DPStewart

Wow. Canon EF lenses working WITH IS on an NX1.... THAT would be some large jar of awesome sauce.

As for the hack - It's fine if it doesn't go any further because it already has added so much. I say "let it be finished". One less thing to always be updating, right?
As for it only adding "ten-percent better image quality", well that's HUGE. That's a lot. Especially if it's doing it right where it's needed.
For critical images it has been worth the effort. I can get footage to work when cut in with higher-grade cameras now that that grunge in the shadows has been cleaned up. That was enough. Heck, it's everything really. If not for that one factor, I probably would have had to let my NX1 go in exchange for something a lot more expensive. 

Video locked down as "private".

14 hours ago, kidzrevil said:

The NX1 is the gift that keeps on giving man. Im really considering getting the 16-50s to get the most out of the cam... and let that be my personal kit. 

Anyway this was shot with a contax zeiss 45mm f2.8 and a tiffen ultra contrast filter

Yeah. Normal gamma uses the picture profile you have selected for stills

Man KIDZ....
Your sense of style just gets better and better.

I haven;t been around here much lately because my NX1 is just WORKIN'. Ya know what I mean?
I put in Andrew's whole LUG-LUT settings and post routine, and it's just been GREAT. So nothing to report.

But RICARDO...
Boom! You've really tapped into an interesting recipe here.
I've put in your settings and shot a few things and I agree - very nice.
A different feel than the EOS Log-LUT thing, but I like them both. Once I've shot a bit more with Ricardo's set and got to know it better - then I'll have two distinct looks out of the NX1.

I think the NX1 screams with the Sigma ART lenses, but boy I'd still love to have that 16-50S lens to really finish the deal.
And I was RIGHT! Back when the camera got knocked out of production, I KNEW the prices for those "S" lenses were not going to come down....
Oh well...at least you DO get what you pay for with them.

~Cheers all!
 

4 minutes ago, Pavel Mašek said:

You can use Kino Seed hack or Vasile's. Vasile is mainly focus on bitrates and biggest benefit is that it is loaded instantly without any waiting and camera behaves like without hack (but you can change bitrates in camera and they will survive even cold boots if you make them defaults - can be done in GUI).

bitrate patch itself

https://github.com/ottokiksmaler/nx500_nx1_modding/tree/master/video-bitrate-mods/nx-patch

to make it work you have to install nx-on-wake which is only complicated and (to be honest) dangerous part of whole process.

https://github.com/ottokiksmaler/nx500_nx1_modding/tree/master/nx-on-wake

Thanks mate!

Hey folks, I've lost my bookmarks - what's the link for Vasile's latest version of the high bit-rate hack for the NX1 for firmware 1.40?
Or has that been abandoned in favor of the firmware 1.41 update. Last I checked in it still wasn't allowing the higher bit-rate hacks.

What's our latest and greatest for specifically high bit-rates?

THANKS!

 

1 minute ago, Herb said:

I'm in Florida. Weird the price is up to $406.  Go to: https://www.essentialphoto.co.uk/product/pixapro-led100d-mkii-daylight-balanced-led-studio-light/

Add it to your cart. Use LM5OFFD for 5% off (from UglyMcGregor youtube.com/watch?v=jbPTPFDsrU0). Keep going through to have the VAT removed and add the shipping.

Unless I'm doing something wrong...

 

 

Yeah, that sounds about right. These are not cheap lights. 
You can always throw the price into an online currency converter and check the price in US Dollars ahead of time.

2 hours ago, Teemu said:

I have one of these lights, but just the mk II not the + version (+ version means v-lock battery option). I really like it and can also recommend it. It's about 1k at full power. Definetly get the mkII version. It's a lot more silent and a bit smaller than the first version.

Also good cheap fresnel adapter for the light is this:

https://www.amazon.com/Nanguang-NG-10X-Studio-Light-Filter/dp/B011HTRTUG?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B011HTRTUG&linkCode=as2&linkId=TOJXOS6VGXPT3Q6T&redirect=true&ref_=as_li_tl&tag=nitsapictu-20

Nitsan has reviewed same lights and recommended very much it.

Yeah, nice piece of kit there Teemu!

Hey mate, does the PixaPro light have an umbrella mount on it? 
I can see a little tube or bracket on the bottom-front of the light, but the pictures are too small to tell if that's an umbrella mount.
Any luck on this being what it is?

Thanks~

5 hours ago, Daniel Galli said:

Thanks man! works perfectly, even at 2% of grain!

Don't it though?!

Shhhhhh........secret weapon.

I don't exactly understand why anyone would even want to use a hack that doesn't increase the bit rate and image quality.

 

The stabilization is nice...but the GoPro still appears to have greater dynamic range and more gradable color.
That still makes a HUGE difference if your footage needs to be cut against footage from other cameras.

Honestly - I never thought the NX1 hack would get this far!

I can remember long ago, when we were all but children playing in the garden, back when Kidzrevil first posted this challenge....

