PDA

View Full Version : MJPEG 70mbits+ 1080p settings



PappasArts
06-11-2010, 02:22 PM
For Updates: MIKOS ARTS
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS
http://MIKOSarts.wordpress.com
http://MIKOSarts.wordpress.com/page-2-of-blog
http://mikosarts2.wordpress.com/blog-page-2
http://mikosarts2.wordpress.com
http://MIKOSarts.COM
http://MIKOSart.net
http://MIKOS.info




THIS THREAD IS FOR THE NEW HIGH BIT-RATE MJPEG SETTINGS/FORMULA I CAME UP WITH- IT'S AN ONGOING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT-
POST FEED BACK ABOUT YOUR RESULTS AND ANALYSIS.

THESE SETTINGS ALLOW FOR PRISTINE 70+ MBIT 1080P/30FPS AND 720P/30FPS IN 4:2:2 COLOR SPACE


At the bottom of this post are my settings, updates and new findings...


MJPEG 720P + 1080P high bit rate footage-stills & comparisons thread for sharing tests.
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=212609

720P Hi-Mbit examples.
Examples of stuff shot at High bit rate 720P
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=2011043&postcount=44
Blowup test of 720P
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=2009705&postcount=29





***UPDATE*** JUNE 11th 10:30PM
I tested the 1440X1080. It worked- So now instead set at 1440X1080 instead of 1920X800-
1920X800 works fine, however 1440XX1080 is a standard


***UPDATE***JUNE12th
Tester13 has added the MJPEG settings in the updated PTool 3.36.
You no longer need to have the older Ptool. This is great, since this
will help in parallel development of both MJPEG & AVCHD.



LINK to full size images.
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=2015034&postcount=71
LINK to VIDEO FILE of example pic posted
http://www.sendspace.com/file/1tigvj

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d94/PappasArts/new2.jpg

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


******THESE ARE THE SETTINGS TO USE AS OF JUNE 11TH for 1080P/30fps 80Mbit******

Settings for achieving 1920X1080-30P Finale V.1 [ CLASS 10 HIGH QUALITY CARD NEEDED ]
Current PTool NEEDED [ You no longer need to have the older Ptool ]


**UPDATE JUNE16TH - I don't recommend the 4:2:2 setting at this time- The Mjpeg data rate being this high already
shows brilliant color and edges. Test done today over and over have shown mixed results with 4:2:2 enabled. So I
suggest to not use it. It' also overloads the codec as well on 1440X1080 HDCAM squeeze process


***METHOD 1. 1440X1080P HDCAM FRAME SQUEEZE METHOD

MJPEG 1280p width - input 1440
MJPEG 1280p height - input 1080
MJPEG SIZE 1280m - SELECT
MJPEG 4:2:2- SELECTION IS OPTIONAL - THIS ADDS OVERHEAD TO THE BITRATE- IN 1080P I DON'T SEE A MAJOR DIFFERENCE IN QUALITY- MORE RESEARCH NEEDED-
QUALITY SETTINGS [ 384, 330, 300, 276 ]
TABLE SETTINGS [ 24, 24, 24, 24 ]



**METHOD 2. 1280X1080P DVCPROHD SQUEEZE FRAME METHOD- This process gives a little more head room if you choose 4:2:2 color space than Method 1.
Remember 4:2:2 adds more data, and is still under research and not recommended. For best bandwidth performance- Don't use 4:2:2 in either 1080P squeeze mode.

MJPEG 1280p width - input 1280
MJPEG 1280p height - input 1080
MJPEG SIZE 1280m - SELECT
MJPEG 4:2:2- SELECTION IS OPTIONAL - THIS ADDS OVERHEAD TO THE BITRATE- IN 1080P I DON'T SEE A MAJOR DIFFERENCE IN QUALITY- MORE RESEARCH NEEDED-
QUALITY SETTINGS [ 384, 330, 300, 276 ]
TABLE SETTINGS [ 24, 24, 24, 24 ]

[ CLASS 10 HIGH QUALITY CARD NEEDED TO USE THESE SETTINGS ]



** 720P/30 AT 80Mbits MODE-- Advantage to this mode is the amount of Mbits per pixel is much higher than 1080 at the same Mbits data rate- Also in
720P you can shoot in all slow shutter speeds ( 1080P can't go lower than 1/30th or camera will freeze ).

Settings for achieving 1280X720-30P
Current PTool NEEDED

MJPEG 1280p width - LEAVE UNSELECTED
MJPEG 1280p height - LEAVE UNSELECTED
MJPEG SIZE 1280m - SELECT
MJPEG 4:2:2- SELECTION IS OPTIONAL
QUALITY SETTINGS [ 384, 330, 300, 276 ]
TABLE SETTINGS [ 24, 24, 24, 24 ]

This mode give you a glorious 720P at a very high bit rate.

[ CLASS 10 HIGH QUALITY CARD NEEDED TO USE THESE SETTINGS ]

-----------------------------------------------------------------


*****INFORMATION AN PERFORMANCE FINDINGS*****

*As with 1080 AVCHD you can not shoot below 1/30th in 1080P. If you do,
it either stops or freezes the camera.

If you shoot at 720 in the 80Mbits mode you can shoot at all shutter speeds with no issue.




