Panning 'mud', reasons why and firmware update

[Boz]

Every new camera has issues.

Yup, which is exactly why I will continue to wait. No harm in that. There's no point in running out and buying a camera right this second (especially one with admitted problems) when in the next few months A) there might be a firmware fix, B) Canon or Nikon might release something competitive in that price range. If I had to have a camera NOW, things would be a bit more difficult (hence Squig's quandry).


The 60D for sure is coming! I think that's one of a few reasons the Firmware came out. I think to make nice with current 5D owners before a more refined and the very latest technology installed in a newer camera gets released. Remember the 5D MII is almost a year old. The head of Canon spoke candid during a PMA interview with DPreview.com; and even stated that a lower price camera can leap upper ones that might be a little older in the technology implantations of the time of their design; ( referencing to the 5D leaping the 1DS questions ) that was just the way technology works he basically said. The 60D line is 1,700 approx costing camera. Not really far in price form the 5D. It will be interesting...

Yes exactly. If it has manual controls, 24P and the like, I will probably go for that. Then I will be able to use my existing Canon glass with it and not have to worry about special lenses or adapters. If turns out to be like the 5Dii when initially released (no manual, no 24P), then hopefully GH1's issues will be worked out by then and I can go that way. In the meantime I'll just watch and learn. :)

[squig]

Yeah if I wasn't cameraless and didn't have a paying gig next week I'd wait. 30-24p conversion on my macbook pro will be painfully slow. I expect we'll see a couple of less crippled DSLRs in the next couple of months. But it will be good to give full frame 42Mbps H.264 a run around the block and then compare it to the coming competition.

[stav1606]

The mud however seems to be the only problem of the GH1. I don't want to go with a Nikon or a Canon because you are forgetting that we are not just comparing the codecs.

I like the GH1 because it is also smaller, lighter, no mirror, long battery, view finder for video too, autofocus, track focus, 10X zoom in the kit lens, not a ull frame sensor which might create an extremel shallow depth of field etc. So all these Nikons and Canon to come, will not very soon have all those things. I mean yes I would like to have a more solid codec but not so much in the expense of a very heavy huge camera I would not like to carry around, or one that would drain the battery as soon as I start filming.

So my only hesitation is ordering the GH1 and after some days Samsung announcing its rival. The other companies will take a lot of time to do a mirror less approach, if they ever bother.

[Barry_Green]

Oh, someone asked once upon a time whether the GH1 has a physical shutter like the G1 does? Yes, it does. It's not used in video recording, it's used in still photography.

[stav1606]

it's at 1:55-1:56.
It is very clear that at the specific point her head is very lit and therefore is overexposed. I don't know why you are insisting but there there is absolutely no mud in this video.

I don't know if its the black background that is very light for the compression or the high ISO but it is completely mud free. I am waiting for the "tests" that will determine if it is the details that are hard for the codec or the low ISO...

(referring to http://www.vimeo.com/groups/gh1/videos/4964678)

[squig]

Oh, someone asked once upon a time whether the GH1 has a physical shutter like the G1 does? Yes, it does. It's not used in video recording, it's used in still photography.

but no mirror giving you a wysiwyg EVF live view

[squig]

It is very clear that at the specific point her head is very lit and therefore is overexposed. I don't know why you are insisting but there there is absolutely no mud in this video.

I don't know if its the black background that is very light for the compression or the high ISO but it is completely mud free. I am waiting for the "tests" that will determine if it is the details that are hard for the codec or the low ISO...

(referring to http://www.vimeo.com/groups/gh1/videos/4964678)

Ok I'll re-phrase how does "substantial loss of frame integrity" work for you. Granted that is re-compressed footage but I've seen enough of it in uncompressed footage to draw some conclusions. But again let me stress I was pixel peeping and the punters won't see it and it's up to everyone to do their own testing and draw their own conclusions.

[PappasArts]

Post processes are not my area, however:

What if you captured footage from the card via the GH1's HDMI to a Blackmagic intensity card and bypassed the hope that the software, Mac or PC, can figure out the proper frame sequences from the 1080P/24 AVCHD file. I assume the HDMI output of the GH1 is pre-converted and sent in a 1080P or i, 3:2 pulldown the normal way. Apposed to the AVCHD file on the card that needs to be figured out.. Couldn't you capture this footage straight to a much better codec on the fly too?

Just a thought.........?








.

[John Caballero]

it's up to everyone to do their own testing and draw their own conclusions.

Exactly. And the conclusion from most of the people that evaluated and commented on this particular footage, with a lot of movement, is that there is no mud showing, or in in other words: no instances of "substantial loss of frame integrity" due to codec breakage. As for the seconds in question, no video camera in the same situation would show any detail on a frame by frame scrutiny, unless perhaps if the camera was shooting 120 fps. As a whole the GH1 is looking very good so far.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Sorry, must be just a misunderstanding on my part. For some time people here were under the impression that nobody was shooting narrative work with the other cameras. The other day I demonstrated how this was false.

....
Our newest mod Zak Forsman was interviewed in Filmmaker Magazine for his work with the D90.
http://www.filmmakermagazine.com/spring2009/still-cameras.php
I think most DVXuser's know people are doing narrative work with those cams even though I don't really see how due to the jello. I saw how in Zak's peice - with his cheeks clinched moving the camera very slowly (and it looked great, the sedentary style suited the peice) - but as a general tool I don't see how and jello is a deal breaker for me.

[Barry_Green]

but no mirror giving you a wysiwyg EVF live view
Well, yeah, that's the whole point of "Micro" Four Thirds. If you want a mirror, get a full-size Four Thirds camera. The "Micro" in Micro Four Thirds does away with the mirror, thus making the whole system quite a bit more compact.

[PappasArts]

Our newest mod Zak Forsman was interviewed in Filmmaker Magazine for his work with the D90.
http://www.filmmakermagazine.com/spring2009/still-cameras.php
I think most DVXuser's know people are doing narrative work with those cams even though I don't really see how due to the jello. I saw how in Zak's peice - with his cheeks clinched moving the camera very slowly (and it looked great, the sedentary style suited the peice) - but as a general tool I don't see how and jello is a deal breaker for me.


I saw that article the other day: The filmmakers shooting "Searching For Sonny" using the 5D are also profiled.




.

[squig]

That Pentax K-7 mjpeg footage of the kid with the baseball bat retains the detail. It seems to me that it's something inherent with long GOP codecs and the lower the bit-rate the lower the frame integrity with fast motion. The mjpeg stuff from the GH1 that I've seen handles motion much better than the AVCHD stuff.

[PappasArts]

That Pentax K-7 mjpeg footage of the kid with the baseball bat retains the detail. It seems to me that it's something inherent with long GOP codecs and the lower the bit-rate the lower the frame integrity with fast motion. The mjpeg stuff from the GH1 that I've seen handles motion much better than the AVCHD stuff.

You mean this shot Squig..

The K-7 has an interesting organic look. The green leaf shot especially..

BTW, the K- 7 footage is the only one I can apply USM to it, and it doesn't get ugly. All others do, including the 5D. Very interesting!

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d94/PappasArts/kidwithball.jpg

.

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d94/PappasArts/K71.jpg





Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms


Anamorphic DSLR Lens Test Images... links:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1638289&postcount=97
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1637705&postcount=84

Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-Pappas/573417404
Myspace:
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts

Arrfilms@hotmail.com
http://www.PappasArts.com
CONTACT VIA AOL INSTANT MESSENGER
AT { PAPPASARTS2 }

[squig]

I think most DVXuser's know people are doing narrative work with those cams even though I don't really see how due to the jello. I saw how in Zak's peice - with his cheeks clinched moving the camera very slowly (and it looked great, the sedentary style suited the peice) - but as a general tool I don't see how and jello is a deal breaker for me.

The D90 jello is controllable to a point. Shooting wide and using a stabilizer helps. Zak shot everything handheld but he's a crazy bugger. 2 guys here have shot features with it with no major complaints. If the D90 was the only DSLR available I'd shoot my feature with 2 of them. Mud is more a deal breaker for me, each to his own.

[squig]

You mean this shot Squig..

The K-7 has an interesting organic look. The green leaf shot especially..



that's the money shot. I've sent some feedback to Ned who runs Pentax in the US about a manual control firmware update so fingers crossed. That shot is 50Mbps+ mjpeg. looks filmic to me. If somebody with a GH1 cares to shoot a swinging bat with similar light and background detail it would be very interesting to see. my money is on the Pentax for frame integrity.

[stephenvv]

You mean this shot Squig..

The K-7 has an interesting organic look. The green leaf shot especially..

BTW, the K-& footage is the only one I can apply USM to it, and it doesn't get to ugly. All others do, including the 5D. Very interesting!



But look, the baseball bat turns to mud! Unacceptable!

:grin:

[Daniel L.]

I recall reading somewhere that the rolling shutter on the K-7 is about as bad as on the D90. Can't seem to find the source now... Maybe this will be improved by the time it's ready.

[PappasArts]

that's the money shot. I've sent some feedback to Ned who runs Pentax in the US about a manual control firmware update so fingers crossed. That shot is 50Mbps+ mjpeg. looks filmic to me. If somebody with a GH1 cares to shoot a swinging bat with similar light and background detail it would be very interesting to see. my money is on the Pentax for frame integrity.



BTW, the K- 7 footage is the only one I can apply USM to it, and it doesn't get ugly. All others do, including the 5D. Very interesting!

However the above I don't have any USM applied.


.

[squig]

I think overall mjpeg looks more "organic" than AVCHD. When AVCHD does a dummy spit it gets blocky and muddy. mjpeg gets more blurry and fuzzy. The problem with mjpeg is if the bit-rate is too low then every frame looks a bit fuzzy just like a jpeg still compressed for the web. Sorry if I've confused anyone with the highly technical jargon. :huh:

[squig]

But look, the baseball bat turns to mud! Unacceptable!

:grin:

hehe peeper!

na that's motion blur mate....honest

[squig]

I recall reading somewhere that the rolling shutter on the K-7 is about as bad as on the D90. Can't seem to find the source now... Maybe this will be improved by the time it's ready.

Not from what I can see. That's shot with 200mm glass handheld from what I can tell. I've shot 105mm handheld D90 and it's jello city. The K-7 has image stabilization built in to the body.

[squig]

just to be a party peeper though I did notice some aliasing on the logo on the kids shirt.....Kholi won't be pleased. :D

[raymondluo]

That Pentax K-7 mjpeg footage of the kid with the baseball bat retains the detail. It seems to me that it's something inherent with long GOP codecs and the lower the bit-rate the lower the frame integrity with fast motion. The mjpeg stuff from the GH1 that I've seen handles motion much better than the AVCHD stuff.

Does anyone know what the bit-rate for the GH1 MJPEG is at?

[Daniel L.]

Not from what I can see. That's shot with 200mm glass handheld from what I can tell. I've shot 105mm handheld D90 and it's jello city. The K-7 has image stabilization built in to the body.

Found it. It was just a post on another forum.

Here are more K-7 videos: http://www.hv20.com/showthread.php?p=218990

[PappasArts]

This K-7 footage is super clean. Download full 720P version ( data rate : 44.19 mbits/sec ) to see the detail. Don't like the skew though.

Why can't the GH1 have this clean look? This is Pentax for god sakes. Panasonic knows video codecs better then them... Ahhhhh!

http://vimeo.com/4951136


This one has the odd frame size, however very sharp...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMcxQOYSFcM

..

[squig]

Does anyone know what the bit-rate for the GH1 MJPEG is at?

from the raw clips I've had access to it's been between 13Mbps and 31mbps averaging about 20Mbps. So a little higher than the D90 which ranges from 7-25Mbps averaging about 15Mbps. The D90 however is 24fps so it's pretty close per frame.

[squig]

This K-7 footage is super clean. Download full 720P version ( data rate : 44.19 mbits/sec ) to see the detail. Don't like the skew though.

Why can't the GH1 have this clean look? This is Pentax for god sakes. Panasonic knows video codecs better then them... Ahhhhh!

http://vimeo.com/4951136


This one has the odd frame size, however very sharp...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMcxQOYSFcM

..

the "odd" frame size 3:2 is ok if you're gonna shoot anamorphic.

[PappasArts]

the "odd" frame size 3:2 is ok if you're gonna shoot anamorphic.

Imagine a 2X anamorphic with that. The anamorphic you have will work excellent with this frame ratio... Hunters Lomo would too!

The sad part is, it's quite apparent the codec is cleaner than it should be from Pentax..... I just wish the GH1 had that Mjpeg instead of AVCHD on it's 1080/24 mode.




.

[squig]

It will be a real shame if the pentax doesn't get manual control and 24p. these DSLRs are getting so close.

[Kholi]

GH-1 uses PhotoJPEG by the way. Check the untouched examples around.

Sign the petition, maybe we can get a 1080/24 PJPEG if everyone bugs Panasonic enough.

[Kholi]

It will be a real shame if the pentax doesn't get manual control and 24p. these DSLRs are getting so close.

Haven't you already chosen your camera? Tsk tsk

[PappasArts]

It will be a real shame if the pentax doesn't get manual control and 24p. these DSLRs are getting so close.

It's Pentax at V.1. I have zero expectations. I'm glad that there just jumping in and giving it a try...

However I hold Panasonic and Canon at a higher standard, and I'm far far less forgiving for stupid implementations from them . With Pentax,, it's Pentax.

Pentax made good cameras way back, and lenses. I still have my Japanese's built K1000 35mm still camera that my dad got me when I was 9yrs old. That thing was a work horse through childhood, HS and on.




.

[squig]

Haven't you already chosen your camera? Tsk tsk

not until it's bought and paid for.

Pentax just got back to me, shipping July. Love the codec but don't know if I want to go back to no manual control but if I could get one next week I'd be willing to pull a Kholi and be the crash test dummy. Maybe Ned would be nice enough to send me one.

it looks like a very nice DSLR. weatherproof seals.....snowboard hell

and only a bit more coin than a D90 @ triple the bit-rate

I even have a pentax K mount anamorphic lens

[PappasArts]

GH-1 uses PhotoJPEG by the way. Check the untouched examples around.

