PE 7 with Canon 5D Mark II - bad slowmotion quality

Hi,
I've used the trial version for some days now to set up a video with shots from my Canon 5D Mark II.
I want the video clips to play in slowmotion so I've set the speed to 50%.
When I render the video I get bad quite quality (jagged playing) and I want it to be smooth.
Does anyone know if this is a know problem and could be solved in any way in PE 7?
If not, will it be the same problem in Premiere Pro version or does this version have a lot better render quality?
Thanks!

Welcome to the forum.
There are a couple of articles on this forum on "Canon 5D MK II" footage, and many more on the PrPro forum. Pay special attention to links to other articles and also comments from Jeff Bellune, a noted author and Community Expert. While I do not recall "slow motion" being discussed, there is much discussion on the .MOV files from that camera.
The Adobe fora allow one to search by both Subject and by People.
If I find some of the links, I will post them here.
Good luck, and have you done a Render (hit the Enter key) to Preview in the best form possible?
Hunt

Similar Messages

PS5 will not open camera raw pictures...all made with Canon 5D Mark III and Canon 5D Mark II

PS5 will not open Camera Raw Pictures made with Canon 5D Mark III

What version of camera raw do you have? You should have at least 6.7 for PS to open Canon 5D Mark III raw images.

Dark pictures with canon 5d mark 3 and 600ex flash, night indoors in Auto Mode and flash on.

I have purchased a new canon 5d mark 3 and speedlight 600ex-rt flash. While testing it indoor at night , the room lights are on and I was using the Auto Mode with Flash on. The pictures are Dark with the Flash on and when the flash is turned off the pictures are brighter. I am confused. How to get the AUto mode working with the Flash on.

Automatic mode, it it's attempt to be reasonably foolproof, is going to lock you out of having any control over the exposure.
The E-TTL metering system on your camera & flash are attempting to find the correct exposure for your subject.
Due to laws of physics (the inverse-square law), light has "fall off". It's not actually possible to use a single light source and expose a large room with that single light. Either the subject is nicely lit but everything else will probably be too dark. OR... the background is nicely lit but the subject is heavily over-exposed. (BTW, there are two ways to get around this.)
The amount of fall-off is based on the relative distance from the light. Every time the distance increases by a factor of 1.4 the amount of light is cut in half. This means if you have subject 10' away, but you have a foreground object only 7' away and a background object 14' away, and the flash is exposed for the subject at 10', then the foreground object will be over-exposed (with twice as much light as needed) and the background will be under-exposed (with half as much libght as needed.) Incidentally... if you "double" or "halve" the distance then the light difference will be 4x or 1/4 (depending on if you are getting closer or farther.)
Here's a video which both explains and then later demonstrates the concept in a way that makes it very obvious to see and easy to understand. If it seems confusing at first... stick with it. The video is only 12 minutes long.
In fully automatic mode the camera wont let you control anything (except how far away you stand from your subject).
If you switch to "Program" mode, it essentially works like automatic mode EXCEPT it will actually allow you to override settings or set compensations.
When you use a flash in a room with some ambient lighting (but otherwise dimly lit) there's a technique called 'dragging the shutter' (which the camera can actually do for you somewhat automatically).
To do that, set the camera to Tv mode (Tv = Time value... which is shutter priority mode). Dial in a slow-ish shutter speed... say around 1/60th of a second. Use a moderately boosted ISO (400 would probably work well... you might even go up higher).
The camera is going to evaluate the exposure needed for the room as though you don't have a flash... and it'll set the camera settings accordingly. However... since it knows you have a flash, it'll still perform the E-TTL II exposure metering and will use the flash anyway. What you end up with is a shot that has a nicely exposed primary subject (because the camera used flash) AND... a nicely exposed background which was primarily illuminated with ambient light -- but looks pretty good because the camera used an exposure that was adequate for the ambient light.
The reason I suggest using Tv mode and NOT Av mode is because you can control the mixture of flash vs. ambient light by controlling the TIME that the shutter is open. But this does NOT work if you control either the aperture or ISO.
Here's why: The flash is "momentary" but the ambient is constant. If you were to adjust the aperture settings, that will increase or decrease ALL the light sources that contribute to the exposure... so it increases (or decreases) the amount of flash AND the amount of ambient light ... and it does them in the same proportions. If you want to bright up the background lighting WITHOUT over-exposing your foreground subject, then you don't want to increase both... you only want to increase the amount of ambient light.
Since the flash is a momentary burst of light, if you leave shutter open longer you wont actually collect any more light from the flash (because the flash was providing illumination for only a tiny fraction of a second. Extending the amount of time that the shutter remains open means the camera will _only_ collect more of the ambient light... and that helps bring up the dark backgrounds.
One way to get around the flash fall-off problem is to greatly increase the distance between flash and subject. You still get "fall off" but now the distance you have to change to notice the fall off really increases. But this method usually isn't very practical because you'll be standing much farther then you'd prefer to be to get the shot.
The second way (and much more practical) is to "drag the shutter" (deliberately use longer shutter times so that the camera can collect more ambient light long after the flash is done.).
Tim Campbell
5D II, 5D III, 60Da