MIKOS ARTS
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS
http://MIKOSarts.wordpress.com
http://MIKOSarts.wordpress.com/page-2-of-blog
http://mikosarts2.wordpress.com/blog-page-2
http://mikosarts2.wordpress.com
http://MIKOSarts.COM
http://MIKOSarts.net
http://MIKOS.info




BlackMagic Digital Camera Info Thread: http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?28-BlackMagic-Cinema-Camera-Technology-Announcements-amp-Latest-Info

http://www.PappasArts.com

Asiertxu
06-11-2010, 03:37 PM
Hi there Pappas!
I just downloaded your video file of the "box".
Very very nice and crisp footage there :D.
It isinīt necesary at all to sharpen the footage in post as has very fine detail in it already!! even after reescaling the picture in vertical to get FULL HD aspect ratio looks to me VERY good...
Thanks alot to take your time at it!!
Cheers...
Asier.

blazer003
06-11-2010, 03:42 PM
I may have missed it somewhere in the notes, but what is the limit on recording time?

PappasArts
06-11-2010, 03:46 PM
Hi there Pappas!
I just downloaded your video file of the "box".
Very very nice and crisp footage there :D.
It isinīt necesary at all to sharpen the footage in post as has very fine detail in it already!! even after reescaling the picture in vertical to get FULL HD aspect ratio looks to me VERY good...
Thanks alot to take your time at it!!
Cheers...
Asier.

Your welcome. I didn't say a word until I felt it was 90% sure this was working I had been at this every day for quite awhile. Banging away at it, and racking my brain over how to get this to work.

Here are frames of a clip I just shot moments ago. This file was 79.28 mbits/s video. VIVITAR MACRO LENS used..

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d94/PappasArts/Picture88.jpg

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d94/PappasArts/79MBITS.jpg

MIKOS ARTS
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS
http://MIKOSarts.wordpress.com
http://MIKOSarts.wordpress.com/page-2-of-blog
http://mikosarts2.wordpress.com/blog-page-2
http://mikosarts2.wordpress.com
http://MIKOSarts.com
http://MIKOSart.net
http://MIKOS.info


BlackMagic Digital Camera Info Thread: http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?28-BlackMagic-Cinema-Camera-Technology-Announcements-amp-Latest-Info

PappasArts
06-11-2010, 03:48 PM
I may have missed it somewhere in the notes, but what is the limit on recording time?

I shot a 75mbit clip that was 3:26second earlier, and I stopped the camera.


MIKOS

http://MIKOS.info

Asiertxu
06-11-2010, 03:51 PM
Ah !
I would like to try out your settings for Mjpeg Pappas, but I havenīt got Ptool required version, the older one that allows you to change aspect ratio (PTool 3.33).

Is there any chance to downlad this older PTool version anywere?

Thakyou very much!
Asier.

Asiertxu
06-11-2010, 03:58 PM
WOW and WOW I MUST to say!!
Definitelly Iīd MUST to give it a try!! hehehe....
I understand you when you werenīt sure to say somethig about the correct and stable performance of these very new settings as they must be tested CAREFULLY before say anything...;).

Thanks again and keep it up!
Asier.

PappasArts
06-11-2010, 03:58 PM
Ah !
I would like to try out your settings for Mjpeg Pappas, but I havenīt got Ptool required version, the older one that allows you to change aspect ratio (PTool 3.33).

Is there any chance to downlad this older PTool version anywere?

Thakyou very much!
Asier.

Tester13 is person to go to. Make a request for him to put those settings back into the Ptool that were in 3.3.

MIKOS ARTS
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS
http://MIKOSarts.wordpress.com
http://MIKOSarts.wordpress.com/page-2-of-blog
http://mikosarts2.wordpress.com/blog-page-2
http://mikosarts2.wordpress.com
http://MIKOSarts.com
http://MIKOSart.net
http://MIKOS.info


BlackMagic Digital Camera Info Thread: http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?28-BlackMagic-Cinema-Camera-Technology-Announcements-amp-Latest-Info

PappasArts
06-11-2010, 10:44 PM
***UPDATE*** JUNE 11th 10:30PM
I tested the 1440X1080. It worked- So now instead set at 1440X1080 instead of 1920X800-


I changed the front page to show this. I'm also trying a new set of numbers.

1440X1080 allows the GH1 to do 80mbit MJPEG as the previous, 1920X800 that worked fine, however 1440XX1080 is a standard and I hadn't fully tested tell now.

As before you need to use Ptool 3.3, order version. This allows you to set different frame dimensions.

MIKOS ARTS
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS
http://MIKOSarts.wordpress.com
http://MIKOSarts.wordpress.com/page-2-of-blog
http://mikosarts2.wordpress.com/blog-page-2
http://mikosarts2.wordpress.com
http://MIKOSarts.COM
http://MIKOS.info


BlackMagic Digital Camera Info Thread: http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?28-BlackMagic-Cinema-Camera-Technology-Announcements-amp-Latest-Info

PappasArts
06-12-2010, 12:09 AM
Hi there Pappas!
I just downloaded your video file of the "box".
Very very nice and crisp footage there :D.
It isinīt necesary at all to sharpen the footage in post as has very fine detail in it already!! even after reescaling the picture in vertical to get FULL HD aspect ratio looks to me VERY good...
Thanks alot to take your time at it!!
Cheers...
Asier.


Un-sharp mask ( USM ) would work fine. I did it to a few test files IN AE it and adds just a slight extra punch. With MJPEG at this high bit rate you can get away with USM.


MIKOS ARTS
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS
http://MIKOSarts.wordpress.com
http://MIKOSarts.wordpress.com/page-2-of-blog
http://mikosarts2.wordpress.com/blog-page-2
http://mikosarts2.wordpress.com
http://MIKOSarts.COM
http://MIKOS.info


BlackMagic Digital Camera Info Thread: http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?28-BlackMagic-Cinema-Camera-Technology-Announcements-amp-Latest-Info

Vitaliy Kiselev
06-12-2010, 12:10 AM
I updated PTool to give you back adjustments you need.