Sign the petition, maybe we can get a 1080/24 PJPEG if everyone bugs Panasonic enough.


Hey Kholi,

I actually like the GH1 a lot; just two things piss me off. The HDMI Live - not! However that I can live with. The biggest gripe is the codec is crap. It's a shame; the camera has the right sensor size pretty much and its totally cool. However at the end of the day, it either produces a clean image or it doesn't.

I do have untouched Mjpegs from the GH1, and well there crappy...... The video looks soft and something just isn't right with the GH1 implementations of the video coming off that sesnor.

Unless you have otherwise.........

That said, I want 1080P/24. The Spec they advertise it does......

That GH1 sensor is way way way way beyond the 1080P spec; and to not get access to that, or at least half the potential of that sensor, just cause they choose a bad codec setup, is a major FUBAR and damn shame.



It's like taking a 2010 Mercedes-Benz SLR ( that car gives me a B#ner ) and putting stone wheels on it.....

WTF.......... Panasonic......

Makes NO sense!





.

[Kholi]

Pappas I thought you already had an MKII anyway?

[squig]

the trouble is 1080 is 2.5 times the amount of pixels as 720 squeezed into the same 17Mbps stream. It's asking a bit much.

17Mbps can barely manage 720 and needs to be at least 24Mbps

[ryansheffer]

I know this has been said before. But I don't think the bitrate is the problem. My XH-A1 could take any sort of fast motion. Would it look great? No. Would it do what the GH1 does? Not even close.

My understanding is that 17mbps H.264 should blow 25mbps Mpeg2 out of the water.

[commanderspike]

AVCHD relies on guessing between frames.

That's okay when nothing much changes from frame to frame.

But with a big pan, this system goes to hell and it seems the codec implementation either cannot keep up or does not have a fail safe in place to prevent the corruption.

Maybe this issue will be fixed with a B frame firmware update.

Maybe it's a hardware issue and cannot be fixed with software.

Either way an explanation from Panasonic would be great, to shed some light on the matter and stop all this guess work.

[PappasArts]

Pappas I thought you already had an MKII anyway?

No! Used it! Pre-manual firmware update...



.

[John Caballero]

commander did you check on the higher ISO theory? The other thread stopped with my last post. A lot of the prosumer video cameras are rated ISO 320 or higher. Did you check to see if getting the ISO higher made any difference on the panning "mud"?

[commanderspike]

An interesting result here.

1/30 F4 ISO 100:
Pretty bad...
http://www.brawnf1blog.com/GH1/iso100.jpg

1/30 F4 ISO 320:
This seemed better...
http://www.brawnf1blog.com/GH1/iso320.jpg

1/30 F4 ISO 800:
Oh dear, then the theory falls down...
http://www.brawnf1blog.com/GH1/iso800.jpg

1/125 F4 ISO 320:
Underexposed but fine once again at ISO 320...
http://www.brawnf1blog.com/GH1/iso320fast.jpg

1/125 F4 ISO 800:
But if it's higher ISO which solves the problem, this tells me otherwise...
http://www.brawnf1blog.com/GH1/iso800fast.jpg

What's interesting here is why the dark one on the fast shutter is so much better than the lighter one shot at ISO 800.

It seems the underexposure has cured the problem. Another test which adds weight to the 'detail' theory.

The more detail in the shot, the more corruption when panning...

[Ian-T]

But it seems like ISO 320 is the sweetspot.

Thanks for those samples by the way.

[sunburst]

Athe more corruption when panning...

so commander, you're KEEPING this camera?

[Isaac_Brody]

Was this shot handheld? 1/30 will definitely look muddy handheld with the amount of motion your blur your introducing.

Just curious, can you also shoot this test at 1/60 and only slightly underexposing the footage. And while you're at it try this with MJPEG.

[Ian-T]

Isaac, I think all shots were purposely done this way to help us see the type of mud we get under similar panning situations.

[Isaac_Brody]

Yes, but it actually might be more useful to see the actual shots in motion. Commander can you post the native MTS files? And Ian, we're looking at a downressed jpg file. This was never meant to be viewed as a still frame. In motion this might not even be noticeable.

Is this useful? It's more useful to me to see the original file along with posted settings to make any type of judgment.

[Daniel L.]

commanderspike,

If you need web space PM me and I will set you up with FTP.

[John Caballero]

commanderspike, thanks for posting. May 320 be the treshold? 1/50 is the closest to 1/48. It would be good to test panning there and see what happens. If it works better there we might have an answer. Thanks for the testing again.

[Boz]

Hmm... a very interesting test. It sounds like a an ISO threshold test is in order: Do the same pan with the ISO incremented by 100 each time (use same shutter speed for consistent motion blur). This way we could see the potential 'sweet spot' for ISO vs codec mud. I'd love to see a test like that. Nice work!

[commanderspike]

I will test again, especially the issue with ISO 320 being so faultless... interesting.

But it will have to wait until at least Sunday, as away on a trip tomorrow. I do have the GH1 with me though, so will be shooting footage.

If any other lucky GH1 owner would like to step in and do a similar test, be my guest! I reckon we can crack this... or at least confirm 100% to Pana that their camera definitely has this problem.

And yes - the purpose of this test is to try and make the problem occur. The day it doesn't happen is the day we find out why it happens in the first place.

Gladly, the decent footage I meant to look beautiful does look great with the GH1. It remains a fantastically promising video camera.

[Isaac_Brody]

Someone with a camera needs to another test. Besides the break the codec test we have not yet seen a work within the limitations and light a scene test. How good can this camera look when shooting with some care and attention involved? Anyone want to lend me one for a weekend? I'll light a scene and shoot it and see just how good it can look. :)

[Nighthawk]

Someone with a camera needs to another test. Besides the break the codec test we have not yet seen a work within the limitations and light a scene test. How good can this camera look when shooting with some care and attention involved? Anyone want to lend me one for a weekend? I'll light a scene and shoot it and see just how good it can look. :)

I was very impressed with Kholi's Heineken imagery but sadly it had to be taken off. With odd lighting and fog I felt it showed it's capabilities quite well in professional hands where care and attention is paramount. Granted there was no chance at frame by frame analysis which I'm sure is what you're after.

[Isaac_Brody]

Nah, I'm not interested in frame by frame. Breaking the codec is easy enough to do, but I want to see what's possible when a little lighting and narrative control is implemented.

[Nighthawk]

Nah, I'm not interested in frame by frame. Breaking the codec is easy enough to do, but I want to see what's possible when a little lighting and narrative control is implemented.

I'm with you on that. That's 'be all end all' for me as well.

[TrueIndigo]

Yeh, as well as making it look deliberately bad for tests, it would be good for morale and inspiring to see more deliberately good stuff too! Maybe Kholi's prepared piece might be out soon?

I was wondering about the nature of the codec's VBR. Is there some way to trick the camera into putting maximum datarate into a shot. I thought: if there's a static tripod shot, the camera may provide just enough to cover the lack of image changes within the GOP. If the same largely static shot were filmed with the camera on a shoulder mount, I imagine the camera would be forced to provide a higher datarate? Even when you try to hold the camera still the inevitable slight movement means the picture will be changed enough to invoke a greater datarate to accomodate it. Obviously, extra datarate is needed compared to the tripod equivalent (because the image really is changing more), but my question is, would more than enough be forced as a result, providing a possible net gain, keeping the footage closer to the maximum?

[John Caballero]

We know about the bad lets see now how good.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Someone with a camera needs to another test. Besides the break the codec test we have not yet seen a work within the limitations and light a scene test. How good can this camera look when shooting with some care and attention involved? Anyone want to lend me one for a weekend? I'll light a scene and shoot it and see just how good it can look. :)


Nah, I'm not interested in frame by frame. Breaking the codec is easy enough to do, but I want to see what's possible when a little lighting and narrative control is implemented.


We know about the bad lets see now how good.


.... It's not perfect, there are issues, but there's nothing else within a hundred miles of it, so -- how can we make it work? That's the quest. And I think it's likely perfectly workable. Likely enough that I think we're gonna try soon.


:lipsrseal

...

:)


_

[PappasArts]

An interesting result here.




1/125 F4 ISO 800:
But if it's higher ISO which solves the problem, this tells me otherwise...
http://www.brawnf1blog.com/GH1/iso800fast.jpg

.

Reminds me of a Van Gough painting!


We could see Dreams II made with the GH1...... The original film by the extraordinaire, Akira Kurosawa. Martin Scorsese could reprise his role as Vincent Van Gogh.......

:-)




.
Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms


Anamorphic DSLR Lens Test Images... links:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1638289&postcount=97
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1637705&postcount=84

Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-Pappas/573417404
Myspace:
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts

Arrfilms@hotmail.com
http://www.PappasArts.com
CONTACT VIA AOL INSTANT MESSENGER
AT { PAPPASARTS2 }

.

[Kholi]

More ISO tests, but that's exactly what I suggested someone do. Commander, if you've yet to activate the 1/3 incremental ISO, try that then start at the bottom.

Try 160, 320, 640, 1250

If these are the native ISO's and the rest are software driven we might have solved the issue.

Most of my stuff has been at 320 ISO, because I'm using faster glass and ND's as well. Try not to go over 320 in general.

and I know for a fact everything on the Heineken job was 320 ISO.

[Kholi]

An interesting result here.

1/30 F4 ISO 100:
Pretty bad...


1/30 F4 ISO 320:
This seemed better...


1/30 F4 ISO 800:
Oh dear, then the theory falls down...


1/125 F4 ISO 320:
Underexposed but fine once again at ISO 320...


1/125 F4 ISO 800:
But if it's higher ISO which solves the problem, this tells me otherwise...


What's interesting here is why the dark one on the fast shutter is so much better than the lighter one shot at ISO 800.

It seems the underexposure has cured the problem. Another test which adds weight to the 'detail' theory.

The more detail in the shot, the more corruption when panning...

Nah nah nah. Not High ISO. But Software driven ISOs. Which ones are the native ISOs is what we have to find out. I'm damned sure 320 is, was sure of that when I started shooting with the camera and I think all multiples of 320 are going to be the right ones.

Thanks for testing this, though! GAHD I wish I hadn't sold my .JP camera. Not having the GH-1 in my hands is KILLING me. The MKii is just sitting in the camera bag right now.

UGGGGHHHHH.

To activate the incremental ISOs, change it to any of the other camera shooting modes, go intot he menu and find the ISO 1/2. Switch it to 1/3.

Then try.

[admactanium]

I shot some stuff at 130. What's the best way for me to encode it for this test? I have iMovie and FCS at my disposal.

[Kholi]

I shot some stuff at 130. What's the best way for me to encode it for this test? I have iMovie and FCS at my disposal.


There's a 130 ISO on your model? O_o; What kinda crazyness is that? I thought it went-- 100, 160, 200, 250, 320, 400, 500, 640, 800, 1250, 1600, 3200

Anyway, don't worry about encoding. Just upload the raw MTS file somewhere for downloads.

Make sure to include shutter, f-stop, iso info etc.

[admactanium]

It's still there are ISO 125 for sure. Less so at 320.

125:

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b19/jeffnee/ISO130.jpg

320:

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b19/jeffnee/ISO320.jpg

Granted, these are simply screen grabs from iMovie's import. But it does look the same as the previous "mud" examples.

[admactanium]

There's a 130 ISO on your model? O_o; What kinda crazyness is that? I thought it went-- 100, 160, 200, 250, 320, 400, 500, 640, 800, 1250, 1600, 3200

Anyway, don't worry about encoding. Just upload the raw MTS file somewhere for downloads.

Make sure to include shutter, f-stop, iso info etc.

Sorry. 125. I think i jut picked the next one up from 100. I have 100, 125, 160, 200, 250, 320, 400, 500, 640, 800, 1000, 1250, 1600 and 2000, 2500 and 3200 grayed out.

[admactanium]

There's a 130 ISO on your model? O_o; What kinda crazyness is that? I thought it went-- 100, 160, 200, 250, 320, 400, 500, 640, 800, 1250, 1600, 3200

Anyway, don't worry about encoding. Just upload the raw MTS file somewhere for downloads.

Make sure to include shutter, f-stop, iso info etc.

MTS file for 125:

http://files.me.com/jeffnee/h42k20

MTS file for 320:

http://files.me.com/jeffnee/83cdkf

[admactanium]

MJPEG is as clean as can be. ISO 100 1/30 shutter speed.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b19/jeffnee/ISO100MJPEG.jpg

[squig]

Thanks for testing this, though! GAHD I wish I hadn't sold my .JP camera. Not having the GH-1 in my hands is KILLING me. The MKii is just sitting in the camera bag right now.
UGGGGHHHHH.


hahaha hey at least you have A camera!

[admactanium]

ISO 160:

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b19/jeffnee/ISO160.jpg

[PappasArts]

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d94/PappasArts/flatline2WEB.jpg

Gentleman, we tried our best.

I'll call it. 14:53.03.sec time of death.

I will speak with the family.....



Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms


Anamorphic DSLR Lens Test Images... links:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1638289&postcount=97
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1637705&postcount=84

Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-Pappas/573417404
Myspace:
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts

Arrfilms@hotmail.com
http://www.PappasArts.com
CONTACT VIA AOL INSTANT MESSENGER
AT { PAPPASARTS2 }

[Kholi]

Gentleman, we tried our best.

I'll call it. 14:53.03.sec time of death.

I will speak with the family.....





Which is the clear choice in VDSLRs right now would you say, Pappas?

[John Caballero]

News of the death of the GH1 are greatly exagerated.

What we learned once again: don't do any whip panning. Now, we want to see some "normal" panning if you will. Thanks for the footage.

Again: We know whats bad now we need to see how good.

[admactanium]

I'm still ecstatic with my choice but I'm just shooting for personal use and perhaps some spec stuff for my Ad Art Director's reel. But I can see how this would be disappointing to some folks. I'm not a big swish pan kind of guy myself so I rarely see this being an issue for me. This cam will mostly be my baby movie camera.