(Windows) Premiere cs4 with Canon 5D Mark II

I'm seriously considering buying Adobe's Production Premium, but I am extremely concerned about Premiere's support for the files outputted by my Canon 5D Mark II, h264 .mov 1920x1080p 30fps.
I've done a lot of research and it seems as if a lot of folks with a lot more experience, better hardware components and 3rd party software packages haven't been able to find a workflow that is reasonable in terms of effort and time required just to get a project going.
Can anyone give me a reason why I shouldn't seriously consider moving to an Apple solution with FCP Studio over production premium cs4 with premiere and after effects?
Thanks for your honest opinions!
Matt.
Intel Core 2 Duo e6850 3.0ghz
4 GB DDR2
2.5 TB Seagates & Samsung 7200 rpms (No drives are in RAID)
Windows XP

Thanks for your reply, Curt!
Curt Wrigley wrote:
flashbangphoto wrote:
Can anyone give me a reason why I shouldn't seriously consider moving to an Apple solution with FCP Studio over production premium cs4 with premiere and after effects?
If you want to stay on PC, would be the main reason.
I dont know how well FCP handles it; but typically fcp converts everything to an intermediate format (pro res)
I am definitely cringing at the thought of ditching all of my PC components (well, I suppose I can re-use the hard-drives at least in the Mac Pro if that's what I get). I do like a lot about windows, and being able to upgrade my stuff to my own liking rather than being stuck in a closed ecosystem. I also game a lot so that's a consideration too.
The way FCP converts the video to Pro Res sounds pretty smart and definitely take the guesswork out.
Jim Simon
Best one I can think of is that it would be an Apple solution.
The better solution would be to get a real video camera for video production. While the world of DSMC is rapidly approaching, we're not quite there yet.
Thanks for your reply, Jim!
I agree making the switch to Apple and Final Cut Studio might not be the best solution.
I cannot really speak to getting a "real" video camera just because Premiere cs4 can't seem to play nicely with the camera I currently have.
I am able to drag and drop 5D Mark II .mov files straight into imovie 6 HD, have it import (40 gb of movies in 4-5 hrs) and then edit away with no delays on a Macbook (non-pro) with no problems whatsoever. Playback, cutting, transitions, effects are silky smooth. Imovie 6 HD came with my Macbook when I bought it in December 2006. Premiere Pro came out last year didn't it? What gives?
There are people making some "real" good stuff out there with this camera and I love its ability to use all of my Canon lenses (four), high capacity memory cards (ranging from 8gb to 32gb) and camera batteries that I already have. Buying a new, but "real", camera would mean learning a whole new camera system not to mention having to buy all of the accessories, lenses, batteries, memory cards (a Panasonic P2 16gb alone is $800 USD) and carrying all that extra stuff around. If I'm on vacation for instance every morning I would have to make the decision of carting around either the still camera or the video camera instead of just bringing something that could do it both, and potentially miss either a once in a lifetime still or video.
I'm a photographer by trade but I'm getting into video production because I feel like I will need video editing/production skills in the future or I'll be left in the dust. That isn't the only reason of course - I've always wanted to shoot video but couldn't afford or justify a quality camera until now.
Jim why do you prefer Premiere to Final Cut Pro on the Mac?
Thanks again for replying.
Matt.