Mike@AF
06-12-2010, 12:22 AM
When you set this in camera, what does it look like on the LCD? If it's set to 1920x800 do we see a 2.40:1 aspect ration image in the LCD? Is there an advantage to shooting 2.40:1 in camera as opposed to cropping in post other than saving time in post? I imagine the storage space savings are minimal.

PappasArts
06-12-2010, 12:59 AM
I updated PTool to give you back adjustments you need.

That is great.

Your awesome, Thank you.... :)


Pappas

PappasArts
06-12-2010, 01:14 AM
When you set this in camera, what does it look like on the LCD? If it's set to 1920x800 do we see a 2.40:1 aspect ration image in the LCD? Is there an advantage to shooting 2.40:1 in camera as opposed to cropping in post other than saving time in post? I imagine the storage space savings are minimal.

Hi Mike,

This squeezes the image like HDCAM 1440X1080. By doing this, it takes that large frame and 70/80mbits data file and allows it to travel more narrow and not stopping the camera from recording.

I shot a whole 8gig, which is not a lot of time at this data rate, and the only time it stopped, was when the 8gig got down to 90 or less megabytes left on the card. May be the camera's estimation software knows that there isn't enough room to proceed.

The image also looks normal too on the LCD VF and swing out LCD. You can view thumbnails as well, and zoom in on them too. Can't play back as these are large data rate files.

It's pretty awesome to say the least.


For Updates: MIKOS • MLPappas on Twitter
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS
http://MIKOSarts.wordpress.com
http://mikosarts2.wordpress.com/blog-page-2
http://mikosarts2.wordpress.com
http://MIKOSarts.COM

Oedipax
06-12-2010, 01:34 AM
I'm still getting caught up on this, but is it possible to record video in a squeezed fashion? Or use just part of the GH1's sensor? Would love to be able to record a smaller area of the GH1 sensor for 2X anamorphics, in order to get native 2.35:1 or 2.66:1 etc...

Martin Koch
06-12-2010, 01:55 AM
I downloaded PappasArts MJPEG file and tried to analyze it with JPEGsnoop. This usually works very well and lets you see the actual MJPEG quantisation tables (which actually define the compression quality) used. But in this case JPEGsnoop gives a "Tables out of indexed range" error.

Can anyone P L E A S E give me access to a few seconds of a GH1 720p MJPEG file with increased bitrate only? No scaling, 30 fps, as original as possible but with HIGH bitrate. I have no GH1.

By the way the chroma subsampling seems to be still 4:2:0 despite the higher bit rate.

JPEGsnoop: www.impulseadventure.com/photo/
PappasArts MJPEG file: http://www.sendspace.com/file/1tigvj

PappasArts
06-12-2010, 02:45 AM
I'm still getting caught up on this, but is it possible to record video in a squeezed fashion? Or use just part of the GH1's sensor? Would love to be able to record a smaller area of the GH1 sensor for 2X anamorphics, in order to get native 2.35:1 or 2.66:1 etc...

Well the video in this Hi-Mbit rate mode is recorded squeezed like HDCAM 1440X1080. However I'm guessing your asking for selecting a 1:1 use of the sensor to match 2x anamorphic lenses. It doesn't do that. That would be a cool option though.

For Updates: MIKOS • MLPappas on Twitter
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS
http://MIKOSarts.wordpress.com
http://mikosarts2.wordpress.com/blog-page-2
http://mikosarts2.wordpress.com
http://MIKOSarts.COM

Vitaliy Kiselev
06-12-2010, 02:50 AM
I downloaded PappasArts MJPEG file and tried to analyze it with JPEGsnoop. This usually works very well and lets you see the actual MJPEG quantisation tables (which actually define the compression quality) used. But in this case JPEGsnoop gives a "Tables out of indexed range" error.

Can anyone P L E A S E give me access to a few seconds of a GH1 720p MJPEG file with increased bitrate only? No scaling, 30 fps, as original as possible but with HIGH bitrate. I have no GH1.

By the way the chroma subsampling seems to be still 4:2:0 despite the higher bit rate.

JPEGsnoop: www.impulseadventure.com/photo/ (http://www.impulseadventure.com/photo/)
PappasArts MJPEG file: http://www.sendspace.com/file/1tigvj

Did you tried to contact JPEGSnoop author?
It is actively developed, as I understand.
for me it is very interesting to understand MJPEG inner workings, such as quantization tables.
You can try to change MJPEG values and see at quantization tables yourself.

mimirsan
06-12-2010, 02:53 AM
Hi pappas thankyou so much for showing some new settings.
Would you be able to upload a short raw vid of 1440X1080 squeezed setting so I can have a play on my editing program?
Still waiting for class 10 card in the post!

PappasArts
06-12-2010, 03:00 AM
Hi pappas thankyou so much for showing some new settings.
Would you be able to upload a short raw vid of 1440X1080 squeezed setting so I can have a play on my editing program?
Still waiting for class 10 card in the post!


I plan too for sure. I need to get something up. My Upload speed sucks; so If I do, I'll need to live it for awhile. Sometime this weekend is what I'm shooting for.



For Updates: MIKOS • MLPappas on Twitter
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS
http://MIKOSarts.wordpress.com
http://mikosarts2.wordpress.com/blog-page-2
http://mikosarts2.wordpress.com
http://MIKOSarts.COM

mimirsan
06-12-2010, 03:46 AM
I plan too for sure. I need to get something up. My Upload speed sucks; so If I do, I'll need to live it for awhile. Sometime this weekend is what I'm shooting for.