[andrzejkra]

MJPEG is as clean as can be. ISO 100 1/30 shutter speed.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b19/jeffnee/ISO100MJPEG.jpg

That really does look remarkably better. The blur streaks are much longer in this one, though. Did you pan faster or use a different shutter?

[admactanium]

They should have all been at 1/30 shutter. It might have been a bit faster but you can only control the speed so much when it's handheld. It felt about as fast as the AVCHD pans I did.

[Kholi]

That really does look remarkably better. The blur streaks are much longer in this one, though. Did you pan faster or use a different shutter?

Yeah looks incredibly smooth. I'm surprised at myself, actually, that I didn't do more 720/30P stuff. It looks really good.

1080/24 MJPEG ...mmmm

[PappasArts]

Which is the clear choice in VDSLRs right now would you say, Pappas?


All I can really think say is what I said on my web site.


""Panasonic has confused me before; however this time it's to bizarre.
Unlike the HVX200 that was an under powered Honda civic trying to be a
Mercedes-Benz SLR. The GH1 was a product with all the right parts to only
be crippled by a horrible implementation of the main codec system.

Good work Panasonic; you sure know how to flat line a new born....... ""


Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms


Anamorphic DSLR Lens Test Images... links:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1638289&postcount=97
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1637705&postcount=84

Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-Pappas/573417404
Myspace:
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts

Arrfilms@hotmail.com
http://www.PappasArts.com
CONTACT VIA AOL INSTANT MESSENGER
AT { PAPPASARTS2 }

[andrzejkra]

Have you tried the 720 60p to compare it to the 720 mjpeg?

It looks like this camera would work best, as Kohil suggested, if you used the 1080 as much as you can get away with, and then upresed 720 footage for situations where you can't avoid the codec breaking. I never tried mixing footage of different resolutions without downresing to the lowest common denominator. Can you stick some 720 footage in an 1080 video without it being obvious to the average viewer?

[androoow]

admactanium , those uploaded pics.. unadjusted enlarged and framed would do just fine in our Tate Modern here in the UK :D

[admactanium]

Let me try 720 AVCHD. I haven't tried that. I just did a bunch of different quick tests with it and it does change dependent upon the ISO but that effect is present in nearly all the AVCHD stuff. The MJPEG stuff is universally smooth as well. BRB.

[andrzejkra]

All I can really think say is what I said on my web site.


""Panasonic has confused me before; however this time it's to bizarre.
Unlike the HVX200 that was an under powered Honda civic trying to be a
Mercedes-Benz SLR. The GH1 was a product with all the right parts to only
be crippled by a horrible implementation of the main codec system.

Good work Panasonic; you sure know how to flat line a new born....... ""


Michael Pappas
...


Michael Pappas: 1 - Panasonic GH1: 0

[Kholi]

All I can really think say is what I said on my web site.


""Panasonic has confused me before; however this time it's to bizarre.
Unlike the HVX200 that was an under powered Honda civic trying to be a
Mercedes-Benz SLR. The GH1 was a product with all the right parts to only
be crippled by a horrible implementation of the main codec system.

Good work Panasonic; you sure know how to flat line a new born....... ""


While fair in ways, I have to say that it's hard to follow this line of thinking from someone who is claiming another camera to be the holy grail, pitching it to others to purchase but hasn't purchased one themselves, especially since the camera is almost a year old, right?

If the GH-1 is SO dead, the decision SO clear then why don't you have an MKii???

I know you said you ordered one the day that I did... I got my unit pretty swiftly, just like I said I would... so I'm just wondering why all of these people pitching the MKii and telling others that it's the best, declaring the GH-1 dead or Inadequate or that the GH-1 can't come close...

Why don't you own an MKii? Or is the decision not as easy as it's made out to be due to the MKii's limitations as well? Is it really NOT all about the image in the end afterall?

Someone please enlighten me. I mean, I already KNOW it's not a clear cut decision and it's one that might only be made by using both yourself.

Just let me know where the hesitation lies if it's just the best and the others are dead?

[Isaac_Brody]

Pappas, it's easy to sit on the fence and make big judgments. It doesn't fit your style, fine, pickup a 5D and enjoy a nice side of jello. :)

Fence sitters often make the loudest noise without using or owning technology for work.

[admactanium]

720 AVCHD is cleaner then 1080 for sure. It's not as clean as MJPEG though.

AVCHD:

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b19/jeffnee/720AVCHD.jpg

MJPEG:

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b19/jeffnee/720MJPEG.jpg

[Isaac_Brody]

I've gotta say, in motion the mud is not that noticeable in 1080 even when panning like a madman.

[Kholi]

Agree with Isaac. Know what else is not noticable? The Jello. I just realized you were panning like crazy with a CMOS sensor. LoL

[andrzejkra]

Fantastic work!

Lets all not forget how easy we can smooth out any bad looking blur with... more blur. I'm sure some motion blur added in post can smooth out any rough edges.

[admactanium]

Personally, from a non-filmmaker's perspective it's very easy to work around. In fact, I was predisposed to purchase the 5d Mk II since I already have two Canon L lenses (only one which would work on full frame though) and 3 other lenses for that format. However, the GH1 has everything that I need in a camera with a small sacrifice in image quality. At some point for someone like me you have to realize that having a 5d II is overkill for my needs. I'm not selling my photographs and while I enjoy it as a hobby and I think I have some very nice images, spending $5k on a whole system was too much. Similarly, spending the same amount as the GH1 on a HF-S 10 wouldn't have gained me a more convenient stills camera to go with my video camera.

I know it's not really relevant to what you guys are dealing with, but the truth it, this camera is probably aimed directly at guys like me. People who are willing to pay more for more quality but who don't want to have a dedicated video and stills camera. The GH1 is the perfect compromise camera for me. I think there are a lot of folks like me also reading this forum since it's the most active topic on the GH1 I've found, even compared to photography websites.

[Kholi]

Personally, from a non-filmmaker's perspective it's very easy to work around. In fact, I was predisposed to purchase the 5d Mk II since I already have two Canon L lenses (only one which would work on full frame though) and 3 other lenses for that format. However, the GH1 has everything that I need in a camera with a small sacrifice in image quality. At some point for someone like me you have to realize that having a 5d II is overkill for my needs. I'm not selling my photographs and while I enjoy it as a hobby and I think I have some very nice images, spending $5k on a whole system was too much. Similarly, spending the same amount as the GH1 on a HF-S 10 wouldn't have gained me a more convenient stills camera to go with my video camera.

I know it's not really relevant to what you guys are dealing with, but the truth it, this camera is probably aimed directly at guys like me. People who are willing to pay more for more quality but who don't want to have a dedicated video and stills camera. The GH1 is the perfect compromise camera for me. I think there are a lot of folks like me also reading this forum since it's the most active topic on the GH1 I've found, even compared to photography websites.

Absolutely, Ad.

Have you tried watching any back on a television yet? Gets even better. =D

[admactanium]

I've gotta say, in motion the mud is not that noticeable in 1080 even when panning like a madman.

No, it's really not that noticeable at speed. I agree that there's no excuse for the breakdown but when in motion it's not too bad. Even as someone who has a trained eye (as an Ad Art Director who has overseen the production and post of over 100 commercials) it's nothing too awful to witness. I'll never whip the camera around at that speed for my own uses and if I did, it wouldn't be in the final product of anything I wanted to keep. But it's educational to see which mode I should be using for my personal use.

[admactanium]

Absolutely, Ad.

Have you tried watching any back on a television yet? Gets even better. =D

I haven't. I should since I have a Viera TV. Haha.

[squig]

hey pappas it's not nice to pick on a cripple

[PappasArts]

While fair in ways, I have to say that it's hard to follow this line of thinking from someone who is claiming another camera to be the holy grail, pitching it to others to purchase but hasn't purchased one themselves, especially since the camera is almost a year old, right?

If the GH-1 is SO dead, the decision SO clear then why don't you have an MKii???

I know you said you ordered one the day that I did... I got my unit pretty swiftly, just like I said I would... so I'm just wondering why all of these people pitching the MKii and telling others that it's the best, declaring the GH-1 dead or Inadequate or that the GH-1 can't come close...

Why don't you own an MKii? Or is the decision not as easy as it's made out to be due to the MKii's limitations as well? Is it really NOT all about the image in the end afterall?

Someone please enlighten me. I mean, I already KNOW it's not a clear cut decision and it's one that might only be made by using both yourself.

Just let me know where the hesitation lies if it's just the best and the others are dead?


You make me chuckle. Gotta love your fight.

I will call you: Kholi "The Mother Who Wouldn't Give Up" Hicks.......


Seriously though, the 5D is good, however the GH1 has the better features.

That's said! In a visual medium, like this; image is paramount no matter if you diffuse it, or keep it clean. IMO

Now, since the economy is in the trash everywhere, nobody should be throwing 2K or 3K around like its change lying around for a Big-Mac.

Unlike you I believe in rental for sizable productions; unless it's just your personal hobby cam, or your personal company that does daily work. Even that, people should be fiscal smart.

Get the best bang for the dollar that makes your company have a stellar top dollar looking image. That's what a future client will remember when they think back after seeing your work. The 5D can do that almost every time if use it right!

I think the 5D is almost good enough. However it's almost a year old too. Why jump when the next few months we'll see a V.2. That possibly, for sure will cross the line for many more.

Oh, as to telling others to buy; only those that proclaim they gotta make their movie now, or soon, or shoot whatever for film school. That was a response to the "" immediate "" souls on this board who gotta have now.

So if you come to me and ask what I recommend to shoot for your film or whatever, now. I suggest the 5D.

If the GH1 had a good Mjpeg or codec in its 1080/24. I would say the GH1.

However if all the GH1 is going to be is a "" alright "" 720P 30; why not get a 5D that can also be an amazing 720P 30 that will be better than the 720P first round out the GH1...

It isn't much more money for what you get for professional studio work... If you choose to down convert the 5D 1080P original, you always have a 1080P master stored away......


Make sense for you now Kholi.....?




Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms


Anamorphic DSLR Lens Test Images... links:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1638289&postcount=97
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1637705&postcount=84

Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-Pappas/573417404
Myspace:
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts

Arrfilms@hotmail.com
http://www.PappasArts.com
CONTACT VIA AOL INSTANT MESSENGER
AT { PAPPASARTS2 }


.

[Kholi]

No, not one bit. It just sounds like to me that you're pitching a purchase that you wouldn't make yourself.

Kinda makes your advice a little difficult to take.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1647187&postcount=28

What happened??? I kept to my word and I didn't even like the MKii. You have terrabytes of footage and praise it to death, said you were putting in an order... but didn't.

[Isaac_Brody]

However if all the GH1 is going to be is a "" alright "" 720P 30; why not get a 5D that can also be an amazing 720P 30 that will be better than the 720P first round out the GH1...

It isn't much more money for what you get for professional studio work... If you choose to down convert the 5D 1080P original, you always have a 1080P master stored away......

But it's not a blow your socks off 30P, it's one which has a lot of jello that inhibits you whip panning since that seems to be the most important feature being touted in this thread. Why spend $2600 on a camera without a lens that shoots 30P when you can get one for a thousand dollars less that shoots 30P with much less jello and 60P slomo and 1080 24P that's perfectly adequate for locked down shots and controlled handheld plus it comes with a fantastic LCD screen to help with focusing.

Can someone with a 5D upload a whip pan video just to bring some perspective to the parallel being made? :)

I'll say this again, it's easy to give advice when sitting on the fence waiting for the next best thing to come out.

[PappasArts]

No, not one bit. It just sounds like to me that you're pitching a purchase that you wouldn't make yourself.

Kinda makes your advice a little difficult to take.

Not at all sir. Not one "bit"

Burn this in your minds eye...... If I needed to make a film tomorrow or next week, I would buy the 5D without hassle......



.

[Kholi]

Not at all sir. Not one "bit"

Burn this in your minds eye...... If I needed to make a film tomorrow or next week, I would buy the 5D without hassle......



.


http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1647187&postcount=28

Just sayin', man. It obviously isn't that clear of a choice, huh?

Anyway, now that there's an understanding here it'll be up to the individual to decide if conjecture less-action from the stands is what to trust or hands-on experience and walk, less-talk.

[squig]

It's a good thing John is a panny fanboy

[Martti Ekstrand]

I think we should admit that Canon nowadays go for honesty in advertizing, this is from the clip on the page presenting the new manual control firmware - they don't exactly hide the rolling shutter effect, the slower speeds are just as warped but with motion blur

http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?act=GetArticleAct&articleID=2951&productID=249&articleTypeID=5

[squig]

I have to say it's a tough choice between the 2. lost a lot of sleep over it

[dcloud]

ive already decided since sept 2008 to buy the gh1 and i will when i get my money :) not even the mud effect will change my mind. maybe something will but for now im still planning for a gh1

[squig]

hey d how did you deal with D90 jello on the feature?

[admactanium]

I think we should admit that Canon nowadays go for honesty in advertizing, this is from the clip on the page presenting the new manual control firmware - they don't exactly hide the rolling shutter effect, the slower speeds are just as warped but with motion blur

http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?act=GetArticleAct&articleID=2951&productID=249&articleTypeID=5
Haha. So it's a feature and not a limitation? Just kidding, I have very little ill will towards Canon.

Although part of my choice to buy the GH1 is the fact that Canon is obviously crippling their DSLRs' video capabilities to protect their video division. Even beyond the video features, Canon is well-known for trickling out incremental upgrades to maximize profit. Now, if I were a Canon stockholder I'd be all for that, but even since I bought my 30D I haven't really felt like Canon has released a camera that fits my specific needs. Once video started to enter into the equation it became increasingly clear that Canon will only do what they are forced to do when other manufacturers force their hand. The video limitations on the T1i are just plainly ridiculous.

