Cinematography : Canon 7D and Magic Lantern Raw capture by Frank A Rybicki

The problem is not H264 as a standard since it includes profiles like High Predictive Profile H264 which can be 4:4:4 and 14 bit colour depth. Trimming the potential data stream down to a rate that is manageable by the camera results in huge compromises The H264 profile used matches the output the camera's processing can actually provide. Using a still camera to shoot moving pictures is the heart of the matter. If you were not happy with the latitude when shooting moving pictures then never look at a resolution chart.

Andrew, thanks for the reminder about the h264 spec. I prefer the fractal based codecs like prores and cineform, soon to be SMPTE VC-5, over the descrete cosine algorithm. The ML sends data at 50 - 65MB per sec - that's megabytes - delivering the raw 14 bit data from each of the photosites on the sensor. Data transfer would be much better if the data were shrunk by either prores or cineform before being sent to the CF in the 7D. Resolution is an issue on the 7D, but getting all the color via ML is worth the effort. Blackmagic and Digital Bolex are addressing the resolution issues for filmmakers on a budget - and the 4K and d16 have global shutters. But I can now do serious film making with wonderful latitude and color without having to spend any more money.

I don't think H264 was ever intended as a serious capture format, but it was there and could display nice pictures so it was used. Does the Magic Lantern set-up really allow info from all of the photosites on the sensor, or only from the photosites that are active in the video mode? The latitude increase is a good thing, if it is noise free. If the sensor is dropping rows and columns to get to 1920x1080 then uncompressed 14 bit would be 87MB/sec. Impressive that the compression is so low that it allows 50-60 MB/s transfer. Unless the full sensor is utilized, the Magic Lantern will do little if anything about the resolution and all of the motion artifacts and aliasing will still be there. Hopefully Blackmagic will do better with the launch of the 4K camera than they are doing at the launch of the Pocket Cinema Camera. That camera arrived with a lot of issues that should never have made it to the public. A good idea though, so hopefully they will get it right.

The alpha ML 7D raw code records a 16:9 1728x972 frame with the line skipping. The sensor does exhibit what I call rolling shudder, cause that's what I do when I see it, roll and shudder. Mosaic Engineering's 7D-VAF deals well with mosiac and alias issues. Blackmagic's engineers know how to make things right. I just wish they were film makers as well. It is better to get product, even if essential-feature challenged (need to stay p.c.), out the door than not. Look at all the good engineering design feedback they are getting from people who make films. Their skin must be graphite tough to weather the business feedback coming at them.

So the Magic Lantern material is then uncompressed. That's impressive. Odd size though, at 10% smaller. While I agree that Blackmagic's design capabilities are very good, their execution has had a pretty dodgy history over the years. The problems with the Pocket Cinema Camera I have seen, had to do with handling highlights. Reflections turned into large round white circles and there were marks in the middle of really bright objects that could be a sensor problem or firmware issue. Those issues should never have made it to the public. Never really got to any testing because the time would be wasted until the issues are dealt with.

To ship or not to ship? Shipping early is better than shipping late because the product gets into the hands of real users. With so much of today's products running on software, there is reduced risk in shipping early. The BMPCC has received a firmware update to fix the white blotch problem with max highlights. If the camera were still in the makers' hands we would not see a short film like https://vimeo.com/groups/blackmagic/videos/75085713. Based on the past 18 months, the audience for BM cameras now knows they are buying leading edge gear with issues. The one week test of the BMCC I did last January disappointed, so many mandatory features absent. But the footage was very good. This is a good time to be making films.

Glad to hear the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera problem, that even rudimentary testing would have found, has been fixed. It should never have been released. To release or not release? A more appropriate first question is does it work or not? Releasing cameras that do not work, means that I would not even consider looking at it again for another 6 months if ever. If I cannot trust the gear, I will not use the gear as any failure is a disaster. Fail twice and the brand is dead to me. There are lots of manufacturers that can release cameras that work right out of the box. Sure there are updates, but they are to make a working camera better, not to make an unusable camera less unusable. Any questionable piece of gear that can halt a production becomes a door-stop in short order.

I enjoyed your pov on the camera. I am considering the BBCC myself.

it sounds wired i don;t understand much about camera compatibility , but canon 7d does gives good pictures , and its my favorite these days , so far, i have used it for 2 films and i love watching what it has produced .