Pappas

Thanks! :Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)

Oedipax
06-12-2010, 04:46 AM
Do we have all the settings in the new PTool 3.36 update? I can't find a few of them, are they called something else now?

Pappas Settings:

MJPEG 1280m Encoder settings.
MJPEG 1280p width - input 1440
MJPEG 1280p height - input 1080
MJPEG 1280p Encoder width - input 2096
MJPEG 1280p Encoder buffer - input 4821120
QUALITY SETTINGS [ 384, 330, 300, 276 ]
TABLE SETTINGS [ 24, 24, 24, 24

Where do Encoder width & buffer go?

PTool 3.36v2:

http://i46.tinypic.com/353407b.png

Vitaliy Kiselev
06-12-2010, 05:09 AM
Just check MJPEG Encoder 1280m->1920

Oedipax
06-12-2010, 05:22 AM
Thanks Tester!

mimirsan
06-12-2010, 06:32 AM
I can confirm that your settings with the squash works on verbatim class 6 card...no write errors recorded for 3 minutes...with bitrate peaking at 69mb....seems super stable!

Kholi
06-12-2010, 08:29 AM
I can confirm that your settings with the squash works on verbatim class 6 card...no write errors recorded for 3 minutes...with bitrate peaking at 69mb....seems super stable!

Great report back. I'm gonna try it out today, just not expecting playback in camera.

Really wish I had lens adapters right now, stuck with the Kit Lens currently. Doh.

ryancglover
06-12-2010, 08:30 AM
Well the video in this Hi-Mbit rate mode is recorded squeezed like HDCAM 1440X1080. However I'm guessing your asking for selecting a 1:1 use of the sensor to match 2x anamorphic lenses. It doesn't do that. That would be a cool option though.

Pappas

Probably a long shot.. but concerning 2x anamorphic shooting, do think it'd be possible to hack the MJPEG 4:3 VGA mode with a higher bitrate (or does the current patch do this already?) and a frame size of 1440x1080? This mode uses the full 13mm height of the chip and would also eliminate most image cropping in post.

Either way, it's felt like Christmas morning for the past 3 days on here. Amazing work everyone!

Kholi
06-12-2010, 08:32 AM
Probably a long shot.. but concerning 2x anamorphic shooting, do think it'd be possible to hack the MJPEG 4:3 VGA mode with a higher bitrate (or does the current patch do this already?) and a frame size of 1440x1080? This mode uses the full 13mm height of the chip and would also eliminate most image cropping in post.

Either way, it's felt like Christmas morning for the past 3 days on here. Amazing work everyone!

Hey! This is a GREAT idea, actually. I dunno if tester can actually do it, but at the rate he's going, I wouldn't even put it past him.

Throw this request in the main thread to see if it's possible or direct him to this post.

Oedipax
06-12-2010, 08:40 AM
Bloody fantastic idea :)

I would love 4x3 mode for its own sake, as well as with anamorphics in front. Academy ratio's no slouch!

mimirsan
06-12-2010, 12:55 PM
Ive upped 2 videos showing the 1440x1080 setting.
http://vimeo.com/12513575
http://vimeo.com/12513188
Download raw footage to see proper quality!

PappasArts
06-12-2010, 01:02 PM
I can confirm that your settings with the squash works on verbatim class 6 card...no write errors recorded for 3 minutes...with bitrate peaking at 69mb....seems super stable!


That's awesome man. Good report!


Pappas

PappasArts
06-12-2010, 01:04 PM
Great report back. I'm gonna try it out today, just not expecting playback in camera.

Really wish I had lens adapters right now, stuck with the Kit Lens currently. Doh.


Yeah there's no playback in camera. Bit rate to big I guess, or not. However you can see the thumbnails and zoom into them, as well check histogram etc.

For Updates: MIKOS • MLPappas on Twitter
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS
http://MIKOSarts.wordpress.com
http://MIKOSarts.COM

PappasArts
06-12-2010, 01:36 PM
*****Just to note. As with 1080 AVCHD you can not shoot below 1/30th in 1080P. If you do,
it either stops or freezes the camera.

If you shoot at 720 in the 80Mbits mode you can shoot at all shutter speeds with no issue.



Shooting 720P at 80mbits is cool, and I do recommend you try it. That's a lot of data rate to be thrown at 720P. It would be kinda of like 140mbits at 1080 sampling. HDCAM was 144Mbits for example at 1080.

Examples of stuff shot at High bit rate 720P
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=212609
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=2011043&postcount=44
Blowup test of 720P
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=2009705&postcount=29

On the front page I list what you need to do to shoot at 720P 80Mbits.

Looking back at footage. The 80Mbits 720P has a definite awesome look to it, you can tell that it is having a lot of Mbits thrown at it. It's like S16 look with digital noiseless performance.


On this front page I will post findings from reports back. So be sure to report things you experience.

For Updates: MIKOS • MLPappas on Twitter
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS
http://MIKOSarts.wordpress.com
http://MIKOSarts.COM

GMC
06-12-2010, 01:38 PM
Did some tests today, using Pappas MJPEG settings and jobless "easy" settings with a Buffalo Class 6 card. Amazing! Everything is so much sharper. I tried to do some before and after tests, including 200% crops etc...:

http://vimeo.com/12511173

It was pretty difficult to get this side by side comparison. Download the file link to get best results when viewing.

I think even resolution has increased, as those "islands of unsharpness" have gone which were there before, even on static shots

Great thanks to tester13!!!