Panasonic is more in-line with my own personal philosophy of making nearly the best device that they can within the constrains of affordability. Of course, they have a lot more to gain and a lot less to lose than Canon, but I really couldn't see myself supporting Canon anymore. The fact that the 50D doesn't have video at all and IQ-wise it's only marginally and even debatably better than my 3-year-old 30D really chaps my hide. The 5D II was too expensive and still limited in video (at the time), the T1i is an insult to my intelligence and the 50D didn't have what I needed. Will the 60D? It'll probably have video but how much better with the stills quality be? I guess I just can't stand feeling like I'm being manipulated by a manufacturer like that. I'm going to take a loss on my L lenses but I think the trade-off is worth it for me personally.

[PappasArts]

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1647187&postcount=28

Just sayin', man. It obviously isn't that clear of a choice, huh?

Anyway, now that there's an understanding here it'll be up to the individual to decide if conjecture less-action from the stands is what to trust or hands-on experience and walk, less-talk.

I was advised against it by someone who has; let's say more "" Know How "" then I......


However you of all people should be careful about looking up past threads. I personally, as well others have held back in the past from; as funny as it sound " hanging you with your own threads "


Your not thought of as the ADD sugared up kid in the back of the classroom for nothing.....

That said!

You got spunk kid, I like it.


;-)

[Kholi]

I was advised against it by someone who has; let's say more "" Know How "" then I......


However you of all people should be careful about looking up past threads. I personally, as well others have held back in the past from; as funny as it sound " hanging you with your own threads "


Your not thought of as the ADD sugared up kid in the back of the classroom for nothing.....

That said!

You got spunk kid, I like it.


;-)

Yet you're advising other people to buy it... I think I get how that makes sense.

I'm okay with someone doing the same thing. afterall, don't do unless you expect to have done.

Haven't changed a single thought since I got the GH-1. I specifically said the 1080/24 is not the Pixel Peepers image. For everyone else, it's plenty.

Said I'd buy an MKii when it got Manual Controls SEVERAL times. I have mines with me right now.

Say what you will about ADD, it's not my fault people like to read into things more than what I've posted. The bottom line is that I put my money where my mouth is, doesn't seem like others do.

Again, you're invited to find past threads and challenge my stand. Hasn't changed.

A+

[squig]

yeah kholi get a life :Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)

[squig]

If I was gonna start shooting tomorrow I'd want both cams to be sure I could get every shot I wanted. Hopefully in 6 months 1 cam will have all the best the GH1 and MKII have to offer and no retardation.

[Martti Ekstrand]

oh squid, get a flip flop mino :Drogar-Happy(DBG):

[John Caballero]

It's a good thing John is a panny fanboy

For video yes indeed! For stills Nikon. But maybe that will change too with the GH1.

I am going to say it one more time: who the heck cares what everybody buys. I tried to tell people about that horribly crippled other camera and nobody listened. So who cares what anybody else wants to buy. You want Canon, then buy Canon. You want Panasonic, buy Panasonic. You want Pentax, well, you get the drill. At the end of the day it is what works for you and makes you feel fulfilled. Thanks to the work done so far by the ones who have the camera I have learned one sad truth: that I won't be able to make all those crazy and fun whip pans we all do and have come to love. Pappas, squig and others I feel sad that you won't be able to do those, but there is always hope for the next generation. Panasonic, how dare you killed the dreams of all of us Whip Pans Fan Boys!

[squig]

you have a 3ccd cam john, you can whip pan till your arm drops off.

I can't think of any shots in the film where I need to do a whip pan but there's gonna be some skateboard stabilized action stuff that could be a bit dicey with the MKII or the GH1 so I might have a HVX on hand for those scenes if whatever DSLR I'm using isn't up to the task.

[PappasArts]

The bottom line is that I put my money where my mouth is, doesn't seem like others do.

A+


I have bought plenty of systems to just test with my own money.
In just recent years the HVX200 - H1 - HD100 & A1, not including all the SD ones. I uploaded a F-ing sh1t load of footage from all those cameras for the grateful and the bottom feeders to siphoned from, at my own expense. ( unlike you, it's like pulling teeth to get full res clips or files to share ) So you need not tread on that water with me.... That's not counting the 80's and 90's. I have put in 30's years more money in those lined bloated slacks of corporate America and Japan industry long enough to give them sh!t when I want too. As for consulting, I have been around many many corners to know how to do it, and do it well..





.

Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms


Anamorphic DSLR Lens Test Images... links:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1638289&postcount=97
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1637705&postcount=84

Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-Pappas/573417404
Myspace:
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts

Arrfilms@hotmail.com
http://www.PappasArts.com
CONTACT VIA AOL INSTANT MESSENGER
AT { PAPPASARTS2 }

[squig]

give it a rest you 2

[Kholi]

I have bought plenty of systems to just test with my own money.
In just recent years the HVX200 - H1 - HD100 & A1, not including all the SD ones. I uploaded a F-ing sh1t load of footage from all those cameras for the grateful and the bottom feeders to siphoned from, at my own expense. ( unlike you, it's like pulling teeth to get full res clips or files to share ) So your need not tread on that water with me.... That's not counting the 80's and 90's. I have put in 30's years more money in those lined bloated slacks of corporate America and Japan industry long enough to give them sh!t when I want too. As for consulting, I have been around many many corners to know how to do it, and do it well..



:beer:

[tackleqb]

OKAY! on a lighter note, I can't wait to get my 2 GH-1's! (for the same price as I would have bought an MKii body with lens)! Thats some bang for your buck! Now I got a cam-A for extra wide/wide shots and cam-B for medium/close ups ;)

[John Caballero]

If the HVX only had shallow DOF.

[NevilleBartos]

Just seen the 'mud' video's and cancelled my order

Pretty shocking breakup...you can shoot video but have to hold the camera like a still camera?

I will feel like a mug if Panasonic fix it quickly and then its sold out everywhere...

[tackleqb]

Just seen the 'mud' video's and cancelled my order

Pretty shocking breakup...you can shoot video but have to hold the camera like a still camera?

I will feel like a mug if Panasonic fix it quickly and then its sold out everywhere...

why would you cancel your order before at-least trying it out? You know you can return it and get your money back?

[admactanium]

Just seen the 'mud' video's and cancelled my order

Pretty shocking breakup...you can shoot video but have to hold the camera like a still camera?

I will feel like a mug if Panasonic fix it quickly and then its sold out everywhere...

Obviously it's your money and your needs are likely quite different than mine. But in reading a thread like this it's much easier to blow an issue like this out of proportion. Again, I won't excuse the codec breaking under "normal" usage but the reality is that 1) unless you're going to be doing a lot of whip pans, it's not really an issue and 2) even if it does occur, it's not nearly as catastrophic in motion as it is looking at screen caps. I agree that the captures look awful, but in full motion it's just a minor glitch. I'll probably shoot in MJPEG mode anyway since I value the convenience of editability more than I value the saves space. I offload my images/video very often, so I'm not worried about the space that MJPEG takes up over AVCHD.

[Barry_Green]

I've gotta say, in motion the mud is not that noticeable in 1080 even when panning like a madman.
That is correct. Viewed on a 67" TV, it looked fine and people who didn't know exactly what to look for said "why, what's supposed to be wrong with it?"

[Nighthawk]

Just seen the 'mud' video's and cancelled my order

Pretty shocking breakup...you can shoot video but have to hold the camera like a still camera?

I will feel like a mug if Panasonic fix it quickly and then its sold out everywhere...

You gotta do what you gotta do but the fix for now isn't from Panasonic but from your shot list. A fix would be great, I'll take it, but you have to weigh investment to potential and this cam at it's price point can be the bomb if you take it's, and your, limitations into account.

[admactanium]

Interesting post on 4/3rumors.com


I received an email from Alex which I found very interesting:
“I’ve seen on forum that the limitation to 17Mb/s compress schema is a choice from Panasonic. If you check Wikipedia, you can read that AVCHD has 2 bitstream rate 17Mb/s and 24Mb/s. The choice for the 17Mb/s rather 24Mb/s come from that the 24Mb/s has some compatibility problem with some hardware. The good news, it seem that Panasonic could update his firmware for to support the 24Mb/s, some forum related that some people from Panasonic confirm that a future firmware could be support this feature in the GH1.

Panasonic has selected AVCHD because this is a consummer format and for the compatibility you take 17Mb/s.

The problem is for the future with this codec you have a limitation to 24Mb/s and we can’t expected to see better video in GH-2 if AVCHD is the only video codec.”

I hope it is true, 17Mb/s is subject to artifacts when the image is full of detail.

Thanks Alex for sharing the news!

http://43rumors.com/panasonic-gh1-firmware-will-upgrade-the-datarate-from-17mbs-to-24mbs/

[AdrianF]

I'll probably shoot in MJPEG mode anyway since I value the convenience of editability more than I value the saves space. I offload my images/video very often, so I'm not worried about the space that MJPEG takes up over AVCHD.
So looking back through this thread and a few others, the mjpeg or even better photo jpeg does look reasonably good. Maybe that is what we should be requesting more than anything, 24/25p in p-jpeg plus 1080 if it is doable.
But if not, it seems to me I could live with the current issues, just by being careful about set up and controling light using NDs. Just gotta get my camera and stop theorising.

[NevilleBartos]

My sensibilities are more Sam Raimi/Peter Jackson than Clint Eastwood so with this camera I would always be worried about breakup when moving the camera at speed.

Hopefully they will fix it because otherwise it's perfect...

[Jean Dantes]

Neville 'f&%kig' Bartos!......sorry, it had to be said! :P "Chopper" is a masterpiece!

[raymondluo]

Based on the rumour, I don't think it's farfetched to think that maybe (just maybe) the internal settings in the GH1 already have the option to switch between 17 and 24.

Most electronic's have a backdoor to their factory settings, my sony mp3 player has a 'up down left right directional sequence' code that would allow me to access a menu not meant for consumers, but allows me to play around even further with the sound.

Maybe something like this is just waiting for us?
//enable 24M/bits AVCHD...... Yes/No?

[TrueIndigo]

With regard to finding the best settings for the best image, I'm a bit confused about shooting video in Manual or in Creative motion picture mode? Is it best to shoot video in Manual (or Custom) mode, to have more of the still camera controls available for recording video? Or is it best to keep within the available options of Creative motion picture mode which is designed for video? I've read through the PDF user manual but I don't understand what's best practice with this camera.

Anything new on the ideal ISO speed yet?

[andrzejkra]

Interesting post on 4/3rumors.com



http://43rumors.com/panasonic-gh1-firmware-will-upgrade-the-datarate-from-17mbs-to-24mbs/


50 bucks says that this rumor got started when someone misunderstood a post on this message board.

[Isaac_Brody]

So looking back through this thread and a few others, the mjpeg or even better photo jpeg does look reasonably good. Maybe that is what we should be requesting more than anything, 24/25p in p-jpeg plus 1080 if it is doable.


Exactly. Intraframe compression at a decent bitrate looks fantastic. I'm pushing for that in the petition. It would totally bypass any breakage issues from AVCHD.

[Nitsuj]

This thread is still going? I see there are still some non-believers posting in here. Well in the voice of the Emperor of the Galactic Empire I say "Good, good. Now is the time to strike. Now is the time for our final operation."

[squig]

the empire gets defeated because they are overconfident

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

AVCHD 108024p = MAX RESOLUTION: Mild jello, really bad break up in motion with AVCHD in 1080-24p.
AVCHD 72060p= ZERO (or virtually no) JELLO, decent motion at right ISO
MJPEG 72030p= GOOD MOTION, least blocking effect in motion.

Pick your mode. Shoot what you need. Confrom to 24p when necessary. Throw it all on a 1080 or 720 timeline.

Establishing shots, talking heads, anytime you want that wow it's so sharp look = 1080.
Concerned with jello or mud? = 720 60p at right ISO
REALLY concerned with mud = 720 30p Jpeg.

Don't see how you can't shoot what you want with this interchangeable lens, $1500 camera, with auto focus and face recognition in video mode, and get amazing results.

Don't see how the drama or long life of this thread is warranted. Maybe a firmware upgrade down the line will give you all of the above in 108024p, but remember the price, remember the low light capabilities compared to your HVX with a coffee can stuck on the front. Remember that motion jpeg didn't look bad even freeze framed ...

Remembe that no film festival, executive, distributor, or audience member is going to grab their remote, pause your captivating, well directed, well executed, well acted, well written, well shot scene and roll their chair up inches away from their plasma and look for mud. No one will do that except for geeks like us and we won't care if it's not noticeable when played in regular motion and if you have great content.

$1500.
Acceptible shooting mode for wow resolution.
Acceptible mode(s) for motion.
Beats the pants off any HD cam plus adapter for low light.
Small form factor.
Interchangable lenses.
A shooting mode to compensate for every weakness.
Manual control.
Auto focus in video mode.

[squig]

Gonna shoot a film with it Jack?

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

I realize that my post might seem like sermonizing, and I am on some level, but I really am asking ... I don't get the kerfuffle - I mean, haven't we addressed mud issues in mjpeg 72030p and even gotten acceptable results in 72060p?



Gonna shoot a film with it Jack?

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1656730&postcount=558

Mine should be here Tuesday.

[squig]

Reminds me of the D90 debates. some bitch about the image quality others make films.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

And as some have expressed - one man's jello is another man's mud.
I literally picked up a D90 and instantly put it down. Just not being able to follow someone around a room or being able to cover basic blocking - at the focal length of my choice - was an immediate deal breaker.

but again here, what I don't get is, that with this full manual, jello-less, under $1500 baby is that we (or others really) have shown shooting modes where the mud is not an issue, there's still a dicsussion instead of "Oh. Cool. I can just shoot mjpeg if I'm doing some crazy panning".

And unlike having to be at certain focal lengths to control jello, dropping top 720 for motion sequences is not that big of a hindrance. I already had to drop to 720 for slo-mo with the HVX, etc. and no one has EVER said - "wow you really took a resolution drop there huh?"