At the rate some of the folks here are carving deeper into the guts, I wouldn't be all that surprised if one day someone DID find a way to get a RAW video feed out of these kittens of ours.

In the meantime it sure seems to be a resounding success even just in it's first couple of months, with the increased bit-rates cleaning up some of the problem areas in just the way I expected it would. Kudos to all involved.

Now if only Otto or someone else could write a sub-script that would prevent me from pointing my NX1 at bad subject material...

On 5/16/2016 at 2:17 PM, Davey said:

Oh blimey. Now I have the slow spinning to the left problem that others have spoken of. I did originally read of this problem on B&H reviews of the DS1, which nearly put me off getting it. Currently wishing that I had stuck with my gut instinct that these gimbals just don't have a good enough level of quality control to be parting with £550.

 

 

 

I had that problem upon delivery of mine.

I ran the "Horizon Calibration" sequence on a PERFECTLY LEVEL flat tabletop. I ran it about 6 times to get it to work itself out. Only took about 5-minutes. I turned the DS1 off in between every cycle of the sequence too.

It's been fine ever since (5 months) and that slow turning to either side never came back. 
 

4 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Holy crap, where are you shooting and what?? :-o 

A series pilot. Pretty edgy stuff. 

1 hour ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

Nice! I assume you're using the 672Ws? Do they have enough oomph for moderately sized locations, or do you wish you had a Lightstorm?

No, the spot version. This is because I need the greater "concentrated" power going through the diffusor. Personally I never put LED panels on people without large diffusion, unless the light is supposed to be weird or effect-ish. Even a 12"x12" panel is really too small to not be a hard light. The bomb factor is the way the umbrella mount is already built into the standard included mounts Aputure includes with these lights.
Now, the 43" shoot-though diffusor umbrellas - those were really expensive....$13 each, heh...

EDIT: The lightstorm has great power, but the separate power supply would be too much of a problem for this application. A 1000-bulb panel runnning on V-Mount batteries would also work, but I'd have to rig up a different mount to get the umbrellas to quickly and easily sit in the right spot. We rigged up a little extra hardware to use both 672's next to each other behind one umbrella when we need more power. works absolutely perfectly.
As long as you don't drop them on concrete, the 672's are just KILLER tools.

I am currently using 2 Aputure 672s lights on lightweight 10' stands with 43" shoot-through umbrellas mounted for SERIOUS run-and-gun stuff... I mean like we have from 10-minutes to maybe 30-minutes to get the shots before we get either nailed by security or flat out arrested.
The guy carrying BOTH light fixtures may even have to climb over fences, etc.,

Using these Aputures was the only way this was going to work. And it surely does work. Killer. 

On 4/15/2016 at 4:00 AM, dafreaking said:

I don't understand why none of these one handed ones have the motor on the right so you can flip out the screens.

The Beholder DS1 is this way. One of the reasons I dig it.

21 hours ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

Well...huh. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the entire appeal of the 3-axis gimbal, then. Maybe a pros and cons list would help.

Pros:

-Smaller and lighter

-Inverted mode for low-angle shots

-Can be used on the end of a monopod for faux-crane/jib shots

Cons:

-Require batteries

-Electronic, so more likely to fail completely if a component malfunctions

-More expensive 

-Lower weight limit


Is that the gist of it?

I'd say that sums it up pretty well. Except full vest/arm/sled can do inverted mode too. You just have to flip the image back right-side-up in post, but most external monitors can flip the image so you're good to go on capture.

Also - you can take gimbals in some places that a steadycam can't really go - like hanging out the window of a car. Things like that.

3 minutes ago, SMGJohn said:

Aye, I agree but initially there is a difference between low resolution JPEG's with normal compression selected versus 2160p video with the same settings from my tests.

Clearly, JPEG's are favouring lower NR levels or are down-sampled differently from video mode.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/samsung-nx1/samsung-nx1HI_ISO_NR.HTM

You can see the higher ISO gets for JPEG's we start to see the mosquito noise we experience in video mode. That could mean, that there is indeed more likely a 1, 2, 3 etc setting for NR and probably not truly an off and on switch. Just speculations at my point but I am with you, hopefully its option 1 but even if it was not a much lower setting would still be way better than its currently at because its way too high. I shot a video at 100ISO in 2160p in a room lit by its own lights, it was underexposed perhaps by 0.1 or 0.2 stops and I zoomed in on the dark areas in post, what do I see? No grain details whatsoever, blocky artefacts and mosquito noise and this is ISO100, Samsung what the hell?

Yes.

When I first saw the first Samsung promotional videos shot with the NX1 the macro-blocking and noise reduction were SO BAD that I immediately dismissed the cameras as "never a consideration". 
Their Firmware updates improved it A LOT and that's why I finally decided to got one.

Turning "off" the Noise Reduction can only be done if somewhere in the lines of code there is a "on" or "off" data entry point. Or if there is something like a line that says "NR level = x".

If nothing like that turns up, then the noise reduction is built into the Codec and won't be removable.