Focus problems with Canon 1D Mark III

I have been having problems with my 1D Mark III, it take an unusually long time to focus. The problem is especially prevalent indoors. I am using a Canon 24 to 70 IS lens.

I have had the camera since it first came out, however I also aready had a Canon 20D at the time. I seemed to do better with the 20D. I recently bought a Canon 7D and it focuses much faster. I am very displeased with the 1D Mark III.
I am an experienced photographer, photography is a passion I have studied and pursued. The 20D was my first DSLR, prior to that I shot with a Nikon 2020 film camera.
The problem with the 1D Mark III is that it takes an unusually long time to autofocus. Due to this, I usually relied on the 20D. When I bought the 7D I retired the 20D and paired the new camera with he 1D for gigs (weddings, parties etc.). It is frustrating to attempt shots with the camera and have subjects wait for me to shoot.

RAW Processing problems with Canon 5D Mark iii

I am having problems with the RAW files coming from my new 5D Mark iii in Aperture. I have the latest version of Aperture (and update) installed. Selecting a picture style on the 5D doesn't seem to yield any results because when I import the photo into aperture all the images go very dark. I have to pull the exposure levels up all the way to get a decent exposure. The histogram on my camera looks perfect but when imported into Aperutre the histogram changes. I have my custom picture style set to give me a very flat image (contrast off, sharpening off, saturation -2, color tone 0). The images looks very flat and perfect in my LCD but once imported into aperture the RAW processing makes it very dark. I even tried shooting the exact photo in three completely different picture styles but they all look identical once they are in aperture. What's going on??

Here is a side by side comparison of a RAW image in the latest versions of Aperture and Lightroom. I have never had these issues with the 5D Mark II only the Mark III. As you can see Lightroom produces a nice flat image while Aperture is under-exposing the image. Any thoughts? I really want to continue to use Aperture but with my recent camera upgrade to the Mark III I don't see how this is possible. Anyones help would be much appreciated.

CS5 Raw with Canon 5D Mark III and Canon 6D

I have CS5. I recently upgraded my 5D Mark II to a 5D Mark III. I also have a 6D. I can't open my images in RAW. Am I forced to purchase CS6?

Hi,
You should be able to open the Canon 5D Mark III files into photoshop cs5 by updating to camera raw 6.7
(Help>Updates from within photoshop cs5)
For the Canon 6D, the 8.1 DNG converter should work by converting your 6D camera raw files to dng
copies which should then open in photoshop cs5.
mac:
http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=5596
wndows:
http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=5597

EXIF and "Flash" field with Canon 1D mark III

Hi,
I have two Canon 1D mark III.
I'm shooting RAW without a flash attached to both cameras.
But if I look in Aperture in the EXIF data of the two cameras, then one camera is showing the value "16" in the "Flash" EXIF field the other is showing "0" as the value in the "Flash" EXIF field.
What does this field mean, why are there different values for the same shooting conditions?
Thanks
JO

Joachim Frey wrote:
But there was no flash on any of these two cameras, so how can this then be different?
Most cameras will let you change some flash settings whether there is a flash attached or not.
Ian

Final Cut Pro X Exporting to Youtube with Canon 5D Mark ii

Hi,
I'm having problems exporting to Youtube with Final Cut Pro X. i convert the file and upload, but the audio is not syncing properly. The video is fine. Any tips on what to do? I'm using a Canon 5 D Mark ii. 24fps, 1080
Also does anyone know where the audio setting are on FCPX?
Thanks

