rate to 60fps at highest stable bitrate at 4k". People that want that feature pool their money into that. Once real money can be seen, we might see bigger interest from developers. Of course if everyone wanted we could make the bounty for more or less features... My vote would be to keep it pretty realistic at first.

So the phone hacking guys at xda often have "bounties" for various things, like rooting or unlocking a boot loader. That method I think could be very successful for us. We find an arbiter that we trust, maybe kidzrevil since he started the thread, and pool our money into something like venmo, so that people are actually committed. The bounty would be for something specific like "installable firmware that can increase bitrate to 150 Mbps and increase frame rate to 60fps at highest stable bitrate at 4k". People that want that feature pool their money into that. Once real money can be seen, we might see bigger interest from developers. Of course if everyone wanted we could make the bounty for more or less features... My vote would be to keep it pretty realistic at first.

So the phone hacking guys at xda often have "bounties" for various things, like rooting or unlocking a boot loader. That method I think could be very successful for us. We find an arbiter that we trust, maybe kidzrevil since he started the thread, and pool our money into something like venmo, so that people are actually committed. The bounty would be for something specific like "installable firmware that can increase bitrate to 150 Mbps and increase frame rate to 60fps at highest stable bitrate at 4k". People that want that feature pool their money into that. Once real money can be seen, we might see bigger interest from developers. Of course if everyone wanted we could make the bounty for more or less features... My vote would be to keep it pretty realistic at first.

So the phone hacking guys at xda often have "bounties" for various things, like rooting or unlocking a boot loader. That method I think could be very successful for us. We find an arbiter that we trust, maybe kidzrevil since he started the thread, and pool our money into something like venmo, so that people are actually committed. The bounty would be for something specific like "installable firmware that can increase bitrate to 150 Mbps and increase frame rate to 60fps at highest stable bitrate at 4k". People that want that feature pool their money into that. Once real money can be seen, we might see bigger interest from developers. Of course if everyone wanted we could make the bounty for more or less features... My vote would be to keep it pretty realistic at first.

I'll shoot something for you tomorrow. 

Handy tip for testing setups, filters, lighting - without the transcoding step.
Shoot some footage; playback in camera and pause at the frame you want to examine. Hit the Fn button on the camera back; the camera burns a JPEG of the frame.
I've played with this and the JPEG is dead-on with the footage (My camera is set for the best and biggest JPEGs, don't know if this affects the frame capture). Really handy for testing non-motion related stuff without running clips through processing. 

What I've noticed with 120p is it needs more light than normal. That may be physics though and not the camera.
Once you figure out its quirks, the 120p can look really nice. I'm new to video and this camera gets me great results.
https://youtu.be/dfssnbAYwYk?t=41s
From :41 to 1:19 There are some 120p shots in there and they came out way better than I thought they would (the compression artifacts are all youtube).

I generally bring a shit-ton of lighting to shoots, but I've had several more editorial-style gigs with the NX1 and shot as hight as 3200.
1800-2200 or so is still remarkably clean; and there's something cool about higher ISOs with the NX sensor; it's not that soupy mush you get from previous Nikon and Canon DSLRs - it's just kind of "snappy" for lack of a better word. And really crazy clean considering. I try to get the shadows opened up so I can crush 'em back down - at 4K you can see some fine mosquito noise at higher ISOs. 
I was shooting a gig last week about inner city grocers, and we were shooting products in a beverage cooler; my grip knew enough to look at the setup and say "are you sure we're not allowed to light this? Mannnn…" and I was like "Dude - look through the EVF…" He was kind of stunned. Punchy shots with a lot of life.
That said - watch for deep, deep blacks that really eat the light. Even at low ISO, a black knit sweater can look fine until delivery - then there's something about the NX's blocking that H264 sort of grabs onto and you may get some posterized shadows - kinda ugly and you have to tweak your compression for output. Try to get some big soft fill going, open the blacks, and cut your key a bit, balance it back in post. Or raise your ISO and cut your key back. I don't have months of this camera under my belt, but watch those intense blacks...

The deal is that sensors have what they call a "native ISO", which is their own internal native functioning gain level within the device. So all other ISOs are either an amplification applied to that or an attenuation applied to that, so that's why some cameras might give its best result at say 400 ISO.  But like you've heard - it varies from camera to camera.

As far as I have been able to see, the response of the sensor in the NX1 doesn't seem to show any bias towards any one ISO - meaning that it all just looks equally clean in the lower range regardless of what its "native" ISO might be. That's good engineering.
 
I agree with Casey. Just follow normal exposure and ISO techniques and the NX1 should respond with no surprises.

Hell of a camera...ain't it?
 

I've found similar to above. For clean image quality:
100-1600 in 4K/UHD
100-800 in 1080p
You can push in certain situations, but these are the safe limits. 

Rest of the week is pretty booked, but this could be something I do maybe next week. Let me see if there are any camera shops that might just be willing to let me borrow a test chart, or maybe shoot something in store. Do you think that micro adjustments like green, red, etc are universal between all the chips that Samsung put into the cameras? What lens would be most appropriate? I have the 16-50S, but also access to sony cine alta primes which are quite clean and don't seem to warm or cool images much if at all.

Rest of the week is pretty booked, but this could be something I do maybe next week. Let me see if there are any camera shops that might just be willing to let me borrow a test chart, or maybe shoot something in store. Do you think that micro adjustments like green, red, etc are universal between all the chips that Samsung put into the cameras? What lens would be most appropriate? I have the 16-50S, but also access to sony cine alta primes which are quite clean and don't seem to warm or cool images much if at all.

Rest of the week is pretty booked, but this could be something I do maybe next week. Let me see if there are any camera shops that might just be willing to let me borrow a test chart, or maybe shoot something in store. Do you think that micro adjustments like green, red, etc are universal between all the chips that Samsung put into the cameras? What lens would be most appropriate? I have the 16-50S, but also access to sony cine alta primes which are quite clean and don't seem to warm or cool images much if at all.