Hopefully the reality is Option #1!

 

1 hour ago, tugela said:

I have not had a chance to try the script out yet, but I am hoping it will solve one niggling issue I have observed. Often you will see the image immediately behind a moving object breaking up (particularly with DIS enabled), which I have attributed to there not being enough bandwidth to handle the extra bits needed. Hopefully these higher bit rates will be more accommodating in those situations.

My guess is that's a compression artifact. Yeah, a bit-rate increase "should" help with that.

On 4/6/2016 at 9:33 AM, caseywilsondp said:

vasile, thanks for your hard work! this is exciting stuff.

did some initial tests of 80 vs 180 (highest my card can write continuously) and I see little to no difference, so double checked the file and sure enough it is 180mbps. That was just a rough shadow/highlight/detail test. Later I'll sit down with some lights and a person and set up a scene to really test it out. My guess right now is that hevc is extremely efficient, so the difference between 80 and 180 are going to be negligible. 320 might be different, but I can't test that until I get a faster card. This does seem to make sense because even at 660+ mbps to an external recorder, the main improvement is only in shadow macro blocking... even with nearly 600 more mbps. It's also being written as prores, so that could even account for some of the improvement.

I think you hit it right on the head Casey.

MAN! There is just something about super 8 film.
Well..about 100 somethings maybe.

Cool to see.

Well well well, do 30-days for a minor felony and I come back to THIS! A bit-rate hack. Outstanding.

Now, I'd like to make very clear that in the case of the GH2 just increasing the bit-rate often caused as many new problems as it fixed. Generating a compressed image involves a whole slew of data factors that affect each other. That's why there was like 200 different hack patches folks made as they tried experimenting with the different data points.
Many of the attempts simply crashed or injected all sorts of other instability. Some made certain artifacts worse. Some fixed one thing but broke another.

The fact that this mod can double the bit-rate is amazingly promising. And remember - you often won't see any "overall" difference. Especially because this camera generates such a great image already. I would advise looking only at the areas that previously had been problems. That's really all we need anyway. Just those few problems fixed. Then this camera is much more of an all-around winner.

SD-Cards: I would not even attempt to record at these new high bit-rates without a card like the Sandisk Extreme PRO or a similar card. You're begging for heartbreak if you do.

We may very well find that there are hidden data matrices that need to work in conjunction with each other to do things like lessen macro blocking, over sharpening, and noise.
That's what there was on the GH2's. It's reasonable to expect some similar complications.

Rock-On everybody!

1 hour ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

The other factor is that I work with a variety of different cameras: 5Ds, 6Ds, Rebels, BMs, Nikons, Sonys, Panasonics, even one kid with a Digital Bolex. Wouldn't it be faster and easier to get a new camera balanced on a 3-axis gimbal than on a traditional steadicam sled?

No. Because once you figure it out on either one, then making small adjustments for a moderately different camera is about the same amount of work on each.

So that one's a wash.

Just now, TheRenaissanceMan said:

I understand that fear for professional work. But as a film student, I feel like one of these gimbals would be a better solution for the here and now. Plus, I feel like they're a lot faster to get balanced, up, and running on a disorganized (ie: student-run) set. 

Yeah - I'd agree with that. But I've seen students get just the Sled of a SteadyCam - not the arm and vest - and have them mastered in an afternoon. But I do agree they are more complicated. But an important factor is that you can get a great one of those for about $285 (Liange) and also there's no batteries to charge.

If the shot is not "do or die" and you could re-do it again later - I absolutely think something like the DS1 is the better choice.

27 minutes ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

So with the H2 coming down the pipe, is the DS1 still the gimbal to get? I might be able to get one from eBay for $550, but might hold off if something simpler and easier is just around the corner.

Unfortunately "simpler" and "easier" have not really landed firmly on the ground yet. What I'm seeing is that gimbals made specifically only for ONE camera - like a GoPro, or the OSMO - are the only ones that really work "simply and easily".

What seems to be the trend is a lot of better and more sophisticated gimbals - but they all still seem to need tweaking.

John Hess from Filmmaker IQ pointed out something EXTREMELY important about gimbals vs. a SteadyCam type stabilizer. And that is that a gimbal has MANY areas that can fail - i.e., each motor axis and any buttons and/or controllers. And if ANY of them fail then THE WHOLE THING is toast at that moment and your shooting day is all over. Whereas the ONLY part of a SteadyCam that can't be adjusted manually on-site is the gimbal-bearing itself - and those are not electronic so they almost never fail without first wearing out over time.

For this reason I am immediately scrambling for cash to get a full vest/arm/sled SteadyCam rig. As much as I dig my Beholder DS1, if any of those components glitch out on me on a paid shoot - I'm in trouble. Even on my own productions - sometimes it's not really possible to get the site and all the people back again if the electronic gimbal crashes.

4 minutes ago, mat33 said:

I like to think of it as a vertical anamorphic flare :-)

Hahahaha!