[squig]

1080 is overrated anyway. 720 is fine for film transfer and I've heard people comment that 1080 is too sharp "too video". We don't even have 1080 here, 720 is HD for broadcast. Only reason I can see an advantage to 1080 is if I want to figure out my framing in post and crop to 720. One of the reasons I haven't decided on the MKII is because it's full frame and 1080.

The mjpeg is a bit lo-fi but dropping it to 24/25p with a 25% bits per frame increase would be a big improvement. I don't see why they couldn't increase the mjpeg bit-rate to say 50Mbps because it's far less processor intensive to encode than AVCHD.

[John Caballero]

The samples out there with the GH1 don't compare at all with "that other camera". The GH1 looks sharp, nice colors off the camera, no in out of focus crap. No jello. This will be a camera wich you will be able to make real movies with. That mud crap means nothing. How many pans, especially whip pans anybody makes regularly? And if you pan properly nobody out there is gonna be looking for any "mud", they won't even know what "mud" means in this context. 1080 will be totally usable for many many different shots, there is absolutely no doubt about it. And like Jack said mix your shots with different resolutions and you have one heck of a camera for $1500! I am just restless with this waiting for it now.

[commanderspike]

Was shooting this weekend and may have come across a fix for the mud issue, but until I get the footage on the Mac I am keeping my hopes down.

When bad mud occurs it's obvious just from watching the playback mode on camera.

But I found that shooting full HD with +2 sharpness and noise reduction OFF seemed to cure the issue or at least make it much less noticeable.

Also was impressed with 720p's total lack of jello.

Will report back later once I have access to my main computer again...

[John Caballero]

commanderspike we have faith on you. The mission is in your hands.

[Jean Dantes]

If 720P is jello-less, it'd be awesome if they let us shoot 24P/25P in 720P AVCHD as well as the 50P/60P offered at this resolution. Perhaps this will become an option in a future firmware upgrade?

Just wondering, does the PAL GH1 do MJPEG @ 25P?

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

You can conform that 50/60p to 24 in post. Yes it'd be great in camera. But you can get there.

[nathankw]

Just wondering, does the PAL GH1 do MJPEG @ 25P?

No, MJPEG is 30p.
720 AVCHD is 50p so easy to convert to 25p.

[Nitsuj]

Was shooting this weekend and may have come across a fix for the mud issue, but until I get the footage on the Mac I am keeping my hopes down.

When bad mud occurs it's obvious just from watching the playback mode on camera.

But I found that shooting full HD with +2 sharpness and noise reduction OFF seemed to cure the issue or at least make it much less noticeable.

Also was impressed with 720p's total lack of jello.

Will report back later once I have access to my main computer again...


Okay I am convinced I am in a time vortex now. I believe Kholi already pointed out the +2 sharpness and noise reduction off or at least somebody did if it was not him. I also remember 720p being known for jelloless goodness. I think it is great you are finding these work-a-rounds, I'm just confused as to why there is so much circular discussions in this forum? So after long careful thought and some calculations I have discovered I am absolutely caught in a time vortex. With that said I must tell myself yet again what the winning powerball numbers were for 06/06/09 - 10,18,23,30,45,BP2 I'm bound to read this on my trip in time.

[raymondluo]

There isn't a FAQ people can read, and with so many postings- it's hard to keep track. I have trouble myself, and am slowly collecting tips as I explore and re-explore the threads in this section so I don't ask a question that's already answered.

[J.D.]

I agree... has anyone jotted down all the facts? I would like a cliff note summary.......
I think I may order one tomorrow......

[John Caballero]

I guess as soon as a few more people start testing with recommendations as this one and get positive results a list should be compiled in a sticky so everybody can share the info.

[raymondluo]

I have this so far, it's a copy and paste compilation I saved at google docs so I can't credit the poster- You know who you are, thanks for the contribution! :)

Granted, it's not exactly a FAQ but a dvxuser preference of shooting sheet, which is what I find good to know about. I wrote it down here instead of creating a new thread hoping someone would take up the sheet and maintain the thread as I won't be able to update it as frequently. (I'll be serving national service in a few days for the next two years so I'll only really be free during the weekends.)

GH1

Shooting Modes (PAL)

AVCHD 1080p 25 (Best used on low to no motion shots)
AVCHD 720p 50 (Anything under the sun, really.)
AVCHD 720p 30

MJPEG 720p 30

... add details on bit-rate.

Shooting 1080p 25 (PAL)

Recommended to shoot with +2 sharpness and noise reduction OFF. (Reduced Mud effect)


Shooting in 720p 50 (PAL)

Use 1/50 shutter to get down to as filmic a look as possible when converted to 25p. (1/60 for NTSC models)


Lens & Compatibility

Most features are shoot around f4 with 5.6 for wider shoots and 2.8 for close-ups. 2.0 is used mostly when running out of daylight on location or for that super-dramatic close-up.

Recommended Lenses
-Tokina AT-X 116 PRO DX (11-16mm F2.8)
-


Accessories

-KFleung Steadicam
DIY steadicam which would probably work great with GH1's continuous auto-focus
http://www.hv20.com/showthread.php?t=14301&page=3

-Microphones?

-Tripods?

[John Caballero]

Very good. The Mods should create a sticky maybe based on this and start adding as we get new info. Thanks raymondluo. I am sure Kholi will help shape it up lots more.

[Isaac_Brody]

I'll compile a basic faq this week.

[John Caballero]

Excelent Isaac. Thanks.

[commanderspike]

Did some testing with the fabled NR OFF / Sharpness + 2 setting today and this is what I found:

http://www.brawnf1blog.com/GH1/bad2.jpg

Sorry for getting everybody's hopes up.

It doesn't look like there is going to be a work around, so I'll just be using 720p motion JPEG until Panasonic fix it.

Not a happy situation but hey...

Oh and I have high detail slow pans on a tripod that are also affected by this bug. It's not just restricted to shoddy test shots.

Will upload to Vimeo after work.

[AdrianF]

Did some testing with the fabled NR OFF / Sharpness + 2 setting today and this is what I found:
So what were your iso and shutter settings here? You've already shown earlier that by choosing an
ISO around 320 the mud seems reduced, seemingly covered by motion blur. So how come it's back again in this shot? Not knocking what your doing, just trying to understand your methodology.

[plasmasmp]

Thank you commanderspike, that's what i've been waiting to see for a couple weeks now (or however long ago that thread was now), and I'm glad I just went with my hunch and didn't pre-order. Hopefully this will get resolved soon with just a firmware update. IF this does get fixed, it will most certainly be the best VDSLR!

[Drcoffee]

Is that mud from 720p footage? commanderspike (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/member.php?u=47438)

[kainekainekaine]

Hi, just wondering commanderspike, have you noticed this mud when you dont pan and are on a tripod but there is movement in the scene of someone moving across the frame. Are they muddy?

cheers

[commanderspike]

That was shot at 1080 24p, the mud does not occur as often in 720p AVCHD and not at all in MJPEG mode.

The ISO setting was 320. Earlier tests at 320 did now show any mud, but you cannot get consistent results even at ISO 320. Sometimes it shows mud, sometimes not.

Mud occurs on pans only. Doesn't seem to occur on static shots, even ones with a lot of movement in the scene. It's only when the whole camera is moving.

We've gone over this bug to death now, it's time Panasonic acknowledged the problem and fixed it.

A great camera gone begging.

At least 720p MJPEG is pretty spectacular. 1080P is more of an occasionally relevant bonus than a usable feature.

[Drcoffee]

Can anyone comment/compare the frequency of mud in 720p to the codec breakup in HDV, under high detail strain etc..? I just want a gauge of how bad it is.

[commanderspike]

Okay, here is an example of 'mud' affecting some footage I shot at the weekend.

I have just uploaded it to Vimeo here: http://www.vimeo.com/5058633

It occurred in this case when I moved my tripod too fast accidentally, but you sure as hell don't get this kind of break up on any other camera I know of.

This is why I'm annoyed at Panasonic - the camera is so damned good in so many respects, only to be hobbled by a major bug which crops up many many times.

Fast frame rate, full HD, brightly lit detailed scene with a lot of FINE detail - don't even go there.

Use 720p MJPEG for that.

That's the lesson over... rant is sure to continue. :)

[Schmoe]

I'll compile a basic faq this week.
Would be AMAZING to have this available on the site. I wish we could get a FAQ similar to Kholi's amazing D90 FAQ here at DVXUser. It's great to have all the facts, both good and bad, all in one place. It really helps in making a buying decision.

Kholi's original D90 FAQ is what convinced me to pass on the D90 and wait for something better.

[stephenvv]

Okay, here is an example of 'mud' affecting some footage I shot at the weekend.

I have just uploaded it to Vimeo here: http://www.vimeo.com/5058633

It occurred in this case when I moved my tripod too fast accidentally, but you sure as hell don't get this kind of break up on any other camera I know of.



Finally, an actually clip...

And that's what this 659 post thread is all about? First of all, there's no pulldown removal and that's the most obvious thing about the clip. Second, yeah, it's an accident jerk. That's footage that no sane person would ever use.

I've always suspected from the stills and from the footage I've scene that this is much ado about nothing and clearly it is.

I'm not even sure this qualifies as major bug if that's what you are complaining about. Compared to D90 jello, 5D Mkii aliasing, EX 1/3 IR Red filteriing issues, the HD100 Split-frame issue etc., this is pretty minor because I've yet to see it occur and be a visual problem in any footage that would be used.

[Isaac_Brody]

You didn't remove the pulldown on that clip. So the "mud" looks even worse. I can't tell it its mud or just improper pulldown removal on your clip. I mean if I go frame by frame I can see it, but in regular motion with proper pulldown removal I'm not bothered by that.

[John Caballero]

Yep. That doesn't look right. It is too extreme. How is the original file?

[commanderspike]

Finally, an actually clip...

And that's what this 659 post thread is all about? First of all, there's no pulldown removal and that's the most obvious thing about the clip. Second, yeah, it's an accident jerk. That's footage that no sane person would ever use.

I've always suspected from the stills and from the footage I've scene that this is much ado about nothing and clearly it is.

I'm not even sure this qualifies as major bug if that's what you are complaining about. Compared to D90 jello, 5D Mkii aliasing, EX 1/3 IR Red filteriing issues, the HD100 Split-frame issue etc., this is pretty minor because I've yet to see it occur and be a visual problem in any footage that would be used.

It happens on nearly all high detail medium to fast pans.

Can you guarantee your shoots will never have this kind of movement?

In that sense it is a problem.

And yes, bit of a rushed clip I uploaded. Will do a better example later. Give me a chance - trying to juggle lots of testing but putting my main effort into actually using the camera creatively and getting some enjoyment out of it.

I shot some footage of a kite above a large grassy field too, and the grass is more like green mud half the time. It's distracting and unprofessional looking.

Yes the GH1 is great... but this needs sorting.

[John Caballero]

Does it happen in tracking shots also?

[tackleqb]

Okay, here is an example of 'mud' affecting some footage I shot at the weekend.

I have just uploaded it to Vimeo here: http://www.vimeo.com/5058633

It occurred in this case when I moved my tripod too fast accidentally, but you sure as hell don't get this kind of break up on any other camera I know of.

This is why I'm annoyed at Panasonic - the camera is so damned good in so many respects, only to be hobbled by a major bug which crops up many many times.

Fast frame rate, full HD, brightly lit detailed scene with a lot of FINE detail - don't even go there.

Use 720p MJPEG for that.

That's the lesson over... rant is sure to continue. :)

Wow if that is really the kind of mud issue everyone has been talking about then people have definitely blown this out of proportion. Besides there slight little strobe effect you get (might be because of pulldown) the footage looks fine to me. Maybe you could give us a better example of the mud effect because this does not seem bad at all.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

If you're a wedding videopgrapher or want to use the cam for Eng work or to shoot extreme improv in natural light - then working all the time in MJPEG (to be able to fling the camera about impromptu) is a restriction.

If you're a narrative filmmaker working with any kind of blocking or 2nd takes, then switching to MJPEG for a couple of shots isn't really a restriction to me.

[DrBlaz]

you cannot switch to MPJEG if you want 24p, panasonic did a good job crippling the camera, even the PAL GH1 has 30p MJPEG, and 30p cannot be converted to 24p smoothly.

[raymondluo]

I was under the impression that the 'mud' was due to the camera since commanderspike had posted a 'mud issue' picture of the same thing when viewing through the GH1's LCD.

[commanderspike]

I was under the impression that the 'mud' was due to the camera since commanderspike had posted a 'mud issue' picture of the same thing when viewing through the GH1's LCD.

http://www.brawnf1blog.com/GH1/gh1bad.jpg

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

I was under the impression that the 'mud' was due to the camera since commanderspike had posted a 'mud issue' picture of the same thing when viewing through the GH1's LCD.
Yep. No one is disputing that. The codec breaks up in 1080 24p with extreme movement. In the last frame of his vimeo clip thought the people are overlapped / doubled once the camera has stopped moving so much - which maybe suggests some other problem which is making the mud worse in that example, like incorrect pulldown or who knows what.

[dmoreno]

commanderspike, thanks a lot for all your efforts. Lots of people around this forum really appreciate every possible hint of how bad the mud problem is. Specially the likes of me that will not be able to even get close to a GH1 and have to order it from overseas based on the feedback from people like you.
I downloaded the clip, removed pulldown in AE, and saw it like a 100 times before posting my conclusions.

1. The problem is obviously there. You can see it with or without pulldown. You don't need to see the video frame by frame, you can see it in realtime playback without making a concious effort (in fact I was trying no to see it, because I want this camera so bad!!)

2. IMHO what makes the mud more apparent is that the codec breaks down giving the image a "vertical smear" even as the image is moving in an horizontal position, which makes it more obvious because it doesn't disguise itself as motion blur. In fact I'm starting to realize that probably most of the stills I've seen in this thread came from fast pans, and I had thought them to come from fast tilts.