If it is a newer Canon7 then it has the New DIGIC IIII CMOS. However, on that note. CMOS can be programmed to run multi formats, Some 1/4" CMOS can run 90 FPS, or you can send your camera to Canon and have them reprogram it to be Interlaced instead of Progressive and make the fields even, to have motion shot like a still photo. CMOS is the deal when it comes to cameras. The containers like MPEG2 now called 264 is just the container. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-4 Which this container will hold 8 8 8 or 4 4 4 - Y Cr Cb. You mentioned 14 bits stream, there are cameras that do 24mbps and more. From my reading and understanding. The CMOS and it's native FPS will get you the clarity you desire. Along with a good NLE and of course Speed Grade Color correction. And it's output for delivery. Yet another container. That is why when you shop for a camera the CMOS manufacturer is just about a secret and finding out the color headroom is nowhere to be found unless it DOES shoot 4 4 4. My two cents of knowing a drop in the bucket of a sea of knowledge

I am assuming you are using Magic Lantern. If not then my apologies because I used it on my 60D as well. What has bothered me with with the 7 and the 5 is the aliasing issue that they have. If the newer Canons adjusted for that or ML then awesome sign me up! Now the question is if the BMCC or even the RED does this. In all honesty I have not seen it in the RED but I would like to see if that issue is in the Black Magic. Thank you Mr. Faris, Ms Nabunya, and of course Mr. Rybicki. it is from your comments that make people strive to learn more.

How could you expect raw to produce equal results to h.264?

Simon. If a DSLR was converted to interlace, and then you only looked at the even fields in HD video, you would be limited to 540 lines. Interlace is comprised of 2 sets of fields odd and even, or the odd numbered lines and the even numbered lines. Why would you do that? H.264 is not part of the MPEG2 standard but it is part of the newer MPEG4 standard. Within MPEG4 different subsets of the standard are known by different part numbers. H.264 is also know as MPEG4 part 10. It is also know as AVC or Advanced Video Coding. Within H.264 there are various profiles, with the High 4:4:4 Predictive Profile being the highest quality profile that I am aware of. MPEG is a standard, are not wrapper. Wrappers, also know as containers, are file formats that package info for video players along with the CODEC and the video information. So you could have H.264 video and wrap it as a .mp4 or avi file or example. The 14bit I spoke of earlier, does not refer to the same thing as a 28mbps stream. The 14bit is a colour bit depth while 28mbps is the amount of information flowing in 1 second. 28Mbps does not meet the minimum technical standard for many broadcasters for HD. In the Canon DSLRs this 14bit colour depth is compressed to 8bit for recording by their version of H.264 There are CMOS cameras that are running at much higher speeds, with very high quality like the Phantom Flex 4K which makes 1000 4K frames per second. Both CCD and CMOS can deliver very high quality images, there are differences but both can be excellent There are many colour correction platforms, but in order to use them it is critical that you have a professional grading quality monitor in order to see what you are doing with repeatable accuracy. What do you mean by "color headroom".

I love this topic and all of your comments. This has been very informative for me as I study which camera to purchase next. Thanks for sharing all of your information everyone.

Although the 7D offers RAW and the contrast ratio was very good on that sun shot, the lens needs to be sorted as it was breathing on the focus pull on the reed shot. That would be very noticeable on a large screen. NB those windows disappearing top left. And that was watching on my iPhone! Get a PL mount and get professional lenses. I KNOW they are expensive. I was recently offered a second hand prime for £8k but that's what they cost but once you have the PL mount you can hire a set from Arri for that special job.

Franz, you caught one of the issues using lenses designed for still photography. Thanks, now I will need to lock focus with the Canon EF-S 17-55 f2.8. 'The Conservatory' short production used a set of Zeiss super speed primes. Most of the work was done at night with very little light. The lenses and the Canon EOS C300 did an incredible job recording the footage. Check out my reel for the trailer.

what a very sweet film clip I have added it to twitter I hope you do not mind

Frank - There is nothing wrong with still lenses but they are made for stills AND to a price whereas cine lenses are made REGARDLESS of price because the image has, potentailly, is photographing an image good enough for projection onto a large screen (the Empire Leicester Square is 47' wide - consider the magnification factor from 36mm x 24mm… A professional zoom lens could set you back £25k. In the film industry, production companies don't buy stuff: The makers sell to a rental house, and the kit is then hired out at a more reasonable cost. Sorry for the detail, which I'm sure you know, but it's more for the benefit of new members out there. That breathing would be massive on a large screen.

While accessing the RAW allows for much more latitude, it does nothing for the actual resolution of DSLRs. Nor for the issues regarding aliasing.

And still remember that the best Sony pixels are around 4 micron whereas Kodak grain is around 2 micron so which again has the better resolution...? DON'T buy the hype just to be trendy and "with it".