PappasArts
06-12-2010, 01:42 PM
Did some tests today, using Pappas MJPEG settings and jobless "easy" settings with a Buffalo Class 6 card. Amazing! Everything is so much sharper. I tried to do some before and after tests, including 200% crops etc...:

http://vimeo.com/12511173

It was pretty difficult to get this side by side comparison. Download the file link to get best results when viewing.

I think even resolution has increased, as those "islands of unsharpness" have gone which were there before, even on static shots

Great thanks to tester13!!!


Thanks Gunther, that was an awesome report!

For Updates: MIKOS • MLPappas on Twitter
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS
http://MIKOSarts.wordpress.com
http://MIKOSarts.COM

Joe Calabrese
06-12-2010, 01:52 PM
I'm thinking of getting a GH1 now that I've seen this hack and I have just a couple of questions:

1.) In that software where you modify the firmware, I saw that you can edit the GOP, does this mean we could create an intra-frame codec or is the MJPEG already an intra-frame codec?

2.) Is there a way to increase the color sampling from 4:2:0 to 4:2:2 or even 4:4:4?

3.) What is the reason we can't get up to 100mb/sec or higher? Is it the SD cards, the processor in the camera?

4.) Is there any possible way to "capture" the stream of information going to the SD card and instead, have it route to a hard drive or other recording medium?

Barry_Green
06-12-2010, 01:58 PM
1) MJPG is intraframe. The GH1 offers both.
2) On MJPG, tester13's already found a way to make it go 4:2:2, although that hasn't been released yet
3) Don't know. Could be both. Technically a Class 10 card only has to support 80mbps/sec.
4) Don't know. If there was an SDHC-to-CF adapter, you might be able to get higher speeds. But you'd have to modify the camera because you can't record with the card door open.

Joe Calabrese
06-12-2010, 02:04 PM
1.) Thanks. I remember you saying that a non modified GH1 really worked better shooting the AVCHD codec, but now that you can achieve higher data rates, I guess this becomes the better codec.
2.) If he can make it go 4:2:2, maybe 4:4:4 shouldn't be far off.
3 & 4.) What about wiring an SD card to a CF card reader/writer and just drilling a hole in the card door to allow the cable through. This would be a pretty delicate camera then, but would it allow for higher data transfer speeds?

Also, how do the movie files appear on the card, .MOV?

Paul Shields
06-12-2010, 02:08 PM
Did some tests today, using Pappas MJPEG settings and jobless "easy" settings with a Buffalo Class 6 card. Amazing! Everything is so much sharper. I tried to do some before and after tests, including 200% crops etc...:

http://vimeo.com/12511173

It was pretty difficult to get this side by side comparison. Download the file link to get best results when viewing.

I think even resolution has increased, as those "islands of unsharpness" have gone which were there before, even on static shots

Great thanks to tester13!!!

Excellent report GMC. From what I can see in your examples the patched AVCHD seems to show more detail than the patched MJPEG. Both are better than your unpatched examples, though I find the AVCHD improvements more obvious than the MJPEG improvements. Either way, I really like how you've presented it here. Thanks!

Park Edwards
06-12-2010, 02:09 PM
1) MJPG is intraframe. The GH1 offers both.
2) On MJPG, tester13's already found a way to make it go 4:2:2, although that hasn't been released yet
3) Don't know. Could be both. Technically a Class 10 card only has to support 80mbps/sec.
4) Don't know. If there was an SDHC-to-CF adapter, you might be able to get higher speeds. But you'd have to modify the camera because you can't record with the card door open.

3). from what i've read from tester, the reason is the SD controller on the camera is limited to 80mbit/sec

PappasArts
06-12-2010, 02:37 PM
1) MJPG is intraframe. The GH1 offers both.
2) On MJPG, tester13's already found a way to make it go 4:2:2, although that hasn't been released yet
3) Don't know. Could be both. Technically a Class 10 card only has to support 80mbps/sec.
4) Don't know. If there was an SDHC-to-CF adapter, you might be able to get higher speeds. But you'd have to modify the camera because you can't record with the card door open.

4:2:2. Sweet!

You can record with the door open, I have been doing that way on my testings. It was easier than opening and closing to check results. I know, on most cameras you can't.



Pappas

Kellar42
06-12-2010, 03:44 PM
I've got to laugh that we're on the verge of 4:2:2 and people start talking about 4:4:4...I mean come on! Doesn't full raster HD intraframe 4:2:2 currently more than ten times a GH1 body? And with this sensor size...forget it...way more! I can't imagine our cards will handle 4:4:4 anyhow...4:2:2 will make me plenty happy!

PappasArts
06-12-2010, 04:11 PM
At 80Mbits in MJpeg is astonishing. Just ignoring the 4:2:0 4:2:2 blah for a moment. In a good codec like this, it doesn't look or handle like 4:2:0 in AE, more like 4:2:2. I can push the heck of these files. However it's funny. I will take the 4:2:2. It's all gravy either way we slice it.

Pappas

Joe Calabrese
06-12-2010, 10:12 PM
I keep seeing that the 1080p High bitrate MJPEG footage from the camera isn't captured at 1080p, but captured at 720p and upressed in camera, but any AVCHD footage is native (either 1080 or 720p) is this true? I'm really confused.

PappasArts
06-13-2010, 01:25 AM
I keep seeing that the 1080p High bitrate MJPEG footage from the camera isn't captured at 1080p, but captured at 720p and upressed in camera, but any AVCHD footage is native (either 1080 or 720p) is this true? I'm really confused.


Well the 1080 feels different. However if that upscale is going on before the encoder, then it makes it more than just plain old vanilla upscale.