3. This problem is worse than any other codec breakup I've seen from HDV.

4. In this example you posted, the pan speed was still faster that most of us would use in footage that we would keep (even when shooting documentary or event stuff. we would probably keep it for family stuff, but in that case the mud wouldn't matter that much unless your wife is a pixel-peeper like us). Another important thing that we don't know is the shutter speed you used for that footage, using shutters faster than 1/50 might make the mud problem worse, due to the lack of motion blur that might make the image softer and easier to encode.


I'm still wating to see a slow film-like pan shooting high-detail folliage with the shutter set to 1/50 (and all the other settings that have been found to reduce the problem as ISO, noise reduction, sharpness or whatever) to be able to decide how bad the mud problem is for me.

[Boz]

Commanderspike, I hope you don't mind, but I took your video, stripped out the pulldown and uploaded it to Vimeo: http://www.vimeo.com/5062764

To me this isn't some wicked crazy pan, but a medium fast pan that I could see being used in nearly any movie. To MY eyes the mud is painfully obvious. YMMV

A couple more thoughts. You have to admit that this is more than just a minor problem. Minor problems do not generate nearly 700 posts in a thread - not to mention the multiple petitions and email campaign by one of the mods here. I suspect the amount of complaints will grow as more and more people get their hands on the camera. The sad thing is, if Panny had a rep on this board they could have nipped this in the bud early on with a simple "we're aware of the problem and looking into it" type post.

In the meantime I continue to wait and watch what's happening. Sooner or later someone will get it right. :)

[Isaac_Brody]

you cannot switch to MPJEG if you want 24p, panasonic did a good job crippling the camera, even the PAL GH1 has 30p MJPEG, and 30p cannot be converted to 24p smoothly.

Just tell that to the 5D folks. That hasn't stopped them from converting 30P to 24P. :)

As for mud, it's more helpful to post original MTS files. Half the time there's problems that are pulldown related that only add to the mud problem. Original footage lets the rest of us know where you're coming from. Really, some things that bug one person are not a big deal at all to another person's eyes. Anyway, not worth getting worked up over. Now, back to workarounds.

[raymondluo]

So we've long established the problem, what would the solution be? Is it the 17M/b bitrate that's too little or is it the loose implementation of AVCHD?

If it's the former, maybe it's a matter of a firmware update. What about the latter?

[John Caballero]

These cameras at this point require a lot of careful handling due to rolling shutter, jello and codec problems. From my experience with the D90 by example you need to handle it in a certain way and restrict certain movements to avoid jello. Now with the GH1 we will have to pan a certain way to avoid this "mud effect". Maybe using a crane and pan movement by example might be better, or worse who knows. You might do track and shots maybe. The fact is that in order to make that part of your film (panning) work is going to require a lot of technical and artistic savy. Something essential to any good DP. Another thing is that we have to explore more how other elements of the settings might be affecting or helping exacerbate the "mud". This camera has way too many color, noise, etc., etc. settings that we have to know as much as posible about them and how they affect the moving image. This "mud" is not going to be a problem at all in creating great looking stuff. You just have to be a little more creative and technically savy.

[DrBlaz]

Just tell that to the 5D folks. That hasn't stopped them from converting 30P to 24P. :)

As for mud, it's more helpful to post original MTS files. Half the time there's problems that are pulldown related that only add to the mud problem. Original footage lets the rest of us know where you're coming from. Really, some things that bug one person are not a big deal at all to another person's eyes. Anyway, not worth getting worked up over. Now, back to workarounds.


haha sure, they convert to 24p but usually the results are... worse than mud!


I spent/waste the weekend around the problem, and it seems to be just panasonic crippling the camera, so I will NOT expect a firmware realease... at least till the sales go down.

[PappasArts]

you cannot switch to MPJEG if you want 24p, panasonic did a good job crippling the camera, even the PAL GH1 has 30p MJPEG, and 30p cannot be converted to 24p smoothly.

Without 24fps that is completely usable like the Mjpeg 720 mode; the GH1 is just a 30P tv video camera. As much as I like the 5D; and it produces a beautiful 30fps, it will need to have 24fps in camera. Can you imagine if the original DVX100 was only 30FPS, it would have never become the legend it did.

However This is most frustrating with Panasonic; they built a very good camera, only to cripple it with a bad codec setting. Panasonic really needs to fix this. Unfortunately, I'm not aware of Panasonic doing such a firmware update like that in the past. They'll just make people wait it out for the next model to be release da year or more form now.

Canon shocked me with the FW update for the 5D; that was sooooooo out of character, however the 5d has had pressure from the press core to film/television people and industrial/wedding video shooters coming at them from all angles with petitions and letters. That was a large wave I haven't seen before in this area.

The Panasonic most likely will not get this backlash and such a strong magnitude's from so many different working professional circles; so a rectified FW is more likely not going to happen..... :-(

It's just not right that "Pentax" has a more detailed and cleaner 720P than the GH1, That's not right. It's Pentax for god sakes. However it too is plagued in having a video 30P only.



Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms


Anamorphic DSLR Lens Test Images... links:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1638289&postcount=97
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1637705&postcount=84

Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-Pappas/573417404
Myspace:
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts

Arrfilms@hotmail.com
http://www.PappasArts.com
CONTACT VIA AOL INSTANT MESSENGER
AT { PAPPASARTS2 }

.

[Ian-T]

Well, Ive said it before....that these issues are by design. Whether one wants to believe it or not these manufacturers know exactly what they are doing. I like everything about this cam except the final picture....and that is what's most important to me. it does not really matter HOW I get there but that the image looks the best that it possibly could. Unfortunately I might have to purchase the 5D in a few weeks myself. The newer contenders look good and all but I really want 1080p. I can live with the converted 24p from 30p for a while. At least we know that even if canon does not implement 24p we still have a hacker working on the issue. These manufacteres should be ashamed of themselves.

[John Caballero]

Oh this cam is so good:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgwUo_R9hFQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgwUo_R9hFQ)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rn5JHU56qPk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rn5JHU56qPk)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzRnjgoEb_o (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzRnjgoEb_o)

[Isaac_Brody]

Unfortunately, I'm not aware of Panasonic doing such a firmware update like that in the past. They'll just make people wait it out for the next model to be release da year or more form now.



Actually, the G1 has had several firmware updates in the past year. Seeing as it's the same division it wouldn't be unheard of to get a firmware update for the GH1.

http://fourthirds-user.com/2009/02/lumix_g1_firmware_update_v12.php

We're lucky that they have a history of releasing firmware updates for the previous model. The petition is an attempt to let them know what we need and if they want to add MJPEG 24P in a firmware update then they'll be selling a lot more cameras in the next six months. If not, someone else will come along and get it right.

[PappasArts]

I might have to purchase the 5D in a few weeks myself. The newer contenders look good and all but I really want 1080p. I can live with the converted 24p from 30p for a while. At least we know that even if canon does not implement 24p we still have a hacker working on the issue. These manufacteres should be ashamed of themselves.

On Saturday my local dealer had one in stock ( 5D ) and it would have been $2,625 out the door after taxes. The impulse to do so was strong, however there are a few things, most importantly 24fps is missing that just stops me. The rumors in the LA film scene are the firmware is in beta to add 24fps. Still a vaporware-rumor until is official. 30P is TV video cameras, and 24Fps is for narrative films/television.

The GH1 hits most points of a well designed camera except the one little mistake. ( The Codec bit rate and no 24 in 720-Mjpeg )

Like I said in another post. It's like putting stone wheels on a SLR Benz; one of the best built/designed cars on the planet with great features, is reduced to it's weakest link , the stone tires......

[plasmasmp]

The 5D is really the perfect cam, minus the 30p. With 30p to 24p conversion you have 3 options:

1. Weird motion blur
2. Weird Strobing
3. Slowdown footage 20%

None of these are acceptable to me, except option 3, but that isnt much use for talking heads.

So again we wait, for either 24p from the mk2, or 720p 24/updated 1080i from the gh1.

[PappasArts]

.

<<<< Canon 5D ( 30 to 24fps ) conversion>>>>



It's still no better than a standards conversion.

It's not a true 24fps that even a HV30 or DVX100 does.

It's fake...


On DVXUSER; Canon in the past has been hung upside down by it marbles with baling wire and sliced with a razor blade at gut level, to slowly bleed down over its own face by DVX-HVX 24fps fanboys because Canon tried to pass along frame mode or 24f/30f.


Let's not forget how many wars have been waged on DVXUSER since 2002 over Panasonic being true 24fps while Canon was less than antiquate to indie filmmaking cause it lacked the "" approved "" 24fps implementations that the DVX/HVX had. Or the Codec wars of Canon HDV vs HVX Codecs.

Now all of sudden it's "" Chic "" to say 30 is ok, because that's all you got on the GH1 that is truly usable. Sorry; unacceptable...

Take the rose colored glasses off. I did long ago. Better to be brand agnostic than a fanbooy...

Just like I think it's pathetic that Canon is stone walling the 24fps; the same goes to Panasonics GH1 not having a 720/24 at least to make up for the AVCHD crappola mode in 1080.

As I said above, let us not forget the wars waged on DVXuser for many many years over what was and what wasn't " true " 24fps ; and how Canon 30P, 30F, 30fps , 24F ( what ever you want to call it ) looks like video and is not real or "" true "" 24.....





Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms


Anamorphic DSLR Lens Test Images... links:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1638289&postcount=97
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1637705&postcount=84

Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-Pappas/573417404
Myspace:
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts

Arrfilms@hotmail.com
http://www.PappasArts.com
CONTACT VIA AOL INSTANT MESSENGER
AT { PAPPASARTS2 }

.

[Daniel L.]

It amazes me how often the 5D sneaks into this discussion... Talk about off topic..


1. Weird motion blur
2. Weird Strobing
3. Slowdown footage 20%


For #1 and #2 you are doing something wrong.

[plasmasmp]

Well 30p to 24p isn't off topic, since the 1080i mode of the gh1 has some bugs. As for 30p converting to 24p, show me one example without artifacts. The best example I'll give you is Open Water, everythng had a weird motion blurry haze. You can certainly take a look at all the other attempts on vimeo and yt HD and see that 30 does not go into 24 nicely. 60p goes into 24 nicely but only if you want that gladiator 90 degree shutter effect in every scene. Its a good thing the GH1 shoots amazing 60p. That alone is worth the price of the camera. Its at lesat as good as my HD-250 and its 20% of the cost.

[akaloith]

canon 500d 1280x720 30fps mono (30mbit/sec)
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/T1I/ymovie_charlotte_720t.mov

panasonic gh1 1280x720 60fps HIGH quality stereo (17mbit/sec)
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DMCGH1/FULLRES/zvid_AVCHD_1280x720_00029.MTS

Panasonic gh1 at 1280 is simply amazing!
At 1920 everything goes wrong:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DMCGH1/FULLRES/zvid_AVCHD_1920x1080_00008.MTS

1)image stabalisation
2)codec compression
3)autofocus

All the above are obvious if you see the comparison clips
1920 needs heavy debugging or a better processor!

[akaloith]

the pal version has better compression from the ntsc at 1920?
is this correct? because of the difference of 50i 60i (more frames for the ntsc model at the same bitrate)
is this correct?
the pal model also shows mud?

[squig]

I like everything about this cam except the final picture....and that is what's most important to me. it does not really matter HOW I get there but that the image looks the best that it possibly could. Unfortunately I might have to purchase the 5D in a few weeks myself. The newer contenders look good and all but I really want 1080p. I can live with the converted 24p from 30p for a while. At least we know that even if canon does not implement 24p we still have a hacker working on the issue. These manufacteres should be ashamed of themselves.

I feel the same way. It just kills me that panasonic got everything right except the codec. Even Pentax appears to have gotten the codec right why can't panasonic? 24p 60Mbps+ mjpeg shouldn't be hard to implement in firmware.

[stephenvv]

To me this isn't some wicked crazy pan, but a medium fast pan that I could see being used in nearly any movie. To MY eyes the mud is painfully obvious. YMMV That's simply incorrect. When shooting 24p, the worst thing to do is a medium speed pan - this shot being perfect example of what not to do. Read your ASC manual. You rarely see pans like this is a movie and if you do, the strobing is far more annoying that any mud.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

The ASC "rule" for 24p is 11 seconds to cross a given point in order to avoid strobing.

Tell that to the Borne Identity or any other action movie though. PLUS it's acceptable to pan faster than that following a subject because the subject won't be strobing, only the background, and you'll be looking a the subject. I only find strobing annoying when it's a prolonged shot and I'm too close to the screen because I got to the theater too late for whatever new release it is I'm seeing.

In those instances mud could be an issue.

[sunburst]

I feel the same way. It just kills me that panasonic got everything right except the codec. Even Pentax appears to have gotten the codec right why can't panasonic? 24p 60Mbps+ mjpeg shouldn't be hard to implement in firmware.


Well there all just hooking you - with enough features. There's been massive,
interest in this camera. How about sales? some cancels so far. many still
on fence.

But will they sell enough to hook you till you have to buy a gh-2? gotcha!

PENTAX: They don't seem as focused in purpose, More like Nikon, Just getting something out there. Maybe they need a pre launch email campaign - lol.

CANON: bets on whether 60d will be THE ONE?

[PappasArts]

The ASC "rule" for 24p is 11 seconds to cross a given point in order to avoid strobing.

Tell that to the Borne Identity or any other action movie though. PLUS it's acceptable to pan faster than that following a subject because the subject won't be strobing, only the background, and you'll be looking a the subject. I only find strobing annoying when it's a prolonged shot and I'm too close to the screen because I got to the theater too late for whatever new release it is I'm seeing.

In those instances mud could be an issue.



What happen to the 7 second rule?

Now it's 11?

Wait, back in the day they taught it as 7.

Great thing about rules: THERE FUN TO BREAK....! :-)




.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Woops 7 is right I think.
I was typing off memory / the hip from 3 years ago and haven't thought about it much since, since it doesn't bother me unless it's a looong pan that's too fast, and then I just slow down til I don't see it.

