Jump to content

No Joke - RAW 4K on the 5D Mark III


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 406
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Just finished my 2nd round of shooting for my short. I had a little more trouble correcting these images as I shot a lot in lower light than the first round. But here are a few shots that turned out o

1st rule of fight club...don't talk about fight club. 

this looks great. wanted to share something I learned to do in resolve. see at the far left and right of your image the blue/red chromatic aberration along hard lines of dark and light? I get that wit

Posted Images

Jean-Baptiste Marcant shared these stunning shots of Rome.

- Resolution : 3072x1024 px
- Bits : 14 bpp Lossless
- Aspect Ratio : 3:1

Also, lostfeliz on ml forum says that hdmi out monitoring is possible on higher res without lag for focusing but you only get 40% of the image on center. They were wondering if it might somehow be able to pan the area to get focus on other parts of the frame. (http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=19300.575)

If anybody else wants to chime in on this development or where the experimental builds are in terms of preview on the higher res modes...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anybody tried a modest bump to 2.5k or 2.7k. I would love to be able to get 2.5k 2:39 working one day. Hell, even cinema 2K at 48-60p would get me off. 

4 hours ago, squig said:

If you guys wanna use Arri LUTS check out http://www.cinelogdcp.com/cinelogc-overview

Yeah I need to test this, Hyalinejim swears by it. I'm pretty sure he uses it with Adobe, and it seems like it may be better designed for After Effects than Resolve, but since I am testing workflows right now, I am pretty much game for anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, mercer said:

Has anybody tried a modest bump to 2.5k or 2.7k. I would love to be able to get 2.5k 2:39 working one day. Hell, even cinema 2K at 48-60p would get me off.

2.7-2.8k 2.39:1 has been pretty solid with most builds. I'm getting 3k continuous (12bit lossless) with the latest build.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, mercer said:

Has anybody tried a modest bump to 2.5k or 2.7k. I would love to be able to get 2.5k 2:39 working one day. Hell, even cinema 2K at 48-60p would get me off.

At 2K you'll be giving up the full frame benefits for a miniscule increase of pixel count (I deliberately don't say "resolution", it is likely you won't get true higher res at 1:1 2K as 1:1 puts much higher requirements on lens sharpness). It is almost certainly better to just upscale 1080p to 2K.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, cpc said:

At 2K you'll be giving up the full frame benefits for a miniscule increase of pixel count (I deliberately don't say "resolution", it is likely you won't get true higher res at 1:1 2K as 1:1 puts much higher requirements on lens sharpness). It is almost certainly better to just upscale 1080p to 2K.

Good to know, thanks. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Zak Forsman said:

Question, if I want to try one of the high frame rates, do I need to set the Canon menu to 60/720p and then the ML FPS to 48 or 60 depending on the mode I've selected? 

Yeah.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, squig said:

Regular build can do lower res.

Thanks again, Squig. So just to be clear... set for 60/720 in Canon menu, then set FPS to 48 or 60, exact FPS, then change the resolution in ML to lower than 1080 and I assume it will let me know what resolution is even possible?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, mercer said:

Thanks again, Squig. So just to be clear... set for 60/720 in Canon menu, then set FPS to 48 or 60, exact FPS, then change the resolution in ML to lower than 1080 and I assume it will let me know what resolution is even possible?

The resolution change is automatic in ML.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, squig said:

The resolution change is automatic in ML.

Yeah I noticed that. Tested it today. Pretty impressive for a less than 720p vertical resolution. I think I'll test the experimental build next week to see what I can get out of it. Have you tested any high resolution slow motion... even 48p is pretty slow... well slower than I thought it would look. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, mercer said:

Yeah I noticed that. Tested it today. Pretty impressive for a less than 720p vertical resolution. I think I'll test the experimental build next week to see what I can get out of it. Have you tested any high resolution slow motion... even 48p is pretty slow... well slower than I thought it would look. 

I haven't tested the high frame rates in the experimental builds. This is some 48p stuff I shot with a nightly build.

GEt7H9Y.png

8s4aZFs.png

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...