Now the 720P is gorgeous, and with 70 to 80Mbits being thrown at that frame makes for a better compressed image than a 1080P at the same Mbit rate. Either way, it's all gravy, you know!


Pappas

Mike@AF
06-13-2010, 01:59 AM
Pappas, thanks for your answers up above. I understand now. I'm concerned about the 1440x1080 vs 1920x1080. I never did like the HDCAM and DVCProHD pixel aspect ratios. Is 1920x1080 native recording with square pixels not possible? We're stuck with having to unsqueeze in post? Or is 1440x1080 really just for slower cards? I plan on getting the Sandisk Extreme III 16GB Class 10 since they are the highest rated by Tom's Hardware.

Also, can someone shoot a comparison of the new AVCHD settings and the new MJPEG settings, using the same subject, lens, aperture, resolution, etc. to see which one looks better? It seems that MJPEG should be better (and with 4:2:2 that's a huge benefit), but it would be nice to know which will be better once and for all.

Lastly, is there any news on getting 24p (23.976) working correctly with MJPEG?

greymog
06-13-2010, 02:20 AM
Same as Mike@af. After all this following of the GH1 hack I can say I wouldn't mind sticking to a 720p30 MJPEG with 422 at the bitrates tested.

I still don't entirely understand how everything on the ptool works. I've been using the EOSHD settings, and don't entirely understand why pappas is using the 1440 setting. If this setting makes for decent recording times (as depending on the card I can only get decent recording time if I don't go too wide and there's not a lot of detail), then I'll try it.

Still, I've been shooting at 1920 wide, for most of the shots it seems to be working. One card really never stopped recording, the rest (same class if not higher but different brands) couldn't last. I also have not managed to go wide with the kit lens at all, it seems to be eating up camera processing power. At least it feels like it.

Would a 720p size make for longer recording times? Or not as the bitrate is the same?

Also is there ANY program out there other than Neoscene or Voltaic that can convert mts files? mpeg can't, I may have heard that adobe media encoder can but I don't know if it goes from 420-422 like neoscene and if that's a necessary step at this point.

Settings for a 720p mjpeg at 30 fps would be awesome. I would sacrifice native 25p in mjpeg (unless it's possible cause again I SWEAR I could've read that somewhere here) for that kind of quality and to skip the transcoding step.

The initial question is Barry Green seems to be having trouble with even the fastest cards, not allowing more than a few seconds on mjpeg mode as I gather. Pappasarts seems to be getting away with gold. Is it a question of 1440 vs. 1920? and further, if it is, would the same difference apply to 1920 vs 1440 vs 1280?

Again I'm sorry I know this topic is flooded with questions, but it is confusing and a bit intimidating.

Thanks for everyone's efforts hope I can do my part.

PappasArts
06-13-2010, 02:27 AM
Pappas, thanks for your answers up above. I understand now. I'm concerned about the 1440x1080 vs 1920x1080. I never did like the HDCAM and DVCProHD pixel aspect ratios. Is 1920x1080 native recording with square pixels not possible? We're stuck with having to unsqueeze in post? Or is 1440x1080 really just for slower cards? I plan on getting the Sandisk Extreme III 16GB Class 10 since they are the highest rated by Tom's Hardware.

Also, can someone shoot a comparison of the new AVCHD settings and the new MJPEG settings, using the same subject, lens, aperture, resolution, etc. to see which one looks better? It seems that MJPEG should be better (and with 4:2:2 that's a huge benefit), but it would be nice to know which will be better once and for all.

Lastly, is there any news on getting 24p (23.976) working correctly with MJPEG?

Hey Mike,

Well the 1440X1080 made it able to record. If you did straight 1920X1080, it would stop after 2 seconds. However squeezing the image at this Bit rate shouldn't be an issue. We may find that this is related to another setting that isn't right. Its funny, a 720P at 70mbits works great. However a 1920X1080 at 70mbits stops the camera, same settings and all. Squeeze that same image to 1440X1080 and that 70Mbits records without a problem.

Now the bits are same, however the GH1 isn't dealing with the 1920x1080 frame size right, I gather, but will deal with the 1440x1080 or the first squeeze process I did that was 1920x800. I find this odd, and have no answer to this- theories, just no answers.

MJpeg is better than AVCHD, not efficient as a codec compared to AVCHD. AVCHD cuts corners like GOP to get more out of every Mbit- this is necessary for the market it's aimed at. As for Mjpeg, I know boat loads of efx and post production guys that work in MJPEG files for big projects all the time. It's just generates a very large file. However gorgeous images....


Pappas

mimirsan
06-13-2010, 02:33 AM
Same as Mike@af. After all this following of the GH1 hack I can say I wouldn't mind sticking to a 720p30 MJPEG with 422 at the bitrates tested.

I still don't entirely understand how everything on the ptool works. I've been using the EOSHD settings, and don't entirely understand why pappas is using the 1440 setting. If this setting makes for decent recording times (as depending on the card I can only get decent recording time if I don't go too wide and there's not a lot of detail), then I'll try it.

.

I discovered that if I use the 1280 settings I cant record for even a second but with 1440 ticked with the same settings I can.
indeed as pappa's points out if i drop the shutter speed it does get write error.
I have tried 3 class 6 cards with the 1440 setting and only one works (being a verbatim) without a problem.
Any general editing program corrects the aspect ratio in post so it does look like full 1080 hd in the end.

I agree with you Pappas even before the hack I was using mjpeg more as it produced more detail (if with grainy artifacts back then)
720P 80mbs ive had no write error either. 1280 just dont work for me right now.

PappasArts
06-13-2010, 02:35 AM
Same as Mike@af. After all this following of the GH1 hack I can say I wouldn't mind sticking to a 720p30 MJPEG with 422 at the bitrates tested.