Hi aussiearn
The process you suggested worked beautifully: images clear and true sound accurate.
I have over 100 30 to 60-minute videos to put on a client's YouTube channel. Using the YouTube settings in Compressor my first uploads colours were looking washed out, and the audio progressively slipped when played via the Safari browser. Your advice has fixed this issue, so thank you for taking the time to post.
To clarify what I understood your process to be for others who may wish to use it:
In FCPX choose 'Share' from the menu bar
Select 'Export Media'
In the options presented: 'Export' should be set to 'Video and Audio'; 'Video codec' as H.264; 'Audio file format' will be greyed out but show Quicktime Movie; 'Open with' will show 'QuickTime Player.app (default)'. Click 'Next'.
You'll be presented with 'Save As' options. Name the file and select where you want it to go on your drive(s), and click 'Save'.
Export will begin: my 6.84GB video, which was 45-minutes of 1920 x 1080 at 23.98fps, took about 35 minutes using a Macbook Pro 2.2 Ghz Intel Core i7 with 8 GB of RAM
When the export is complete the video should automatically open in QuickTime.
Within QuickTime go to 'File' on the menu bar and choose 'Export for Web', which is at the bottom of the drop-down menu
You'll be presented with a box that says 'Export versions of your movie optimized for web-delivery to iPhone and the desktop'. Pick what you want to name the file in the 'Export as' and then where you want it to go in 'Where' (obviously enough). You can save in three versions for different contexts, but I chose only to save as 'Broadband', with the best quality as YouTube will automatically create different versions later. Click 'Export'.
An 'Export Progress' box should appear. My file took around 45-minutes to process.
At the end of the process you will find a folder with your chosen name, rather than a file. Click on tha folder, then click on the 'Resources' Folder you will find in side. Amongst other files you'll find a .m4v file with 'broadband' at the end of the name. Rename the file and change the suffix '.m4v' to '.mp4' and upload to YouTube.
As you said this seems to save a lot of time compared to compressor (perhaps half the time?) The file that began the process at 6.84 GB ended as 1.16 GB, and looks and sounds great.
Thank you,
Nigel

Log and Transfer with Canon 5d mark iii footage on OS 10.5

FCP is not recognizing my SCDH card in the Log and Transfer window
and I'm wondering why this is.
I am running OS 10.5 - and there were no additional EOS drivers available
on Canon's website for my OS.
I am shooting with the new 5D mark iii. When I first got the Rebel T2i a few years
back, I had the same problem and installing the Canon driver worked to
get the card to show up in the Log and Transfer window.
Does anyone have tips for how to get my Log and Transfer window to recognize
a card from the 5D mark iii?
Thanks.

Hi, guys.
In my experience, the best native format is ProRes MOV while the 5D Mark III recorded file is H.264 MOV. So I have been using a H.264 to ProRes MOV Converter to help me change the 5D Mark III H.264 MOV files before importing to FCP on my iMac. I found the way from Google. The below is the link.
http://www.editavchdmac.com/convert-5d-mark-iii-mov-footages-to-prores-for-editi ng-in-fcp-x/
Thanks

RAW Processing with Canon 5D Mark iii

Since upgrading to Aperture 3.3.1 I started to notice a huge decrease in the sharpness of my images. I have checked previous threads and followed up on my Highlight Tone priority settings as well as Post Import Raw Process setting. Having messed around with both settings I have been unable to fix this issue. So I went ahead and downloaded a copy of Lightroom to test. Images imported into lightroom at full 1:1 previews are sharp as a tack. What could be causing my issue with Aperture. I do not want to have to switch but at this point I might not have a choice.
I am importing mRAW files without JPG and applying no Presets. The first time I click on the image it initially loads sharp and then after a split second it becomes "blurry"
Any one else seeing this issue still and have any advice?
Shooting with a Canon 5D MK3.
Thanks
Brad

Wish I had an answer here, but I will caution about mRAW files. I wouldn't use them, as they are the "red-headed stepchild" of RAW files. They are not true RAW files, and Aperture's support for them came much later than regular RAW files.
I'd recommend shooting regular RAW files and just deleting more of the non-keepers if space is an actual consideration.
Here's an article that goes into details (mostly on sRAW, but mRAW is the same thing, pretty much):
http://dougkerr.net/Pumpkin/articles/sRaw.pdf