But the timing wouldn't change unless physics has recently :)

[stephenvv]

Tell that to the Borne Identity or any other action movie though. PLUS it's acceptable to pan faster than that following a subject because the subject won't be strobing, only the background, and you'll be looking a the subject. Well, I've still yet to see filmic shot where it's the problem. And the Bourne films, if you watch carefully, have almost no medium fast pans shots anyway. Fast/whip pans, hand held jerks amidst fast cuts, jerk zooms, handheld running shots, slo-mo - that's Bourne filmls. I'm not convinced that this supposed bug is problem with those kind of shots and edits. But until I can find GH1 and test some stuff or somewhere else posts Bourne-like stuff, we have no idea still. Not saying there is no problem but what's been posted is not a problem. Until someone posts some shot that display a real problem in footage that shows a shot you would actually want ruined by this, the jury is way out on &quot;the problem&quot;.

[Boz]

That's simply incorrect. When shooting 24p, the worst thing to do is a medium speed pan - this shot being perfect example of what not to do. Read your ASC manual. You rarely see pans like this is a movie and if you do, the strobing is far more annoying that any mud.

It's not incorrect. Just watch pretty much any recent action movie. I was watching a bit of "Mr. & Mrs. Smith" over the weekend and there were plenty of pans that were that fast if not faster in the two action sequence that I saw (assault on the house, freeway chase). If you're going to shoot static dramas, no problem, if you're going to shoot any action, plan on doing some serious planning about how you compose your shots to minimize mud.

[stephenvv]

It's not incorrect. Just watch pretty much any recent action movie. I was watching a bit of &quot;Mr. & Mrs. Smith&quot; over the weekend and there were plenty of pans that were that fast if not faster in the two action sequence that I saw (assault on the house, freeway chase). If you're going to shoot static dramas, no problem, if you're going to shoot any action, plan on doing some serious planning about how you compose your shots to minimize mud. Faster, yes, in fact much faster. With 24fps, for fast and whip pans, you to a 180 degree shutter or more and use plenty of motion blur to cover strobing. Nobody has posted footage like that yet. With fast pans, I don't care what the still frame looks like, it's what it looks like in motion. But medium speed pans are the big problem with 24fps and also any pan at high shutter speed. Strobing issues alone give people headaches, especially projected large.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Well, I've still yet to see filmic shot where it's the problem. And the Bourne films, if you watch carefully, have almost no medium fast pans shots anyway. Fast/whip pans, hand held jerks amidst fast cuts, jerk zooms, handheld running shots, slo-mo - that's Bourne filmls. I'm not convinced that this supposed bug is problem with those kind of shots and edits. But until I can find GH1 and test some stuff or somewhere else posts Bourne-like stuff, we have no idea still. Not saying there is no problem but what's been posted is not a problem. Until someone posts some shot that display a real problem in footage that shows a shot you would actually want ruined by this, the jury is way out on &quot;the problem&quot;.
I agree about not knowing it's a problem till we see it, but I disagre that in at least one of the bourne's (can't remember which) there's not some near headache inducing strobing (esp. if you are too close to the screen, as I was), but they def. get some strobe on.

[Jackson Miller]

That's simply incorrect. When shooting 24p, the worst thing to do is a medium speed pan - this shot being perfect example of what not to do. Read your ASC manual. You rarely see pans like this is a movie and if you do, the strobing is far more annoying that any mud.

I have always heard this, and I always wonder, well what about action movies? The Bourne series especially, but literally ALMOST EVERY action movie has fast pans. Take 24 (shot on film) or even horror films. Lots of genres use fast pans now. How are they able to do that?

Thanks.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

I have always heard this, and I always wonder, well what about action movies? The Bourne series especially, but literally ALMOST EVERY action movie has fast pans. @4 (shot on film) or even horror films. Lots of genres use fast pans now. How are they able to do that?

Thanks.

Well if it's so fast it's a whip, then you can't see it. Otherwise they just have strobing. It's a natural / organic artifact of 24p.

In fact when the DVX came out, people were complaining about the strobing. Until Barry Green put a 16mm film camera and a DVX next to each other and panned them at the same rates and they saw that the strobing was not a defect but an actual by product of actually accurately imitating the frame rate of film.

Strobing is not a heinous issue like mud, again it's a natural by product of the frame rate. You just keep in mind the panning rule to use depending on whether you want to avoid strobing or not. I think it adds somethingt to rough handheld action like Bourne. Pan fast you can get strobing. Push your film too many stops in post and you get grain. Sometimes either is cool.

[stephenvv]

I have always heard this, and I always wonder, well what about action movies? The Bourne series especially, but literally ALMOST EVERY action movie has fast pans. @4 (shot on film) or even horror films. Lots of genres use fast pans now. How are they able to do that?

Thanks. Again, I never said fast pans were a problem - but medium speed pans (like the footage CS posted) are the problem. But when you do fast or whip pans, you usually shoot slower shutter speed/angle. Isaac - yeah, there was some strobing issues but those IMO are caused by sitting to close and your eyes following the background (which does often strobe in films) and not the subject.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Again, I never said fast pans were a problem - but medium speed pans (like the footage CS posted) are the problem. But when you do fast or whip pans, you usually shoot slower shutter speed/angle. Isaac - yeah, there was some strobing issues but those IMO are caused by sitting to close and your eyes following the background (which does often strobe in films) and not the subject.

Isaac? :)

[John Caballero]

He problably needs a smoother tripod head too. You can't jerk the motion too much. Like I said before, you really need to know how to handle this cams. By example, when you are hand holding one of them you have to sort have to make the camera "float" as if suspended in the air to avoid the jello, like what the steadicam would do, the slightlest tilt back and forth will ruin the shot. I can't wait to get one and start working on how to handle this little beast.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

But from what we've seen jello is no issue at all in 720 and so minor it's really not an issue in 1080 you can only get it by panning like a mad man.

The only thing is this mud thing, IMHO.

[Jackson Miller]

So I know what a whip pan is but is there an actual point that a fast pan is no longer just a fast pan, and becomes a whip pan?

EDIT: People are posting wayyy too fast on this thread. Haha. At this rate it will be twice this long in a week.

[John Caballero]

There could be some jello there at 1080 but I think is very manageable. BTW: if you want to see some serious whip pans and nasty rolling shutter image bending check out the series Southland on NBC or Hulu. At least in the first few episodes that I watched. It is shot with the Red One no less. It looks a little pasticky to me also. Did the nasty rolling shutter prevent them from doing the wacky whip pans? Nope. I think they enjoy making the images look all bent up. I guess is an artistic choice. Those who like to analyze frame by frame wll have a ball with this one.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Huh. See here's a good example of content and everything else working. I've been watching Southland since day one on my 1080 46" and never noticed skew.

[Jackson Miller]

I think the 1080 footage that I have seen looks very... pixelated. When you pause it the greens look horrible and even faces look broken up by blocky pixel-ish looking things. Do you know what I mean? This is when the camera is locked down and the subject is barely moving. The 720 looks delicious to me, to the point that it looks higher resolution than the 1080 does. So I think I will be shooting in 720. One question. How do you convert from 60p to 24p and how nice or bad does it look?

EDIT: How do pans hold up in 60p?

[Ian-T]

Huh. See here's a good example of content and everything else working. I've been watching Southland since day one on my 1080 46" and never noticed skew.
And there it is. If you didn't notice it...I'm sure millions of other viewers didn't either. I think Kholi is right....we are all nothing but measurebaters. I, like a lot of other folks, really never had a problem with rolling shutter issues until some others started making a big stink about it. Now I have to reprogram my viewing brain so that I don't see it.

[Jackson Miller]

Another thought:

Are pans in 720 okay on the GH1? I can use my HF10 for pans that don't work with the GH1. The deeper DOF might help as well if I am moving the camera around. The only thing I am concerned about is the lowlight. My upcoming short has a lot of night shots. And a lot of it is outdoors.

[stav1606]

I, like a lot of other folks, really never had a problem with rolling shutter issues until some others started making a big stink about it. Now I have to reprogram my viewing brain so that I don't see it.

Lol, I have the same problem, watching a series I know was shot digital, and sometimes when fast motion is involved instead of paying attention to the plot I try to spot rolling shutter issues...
Anyway not to go off topic, I really want to buy this camera because of the form factor. As I already said, even without taking into account the double price of the 5D, I want a smaller and lighter camera. My only hope is still the Samsung NX.
And also, the full frame sensor is way too large for me. I want a sensor of APSC size maximum...

[John Caballero]

And there it is. If you didn't notice it...

Yeah, it is there but it works with the flow of the visuals. You dont even notice it unless you know that the Red One does that and therefore you look for it and most importantly you know what it really is. 99.9% of the viewing public won't know or won't give a crap about those seconds in the film.

[Boz]

I love how those who can see this OBVIOUS problem are called 'measurebators': http://www.vimeo.com/5062764 I'm sure even most untrained eye can spot that. Or how about the the very end of Kholi's Thrifty video (I've truncated it here for easy viewing - last shot): http://www.vimeo.com/5070498 (http://www.vimeo.com/4582107) Are people really going to tell me most people won't see this stuff? I don't need to frame by frame to see these problems. The only time I stop a video is if I see something weird in motion - then I go back to see what was going on. It wouldn't be much of a problem if it wasn't so obvious in motion.

Others have brought up the fact that both Canon and Pentax have much stronger bitrates in their codecs to make up for the lack of B-frames..... what's Panasonic's excuse? It saddens me that Panasonic said 'good enough' and shipped the GH1 out the door.

So far there are only 3 real workarounds:

1. Cut around the problem. If there's mud, cut it out.

2. Carefully limit camera motion when shooting 24P.

3. Shoot 60P (or 30P) and either do a drop frame trick or optical retiming to get it to 24P (render intensive, doesn't always work).

I REALLY wish Panny would at least give us 720-24P MJPEG. I'd order one tomorrow.

[squig]

I don't think the punters will notice the 720 mud but the 1080 mud is really unacceptable. Personally I don't care if anyone else sees it, I see it and I'm not buying it unless panasonic fixes it because as far as I'm concerned it's broken. I'd rather use a D90. I hope they fix the GH1 it has so much potential.

[John Caballero]

Most basic rule: don't whip pan. As simple as that. Thats the lesson, again, with that piece. Now, we want to see a deliberate pan with a nice smooth head. Don't jerk it. Just let it roll nice and even, like it should be with a normal pan. Whip pans have an artistic(?) place but unfortunately those that want to do it in a lot of their shots won't be able to do them with the GH1.

Again, for those who want to witness nasty rolling shutter whip panning watch Southland on NBC or Hulu. You'll love checking it frame by frame.


I'd rather use a D90.

LOL.

[Boz]

John, the video that CS posted hardly qualifies as a "whip pan". I classify it as a moderate quick correction that you see in lots of narrative handheld shots. Check out "Mr & Mrs Smith" that movie is full of 'em! :)

BTW, I found a brilliant post from Stu Maschwitz as to why one doesn't want to lean on the the 60/30 to 24P crutch to much:
http://rebelsguide.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=26384#26384

[Isaac_Brody]

Here's something interesting. I finally got around to watching raw footage on a playstation on a 1080P television. It looked fantastic. I know that my LCD has some built in sharpening, even when I dial it all the way down it's doing some tweaking to images. I've looked at stuff on two different monitors and noticed that LCD's end up skewing the image. Not saying there's no mud, but on a 1080P screen playing out from PS3 everything looked right, pulldown was correctly removed and the picture looked great. I'm beginning to think that they built this camera around the consumers hooking up cameras to their HDTVs' and Panasonic Vieras instead of the discerning pixelpeeping indie filmmaking crowd.

[John Caballero]

John, the video that CS posted hardly qualifies as a "whip pan".

He just jerked it, thats all. And we know you can't be done for sure.


I'm beginning to think that they built this camera around the consumers hooking up cameras to their HDTVs' and Panasonic Vieras instead of the discerning pixelpeeing indie filmmaking crowd.

Really? That is EXACTLY what they did. The masses won't know what to make of all that "mud" hitting them from their huge t.v. screens! There's gonna be a lot of messed up living rooms out there.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

He just jerked it, thats all. And we know you can't be done for sure.

http://vimeo.com/1124192



....Really? That is EXACTLY what they did. The masses won't know what to make of all that "mud" hitting them from their huge t.v. screens! There's gonna be a lot of messed up living rooms out there.

I think what Isaac is saying is that it looked good under the viewing circumstances he described.

[Kholi]

Wow. I just got out of the emergency room after being pretty much dead for a few days and this thread is STILL ongoing?

Give it a rest already.

All this stress over an inanimate object is ridiculous.

[John Caballero]

I think what Isaac is saying is that it looked good under the viewing circumstances he described.

I know. And we are going to benefit from this new camera even though Panasonic made it for consumers.


I just got out of the emergency room after being pretty much dead for a few days

What happened to you? You know that I thought today something may have happened to Kholi because he hasn't been around for a while. You OK? You had the "flu"?

[squig]

Wow. I just got out of the emergency room after being pretty much dead for a few days and this thread is STILL ongoing?

Give it a rest already.

All this stress over an inanimate object is ridiculous.

you what?

[Kholi]

What happened to you? You know that I thought today something may have happened to Kholi because he hasn't been around for a while. You OK? You had the "flu"?

Honestly, it was major stress again. A direct effect of being too worried about the wrong things, all this GH-1/MKii crap and some other stuff mixed in PLUS a poor set-based diet: bunch'a Coca Cola and Crap Food that nobody should be consuming heavy amounts of.

Arguing about cameras, dreaming about cameras (literally), trying to figure out which camera to shoot the feature with, stuff that just does not matter getting the best of me and you can see it by just how many posts I've made on the topic in the last month. I could barely even think about visiting the forums up until an hour or so ago without getting nauseated, and my MKii and glass has been shunned to the closet. The thought of it's making me sick right now.

Add to that, Neglecting other responsibilities (feature included) and not paying attention to the same loved ones that have now been bed-side with me since I started going into pain.