I still don't entirely understand how everything on the ptool works. I've been using the EOSHD settings, and don't entirely understand why pappas is using the 1440 setting. If this setting makes for decent recording times (as depending on the card I can only get decent recording time if I don't go too wide and there's not a lot of detail), then I'll try it.

Still, I've been shooting at 1920 wide, for most of the shots it seems to be working. One card really never stopped recording, the rest (same class if not higher but different brands) couldn't last. I also have not managed to go wide with the kit lens at all, it seems to be eating up camera processing power. At least it feels like it.

Would a 720p size make for longer recording times? Or not as the bitrate is the same?

Also is there ANY program out there other than Neoscene or Voltaic that can convert mts files? mpeg can't, I may have heard that adobe media encoder can but I don't know if it goes from 420-422 like neoscene and if that's a necessary step at this point.

Settings for a 720p mjpeg at 30 fps would be awesome. I would sacrifice native 25p in mjpeg (unless it's possible cause again I SWEAR I could've read that somewhere here) for that kind of quality and to skip the transcoding step.

The initial question is Barry Green seems to be having trouble with even the fastest cards, not allowing more than a few seconds on mjpeg mode as I gather. Pappasarts seems to be getting away with gold. Is it a question of 1440 vs. 1920? and further, if it is, would the same difference apply to 1920 vs 1440 vs 1280?

Again I'm sorry I know this topic is flooded with questions, but it is confusing and a bit intimidating.

Thanks for everyone's efforts hope I can do my part.

Hi,

Maybe the post to Mike might answer some of the questions you posed. The bit rate this 1440x1080 is running at 70 to 80mbits data rate. If you set it for 1920x1080, the camera would stop in two second. This 1440x1080 allows more bits to be allocated to the bigger image. Like I said it doesn't make sense one bandwidth of data for 720 at 70mbits works flawless, however go 1929x1080, and it stops. Reduce it to 1440X1080 with same setting at 70mbits, and it works. Don't have the answer on this- unfortunately.

Pappas

Lpowell
06-13-2010, 02:42 AM
I'm getting good results with 422 MJPEG 720p using the EOSHD settings. The bitrate is around 30Mbps and I can record 7 minutes of video in a 2GB file. I'm using a Class 6 Transend 16GB SD card, and have had no recording errors yet. In-camera playback, however, fails for some movies with a card Read Error. Image quality is excellent, and the 422 color looks noticeably more realistic than the 720p AVCHD color.

In an earlier patch attempt, I tried using the EOSHD MJPEG settings at the recommended 1920x1080p, but it recorded corrupted video frames with large purple rectangles obscuring the image. I don't know if this was because my Class 6 card was too slow, but my feeling is that 1080p MJPEG has not yet been shown to be 100% reliable.

Regarding the 1440x1080p mod, the PTool v3.36 422 patch doesn't have the MJPEG 1280p Encoder Width and MJPEG 1280p Encoder Buffer options. Does the 1440 mod still work without these two patches?

PappasArts
06-13-2010, 02:43 AM
was using mjpeg more as it produced more detail (if with grainy artifacts back then)
720P 80mbs

720 at 70 to 80Mbits is like having 1080 at around 140ish mbits. It's creamy goodness. That's much better compression data rate at 720 than 1080 at the same 70 to 80mbits. I have already noticed that my 720Ps at 80mbits are smoother than the 1080's at the same Mbits. Now 1080 at 100+ mbits, this would go the other way, and the 1080 would be better or equal in having the same Mbits for frame size- Hmmm that would be so awesome...

I'm going to do some scaling tests of 80mbits 720 vs 1080 80mbits just to see how much they are different. I did notice that 1600iso shots look better in 1080P than the 720P 1600 at around 80mbits. However I need to run more clear tests on this before truly thinking so. That said my color chart showed cleaner artifact free of the 720P vs the 1080 at the same Mbits.


Pappas

greymog
06-13-2010, 02:44 AM
I have so many settings copied over, I'm sooooo sorry, but can one direct me to the settings that provide the 1440 and the 720p?

Also the answer to mike's post was a bit confusing as he said 720 = no write error. 1280 = problem.

Isn't 720p 1280 wide? Or are we talking about the box to tick? encoder 1280>1920?

Thanks again, just soooo many settings floating about.

Mike@AF
06-13-2010, 02:47 AM
Thanks for your explanation Pappas.

It sounds like we just need a proper 23.976fps in MJPEG mode then. I don't care about the less recording time/more hard drive space being used if the quality is better. How much of this high bitrate footage could I fit on a 16GB card?

The footage you've shown and the frame grabs look amazing, but has anyone done any tests of these MJPEG high bitrate settings at 1440x1080 vs the new AVCHD high bitrate settings at 1920x1080 (from a GH1 with same subject, lens, aperture, etc.)? I'm just really concerned about the squeeze part of it taking away some of the resolution.

PappasArts
06-13-2010, 03:01 AM
Thanks for your explanation Pappas.

It sounds like we just need a proper 23.976fps in MJPEG mode then. I don't care about the less recording time/more hard drive space being used if the quality is better. How much of this high bitrate footage could I fit on a 16GB card?

The footage you've shown and the frame grabs look amazing, but has anyone done any tests of these MJPEG high bitrate settings at 1440x1080 vs the new AVCHD high bitrate settings at 1920x1080 (from a GH1 with same subject, lens, aperture, etc.)? I'm just really concerned about the squeeze part of it taking away some of the resolution.