Aperture RAW conversion colour noise with Canon 1D Mark II

I'm using Aperture 2.1 and am wondering if anyone here is having this problem - basically highlights end up with false colour with this camera/RAW conversion combination. The problems appears to have been introduced with the 1.1 RAW converter as 1.0 conversions don't seem to have the problem. I'm not sure if this is camera specific, or whether there is some tuning which can be done to the RAW converter to minimise the effect - attempts have so far failed with this approach.
The best subject to produce the effect is strong reflections from water - i've attached a crop of an image which shows this problem, and I can supply a RAW with this problem.
Conversion using RAW 1.0 (less or no colour pixelation):
http://www.loftsoft.co.uk/pictures/KC7U5116%20-%20RAW%201.0.jpg
Conversion using RAW 2.0 (colour pixelation):
http://www.loftsoft.co.uk/pictures/KC7U5116%20-%20RAW%202.0.jpg
Any suggestions as to what to do? Is this simply a RAW conversion problem which can be addressed or am I using the tool wrong?
Many thanks,
Cesare

Hmm. I can see some color effects in the 1.0 conversion as well.
Those are some touch photos... you have lots of specular highlights with the sun reflecting off the water and the railing.
Aperture 2.x and 1.x handle the RAW conversion differently. I would suggest you try playing with the RAW Fine Tuning brick, specifically with the Moire and Radius sliders, and try fiddling with the Auto Noise Compensation checkbox.
I don't know whether you'll be able to make the problem go away completely or not.
With my ~30,000 1D Mark II files I've seen something similar to this (though much less extreme) on a couple of them. Always with specular highlights though -- off water or metal objects.
Still, you may wish to submit Aperture feedback and include the RAW file.

Is elements 13 compatible with Canon 5d Mark iii raw files?

Just upgraded my camera and the raw files cannot be read on my current version of elements. Will Elements 13 be compatible - was thinking of upgrading to full photoshop but that now only seems to come in a monthly package! I really need someone to talk through my best options but there doesn't seem to be any customer service.

Photoshop elements 10 should be able to open those files if you update to camera raw 6.7
Which operating system are you using?
windows
Adobe - Photoshop Elements : For Windows : Camera Raw 6.7 update for Elements 10
mac
Adobe - Photoshop Elements : For Macintosh : Camera Raw 6.7 update for Elements 10
Also, photoshop elements 13 will open those files as well.

Editing with Canon 5D Mark II Problems

Hello fcp experts,
I shot a short film on 5D and I did not know that I should convert the raw files to Apple ProRes 422 in Compressor and then edit it on final cut pro.
I already edited the raw files in fcp. and I started adding fades and outline texts. then I rendered them and exported it. That's when I realized that the color of the video changed whenever there was subtitle or fades.
Is there any way to fix this or do I have to convert all the files to Apple ProRes 422? (I did start) Is there any short cut to this?? Please help!!!

sorimsanim wrote:
I followed this guideline I found online and it said to set in and out points on the raw files in Compressor.
I've never heard of this being done in any of the conversion workflows I'm aware of, and it seems like a waste of time. The amount of drive space you'll save will be negligible - if saving space is the reasoning behind it. Reconnect to the ones without in and out points.
+And could you tell me the exact settings after conversion? It should be Apple ProRes 422, right?+
If that's what you converted them to, then yes.

Canon 5D Mark II support on FCP 7?

Anyone know if there is support for the Canon 5D Mark II h.264 native files on the new FCP?
I've looked at the new features and they claim it supports native file editing, but not specifically the Canon 5D. Thanks for any info.

Some people have worked with Canon 5D Mark II H.264 footage "natively" even with the previous version of FCP, but you don't get real-time performance.
The new lower bandwidth ProRes codecs are great here. ProRes 422 (Proxy) would be approximately the same data rate as the original, but without temporal compression so in some places there may be quality tradeoffs.
For optimal quality use ProRes 422 (LT) - it's 3x the bandwidth but still fairly lightweight, and can be edited natively with real time effects.
Using any higher quality ProRes options is unnecessary if your sequence does not include higher bandwidth sources.

PE 7 with Canon 5D Mark II - bad slowmotion quality

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for