For folks who don't know what Magic Lantern is: > Magic Lantern is a free software add-on that runs from the SD/CF card and adds a host of new features to Canon EOS cameras that weren't included from the factory by Canon. It also backports new features to old Canon cameras that aren't supported anymore, and is generally just a really impressive feat of both (1) reverse engineering and (2) keeping old hardware relevan…
I wish there are similar projects for other camera brands like Fujifilm. With abilities of ML on old Canon cameras we know there is a lot of potential in those old machines across other brands. It is also "eco" friendly approach that should be supported.
Magic Lantern Is Back
161–170 of 170 posts
Re: Magic Lantern Is Back
#162The nifty thing would come from opening up the high end cameras, so why not go there? Of course Canon's legal team gonna crack down on the project, as they've previously said.
Canon's legal team have never said anything about Magic Lantern in any context that I'm aware of. The high end cams need ML less, they have more features stock, plus devs need access to the cam to make a good port. So higher end cams tend to be less attractive to developers.
Of course they did. They explicitly said, that if ML team touches their high end cameras lawyer team gonna push their shit in.
Re: Magic Lantern Is Back
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
Canon's legal team have never said anything about Magic Lantern in any context that I'm aware of. The high end cams need ML less, they have more features stock, plus devs need access to the cam to make a good port. So higher end cams tend to be less attractive to developers.
Of course they did. They explicitly said, that if ML team touches their high end cameras lawyer team gonna push their shit in.
I don't believe they did. Where did they say that?
Re: Magic Lantern Is Back
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
Canon's legal team have never said anything about Magic Lantern in any context that I'm aware of. The high end cams need ML less, they have more features stock, plus devs need access to the cam to make a good port. So higher end cams tend to be less attractive to developers.
Of course they did. They explicitly said, that if ML team touches their high end cameras lawyer team gonna push their shit in.
No, they explicitly never said that.
This is the origin:
https://www.canonrumors.com/inside-the-canon-eos-1d-c
Quote:
I was told by someone at Canon that they would “bring the might of its legal team” to anyone that attempts to modify at the software level, the features of an EOS-1 camera body
/Quote
"Someone"'s name was never revealed.
ML was never mentioned directly.*
ML team was never contacted by any Canon official or anyone speaking in their regard.
* Of course it is logical to assume there is a connection to ML.
Re: Magic Lantern Is Back
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm interested in using all kinds of devices for streaming live video from live (think music) events via OBS with minimal effort. Current setup is with a device (just an old iPhone can do) which provides WiFi connectivity, then another (or the same device) runs DroidCAM which them streams into a nearby laptop with OBS (typically capturing the audio needed) and this is then sent to wherever we decide (twitch, RSTP, et…
With 600D you are stuck to 1620x912 in video mode embedded in 1080i59.94 8-bit. Black borders around and you have to crop and - maybe - scale up. 200D HDMI stream with ML is clean with MF but AF will still draw a focus rectangle. But at least true FHD via HDMI. AF with 600D in liveview: Phase detection only. Focus hunting galore. 200D comes with usable DPAF. I prefer 250D for streaming. Dual display support, no 30 mi…
But there’s no way to skip HDMI right? I mean I’m not familiar with ML, but think whether some wiring can be spared. Don’t these cameras expose wifi of some sort?
IMHO even 800x600 is okay for most streaming needs. And particularly when sound quality is of primary importance.
Re: Magic Lantern Is Back
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
With 600D you are stuck to 1620x912 in video mode embedded in 1080i59.94 8-bit. Black borders around and you have to crop and - maybe - scale up. 200D HDMI stream with ML is clean with MF but AF will still draw a focus rectangle. But at least true FHD via HDMI. AF with 600D in liveview: Phase detection only. Focus hunting galore. 200D comes with usable DPAF. I prefer 250D for streaming. Dual display support, no 30 mi…
But there’s no way to skip HDMI right? I mean I’m not familiar with ML, but think whether some wiring can be spared. Don’t these cameras expose wifi of some sort? IMHO even 800x600 is okay for most streaming needs. And particularly when sound quality is of primary importance.
600D doesn't have WiFi.
You can stream via HDMI or USB.
USB stream for cams not supporting UVC (in general every EOS before Digic X and even some of those) is limited to 576p. Don't get your hopes high subscribing to EOS Webcam Utility Pro. Canon says it is able to deliver 720p and 1080p but they are scaled up from 576p.
And you need a dedicated mic. No audio support via USB or HDMI in early cams.
Re: Magic Lantern Is Back
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
Think of it as a non-profit club. If you volunteer to be the treasurer, are you then free to ignore everything and do whatever you like, just because you aren’t paid? Of course not. It’s the same with being a software project maintainer; you have willingly taken on some obligations.
If you volunteer, sure. If I put some code out on the internet and some other people find it and start using it, they message me we talk and I start adding things they suggest and working with others to improve this code. Then one day I wake up and don't want to do it anymore. At what point did I become obligated? When I published the code? When I first started talking to others about it(building a community)? When I…
If I strike up a conversation with you, and suddenly I don’t want to talk to you anymore, then what, if any, obligations do I have? Can I just stop talking mid-sentence and begin to completely ignore you? After all, I did not promise you a complete conversation.
Or did I, by engaging in a civil conversation with you, implicitly promise to abide by the normal social rules of etiquette, as far as I am reasonably able?
It is similar with software. If you, say, put up a web site (or even just a README.md) containing blurbs about how useful your software is, extolling its virtues, you are implicitly promising future updates and support, to the best of your (limited) ability. If you need to step away from the project, you are expected to do so in an orderly fashion (again, to the best of your – possibly limited – ability), announce it publicly, etc.
If you have no web site, but you have given similar indications in conversations, the same principle is applicable, but you have fewer people to notify.
> Who get to decide where the line is?
If a user can reasonably feel let down by your actions, or can reasonably feel that you have misled them, then I feel that a line has been crossed.
Re: Magic Lantern Is Back
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
But there’s no way to skip HDMI right? I mean I’m not familiar with ML, but think whether some wiring can be spared. Don’t these cameras expose wifi of some sort? IMHO even 800x600 is okay for most streaming needs. And particularly when sound quality is of primary importance.
600D doesn't have WiFi. You can stream via HDMI or USB. USB stream for cams not supporting UVC (in general every EOS before Digic X and even some of those) is limited to 576p. Don't get your hopes high subscribing to EOS Webcam Utility Pro. Canon says it is able to deliver 720p and 1080p but they are scaled up from 576p. And you need a dedicated mic. No audio support via USB or HDMI in early cams.
Thanks for taking time to explain. Perhaps I should also take time to share our setup in some sort of blog or gist.
Re: Magic Lantern Is Back
#169Canon Hack Development Kit for Canon PowerShot cameras
Re: Magic Lantern Is Back
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would love to add it to my 1Ds3. I recall reading that once upon a time Canon wrote ML devs a strongly worded letter telling them not to touch a 1D, but a camera that old is long obsolete. (I literally only want a raw histogram) (I also have a 1Dx2 but that's probably a harder port)
The 1Ds3 still renders wonderful images but the UI feels so limited now. ML would transform it.
Actually when I go back to the 1Ds3 from my 1Dx2 the only thing I miss is the front buttons near the lens mount, which I use for playback and magnification.