None of this mixes well for mental, physical and emotional health and unfortunately it caught up with me again. I'm not gonna stop feeding my brain DVXuser/Filmmaker's conversation, but I'm gonna go hang around the USER FILMS sections etc, where there isn't nearly as much strife about the tools versus the actual craft.

Sometimes it just goes overboard, man.

Anyway, do what you guys gotta do.

[Peter J. DeCrescenzo]

Kholi: Amen to that! Thanks for everything & be well.

[John Caballero]

Man, Kholi, I am sorry to hear that but you have to take care of yourself first and I hope you feel better. I've gotten to the conclusion that this camera stuff should be for your own concern, forget about the others and whats in their mind. Do your work and do it with passion, because you love it and with the tools you choose for yourself. And you will do very well for yourself by yourself. No matter how young you are you have to eat well and rest properly. That crap food is bad for you too. We are lucky because what we do for a living can be fun if we let it be. You gave us the start with the GH1 and we are thankful for your contribution. Get together with your close ones and take care of yourself. Everything will be alright. Be well.

[Boz]

Yeah, staying out of forums in general is a good way to lower stress. I need to take a break from time to time otherwise I start to stress out as well. Best of luck to you Kholi.

[DrBlaz]

well, we were trying to know if the mud is due to a panasonic bug, but it seems the avc encoder is crippled by panasonic to protect their video cams, this is, the encoder does not use b-frames and the data rate seems to be carefully selected to ruin the images enough to not pass pro quality requirements. And of course, when the image changes quick enough then the thing breaks completely and mud appears.

it is not only the bitrate, its the lack of b-frames plus the bitrate. All AVCHD video cams even old panasonics use a better AVC encoder, with B frames , giving more image quality and mud-free panings.

Even the point&shot photo cam panasonic TZ7 uses a better AVC encoder scheme than GH1, using I frames every 13 P frames, while the GH1 at 720p usess I frames every 26 P frames. Well this use of small gop can be due to the TZ7 recording only 25p cause it uses the same bitrate, 17mbps, anyway the AVC encoder quality of this P&S PHOTO camera is lot better than the GH1.

[John Caballero]

Well, I am going to say my last bit on the subject. If you really want and can afford the GH1 get it. If you complain about the bit rate, jello, crippled codec, mud, etc., etc., then simply don't get it. Is that simple. We are all grown ups and should know what decisions to make and to live with them. As far as I am concerned I can't wait to get my GH1, mud or not I will have fun with it first and second I am gonna make a lot of money with it as well. Thanks Panasonic, you are on the right track.

[squig]

Dude take it easy. I have to say watching MKII footage over the last few days has helped me sleep better and lowered my feature planning stress levels (and the arrival of the first nikon to eos adapter ring). Sit back relax eat some lentil soup and enjoy, it's jello rich and mud free-

http://vimeo.com/groups/8432/videos/5055585
http://vimeo.com/groups/8432/videos/4970144
http://vimeo.com/groups/canon5dmarkii/videos/4823775
http://vimeo.com/groups/canon5dmarkii/videos/4750555
http://vimeo.com/3449805
http://vimeo.com/3155182
http://vimeo.com/groups/canon5dmarkii/videos/4145939

one or two might have been on dan's list.

[Coco Bermudez]

Well, I am going to say my last bit on the subject. If you really want and can afford the GH1 get it. If you complain about the bit rate, jello, crippled codec, mud, etc., etc., then simply don't get it. Is that simple. We are all grown ups and should know what decisions to make and to live with them. As far as I am concerned I can't wait to get my GH1, mud or not I will have fun with it first and second I am gonna make a lot of money with it as well. Thanks Panasonic, you are on the right track.

yeah man...just like me. I was one of the lucky ones to get this camera on Friday...shooting since then and testing it to the max. Yeah I am incredibly dissapointed...but I keep on shooting and hoping for a work around. to all or any issues I keep on discovering..if I find it, I will post it.

To live in the bleeding edge has its price...

[Nighthawk]

Kholi, get yourself well and strong, you'll need to for your feature. Thanks for giving us all a better insight into this camera to make our decisions easier, or harder, as the case may be.

[commanderspike]

Damn, I hate to contribute to stress levels, but the GH1 is still a great camera. Buyers be happy.

- Much less jello than competition especially in 720p mode
- 720p MJPEG quality is right up there with 5DM2 at half the price
- 1080 24p mode is there for the future when Panasonic fix it, or for static shots
- Great range of lenses with adapters
- Better manual control, live view, EVF, more auto control than competition
- Great stills
- Small size and low weight
- Great kit lens
- No mud at night. I managed to shoot a whole short ambient piece at a night market on a fluid head pan Velbon the other day without encountering the problem in 1080 24p. Lots of dark static shots and a few occasional slow pans.

The GH1 has fantastic potential, that potential is already fully realised in MJPEG mode and I am sure Panasonic recognise the problem with the codec firmware and will fix it.

Hooray!


Again, I never said fast pans were a problem - but medium speed pans (like the footage CS posted) are the problem. But when you do fast or whip pans, you usually shoot slower shutter speed/angle.

But I agree with this... pretty factual. The dark side of the GH1 is as well documented as it's pros.

Warning: if you are sensitive to stress caused by mud, look away now!! For all it's plus points above even a 90 year old guy can outrun the GH1 :)

http://www.vimeo.com/5072139

Pulldown removed this time. Cheers to Boz for fixing my previous clip. Tardy on my part... was in a rush that day.

EDIT: the mud isn't as visible on Vimeo as it is from the full HD Quicktime on my Mac... it is a much more minor occurrence here, which goes to show that certain sources can hide the mud effect, especially the PS3, playback on a quality plasma or viewing it small on Vimeo.

[Jackson Miller]

Two questions:

1) How do the greens hold up in 720p mode?

2) Why does even most of the fairly static 1080 footage look pixelated? It looks a bit different than the mud... it just looks... pixelated I guess. Any way around this?

Commanderspike? What brand and class cards are you using (when you get problems)?


Kholi man, take some time away from the computer. Go out and go for a run maybe. Just enjoy the air. We all really appreciate what you have done. No need to stress yourself. Stay away from these topics.

[SonicStates]

Be well, Kholi. You are quite a remarkable contributor and I'm sure there are countless people here who have benefited from your insight and advice.

All of those that buy the GH1, good luck shooting something cool with it. I'm hoping that the combo of GH1 and HVX is going to get me through for the short I'm planning. I'm pretty sure it will. Regardless of mud, these (as has been mentioned many times already) are exciting times...In the next little while our options for creative film making are going to explode. I can't wait to see what's just around the corner.

Cheers,
Sam.

P.S. Kholi, I should send you some hard-core "Genki" drinks from Japan....although stimulants are probably NOT what you require right now.

[akaloith]

the pal version has better compression from the ntsc at 1920?
is this correct? because of the difference of 50i 60i (more frames for the ntsc model at the same bitrate)
is this correct?
the pal model also shows mud?

[Nighthawk]

- No mud at night. I managed to shoot a whole short ambient piece at a night market on a fluid head pan Velbon the other day without encountering the problem in 1080 24p. Lots of dark static shots and a few occasional slow pans.


That's great to hear. Tell me more. My feature is mostly shot at night.

[Ian-T]

the pal version has better compression from the ntsc at 1920?
is this correct? because of the difference of 50i 60i (more frames for the ntsc model at the same bitrate)
is this correct?
the pal model also shows mud?
No, No, No, No and yes.

You really have to go back and read the numerous information we have on this.

[Ian-T]

Commanderspike, it would be real cool to see some of that video at night you are talking about....at your convenience of course.

[John Caballero]

If the GH1 has virtually no "mud" during pans at night that tells you that there must be some camera setting problems for daylight at play.


Commanderspike, it would be real cool to see some of that video at night you are talking about....at your convenience of course.

Its in Vimeo. Click his other video and is there.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

If the GH1 has virtually no "mud" during pans at night that tells you that there must be some camera setting problems for daylight at play.
...

not necessarily - it could very likely have to do with detail level

At night you're going to see nothing in the far background or lights and no matter how many lights there are it will not compare to every leaf on several trees or every tree on a mountain which are the examples Commander has been showing us - the absolute worse case scenarios - greenery in a scenic background will be the worst.

It's either a detail thing or possibly a combination of detail and settings - my guess.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Its in Vimeo. Click his other video and is there.
http://www.vimeo.com/5072914

that's a tilt, not a pan. apples and oranges. handled differently by the rolling shutter which has more vertical line issues than horizontal issues, different resolution change (less than a pan, so maybe easier to handle), and I think maybe a different refresh rate too.

[John Caballero]

that's a tilt, not a pan. apples and oranges. handled differently by the rolling shutter which has more vertical line issues than horizontal issues, different resolution change (less than a pan, so maybe easier to handle), and I think maybe a different refresh rate too.

Tilits were also showing "mud" on daylight footage from commanderspike.


It's either a detail thing or possibly a combination of detail and settings - my guess.

Yep. Maybe a combination of the two.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

OK cool then.

He's making a point in that tilt to do so slowly though. It's about exactly following the 7 second rule and the clip is titled "Cinematic Slow Pan - No Mud". So again - don't know how we can necessarily draw the conclusion that night time pans/tilts aren't an issue. You have to only change 1 thing to know what's causing the fix. So you have to test pan to pan, tilt to tilt, and same speed to same speed. Barry Green and others have already proffered that if you follow the cinemetic rule you don't get mud - could be a result of that. Maybe not. If I missed a cinematic speed tilt that had mud - sorry.

[Nitsuj]

http://www.vimeo.com/5072914

that's a tilt, not a pan. apples and oranges. handled differently by the rolling shutter which has more vertical line issues than horizontal issues, different resolution change (less than a pan, so maybe easier to handle), and I think maybe a different refresh rate too.

Agree.

The pan I had seen with the old guy (that guy can move) I would still consider a nasty pan. Get this thing on a fluid head and do a nice controlled pan. Also I would really think of 1080p as more of a cinematic mode (steady control and planned shots) and the 720p would be for all your doc style modes (run-n-gun, unplanned shots). That's just imo. I still think the VBR drops down low with fast movements so that needs to be kept in mind.

[Joe Shaw]

Anyone considered shooting with a black pro mist on to see if this helps at all?

I would try, but my duff lens is in the process of being exchanged... Wahey. :(

[Boz]

Warning: if you are sensitive to stress caused by mud, look away now!! For all it's plus points above even a 90 year old guy can outrun the GH1 :)

http://www.vimeo.com/5072139

Wow, that truly is awful. Again not a 'whip-pan' by any means. Just sad and pathetic.

Speaking of sad and pathetic, there's this:

http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/atepper/story/lumix_gh1_camera_surprising_responses_from_panason ic/

Another chance for Panasonic to fess up to some of the problems with the GH1, and they totally drop the ball with canned, dry answers. Way to go Panny! :(

[Ian-T]

I understand 60p is much more robust than 24p in this camera. But I can't remember....does 60p exhibit any of this behavior a little? I thought that it was said that it did but not nearly as much. Sorry for the OT question.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

I know 60p is zero skew and 1080 is virtually no skew
I don't know about the 720 60p mud though - seems like it was slightly less due to the codec / processor changing a smaller image?
The 30p MJPEG was no or virtually no mud if I'm keeping it all straight.

[DrBlaz]

the problem is not a panning or a tilt, or a more than 6 secons paning, or a nervous guy, or more or less green...

the problem is the encoder (bitrate/lack of B frames) is carefully ajusted by panasonic to be "on the border", and when doing a paning with a lot of image detail the camera crosses the border and falls...

you can do mud-free pannings as long as the scene don't have too much detail.

also, if you are luck and get a I-Frame in the middle of your paning the mud can be reduced a lot, just like a I-frame lottery :)

[stephenvv]

Warning: if you are sensitive to stress caused by mud, look away now!! For all it's plus points above even a 90 year old guy can outrun the GH1 :)

http://www.vimeo.com/5072139

Pulldown removed this time. Cheers to Boz for fixing my previous clip. Tardy on my part... was in a rush that day.

EDIT: the mud isn't as visible on Vimeo as it is from the full HD Quicktime on my Mac... it is a much more minor occurrence here, which goes to show that certain sources can hide the mud effect, especially the PS3, playback on a quality plasma or viewing it small on Vimeo.

Please keep posting clips like these that make the camera look bad. I want to buy one this week bad and maybe you can convince someone to sell me their order.

:Drogar-Love(DBG):

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

the problem is not a panning or a tilt, or a more than 6 secons paning, or a nervous guy, or more or less green...

the problem is the encoder (bitrate/lack of B frames) is carefully ajusted by panasonic to be "on the border", and when doing a paning with a lot of image detail the camera crosses the border and falls...
We know. no one is saying it's not the codec. But if you pan slower, the codec has more time to process the detail changes. It definitely is a mix of detail vs. speed or you wouldn't get detail when still.

The point about pan, tilt, this background, that background etc. Was that you can't compare apples and oranges and say one solves the problem and one causes it. You have to compare panning along the same background at different speeds or differet backgrounds at the same speeds.

You can't point the camera at tons of far off leaves and pan fast then go into a grocery store at night and tilt or pan slow and say one or the other solves the problem because you've changed top much.

Pan the distant mountains ot one speed, pan the grocery store at night at the same speed - that tells you something.

Pan the camera across the distant mountains at different speeds. That tells you something.

Pan the camera across the grocery store at night at different speeds. That tells you something.

Pan the camera across the detailed mountains fast, then the grocery store at night slow and you've changed too much to isolate what's helping or hurting.


you can do mud-free pannings as long as the scene don't have too much detail...Yes that's my point about lots of little leaves and trees on a mountan vs. shelves and dark background witha few light.

BUT if you pan the mountains slow enough the codec can likely handle it no?

Also there are more vertical lines than horizontal lines, therefore .... pan = more information to process than a tilt.

You are right it's all abou the codecs ability to handle detail. But panning slower gives it time to process. Tilting is less detail to process at a given speed than panning. Maybe too little a difference to matter. But we don't know yet.