Hey Mike,

Think about optical anamorphic. That is truly all over the place in reduction of image quality. However digital squeeze at this bit rate is much safer in my opinion. It's just another form of compression if you look at it. We are only talking 280 pixels in both directions on the Horizontal to a 1920x1080 pixel wide/tall image.

AVCHD GOP is worse to an image than a slight squeeze at a High Mbit rate I would think. If I got my hands on some Hawk anamorphic, I wouldn't think twice to squeeze my image optically ( analog style ). Same thing with the Mbit rate at this level, it doesn't concern me that much. However Tester13 might find that there is a setting that makes this obsolete to do.


BTW, as I'm writing this, I'm reviewing test footage shot tonight at 1000 to 1600iso and can't believe this is from the GH1. It's remarkable to see at 1080P MJpeg at 70ish Mbits.



Pappas

squig
06-13-2010, 05:08 AM
I just had a crazy idea- sell my 5D, get a GH1, mount a leica 50mm f/0.95 summilux and an iscorama, and change my name to Stanley.

Is 24p doable?

Phew!finder
06-13-2010, 06:09 AM
Hi everyone great work and sorry if this has been answered elsewhere, but does 1920x1080 70Mbps work @ 25fps? Or does the camera still crap out after 2 seconds?

mimirsan
06-13-2010, 06:13 AM
Just tested the 720p setting you have pappa...im getting around 54-58mb max...shot same scene with 1440...got around 69mb
wierd huh?

greymog
06-13-2010, 06:14 AM
I set 720p, haven't tried the 1440 yet.

As for 720p with pappas's settings...

Oh my effin god.

I am happy. One card seems to be working up to 3 and half or 4 minutes. It's a class 6, and some generic brand. The other transcend class 6 now can't last more than a second.

But on the card that works, damn. I'm happy. I just want PAL.

But still, I'll deal with it in post. I do have one question.

I am now shooting 30p. If I set my shutter to 60 it looks like crap, but it is 180 degrees. If I set it to 50, it looks way better to me, but it ain't 180 degrees.

I will definitely convert my final edit to 25 fps.

Questions are; what shutter speed do i shoot, i set to my capture fps? or I set shutter for 25fps?
Also, Do I convert before I edit? to 25p? Or at the end?

I know that it won't yield such great results, but I have to for work, and not many people can catch the motion artifacts that happen. For high movement that I can't convert I will of course fall back on avc 32mbit, but for mjpeg, what would be a good course of action for finishing to PAL?

T

Oedipax
06-13-2010, 06:20 AM
There really is no good solution to getting 30p footage into 25p - only compromises and techniques that involve a bit of luck and a lot of time to get right. Pretty much all the same methods people were using on pre-24/25p 5D stuff - retiming in Shake/Compressor/After Effects/whatever, conforming footage to 24/25 (at the cost of slight overcrank and no sync sound), letting the NLEs do a down and dirty frame drop/blend, etc.

For MJPEG to be worthwhile for PAL production, we're really going to need a native 24/25 patch.

As for when to convert - I think the only sane option is to do it once your edit is locked. Otherwise you're going to spend hours (even days) converting all your dailies to 25p before editing.

greymog
06-13-2010, 06:50 AM
Thank you oedipax. At the speed everything is going I'm not going to nag, and will even resort to the 'down n' dirty frame drop/blend' if there's not much motion.

I'm sure the progress will mount, the avc mode is way good incase it really starts to bug me about going to 25.

Still, I'm trying both shutter speeds and 50 seems to look a lot less like video.

Also, I just keyed something outside in the sunlight, the files hold up incredibly well. Not the best of keys, but I'm chalking it up to doing it hastily. I will do an indoor lit properly spaced out key this evening and post results.

How do I check if the file is indeed 422? I tried the media inspector on quicktime, and can't find any way on ae or bridge to tell me.

30p at a shutter of 50 really isn't bothering me. Also, it's actual 30p not 29.97 on my machine. Is this the case for everyone?

The only reason I'm okay with sloppy conversion at this point is that patience is key, and my clients (without exception for two years) ask for a higher framerate coz they believe it's better. I've given up fighting with them.

Oedipax
06-13-2010, 07:12 AM
How do I check if the file is indeed 422? I tried the media inspector on quicktime, and can't find any way on ae or bridge to tell me.

I've been wondering the same thing. It would be awesome if someone could do a before/after with the 422 patch and some evenly-lit greenscreen. I don't have a greenscreen setup here or I'd do it myself... Although strictly speaking just shooting anything with solid color in before/after fashion and then looking at the individual color channels could tell us a lot.

mimirsan
06-13-2010, 07:34 AM
http://vimeo.com/12527761 1440p test re-encoded for ps3 ;-)

Vitaliy Kiselev
06-13-2010, 07:38 AM
I've been wondering the same thing. It would be awesome if someone could do a before/after with the 422 patch and some evenly-lit greenscreen. I don't have a greenscreen setup here or I'd do it myself... Although strictly speaking just shooting anything with solid color in before/after fashion and then looking at the individual color channels could tell us a lot.

Look for tool called JPEGSnoop, it shows actual subsampling.

greymog
06-13-2010, 08:07 AM
Just heard of media info. Also tells you everything but haven't tried it, just heard. downloading now.

mimirsan
06-13-2010, 09:49 AM
PappasArt can I ask what card you use for your tests? Thanks again!

Lpowell
06-13-2010, 10:23 AM
PappasArts, can you clarify? In the first post in this topic, you recommend making the following settings:

MJPEG 1280p Encoder width - input 2096
MJPEG 1280p Encoder buffer - input 4821120

However, the current 422 version of PTools 3.36 does not include these two patches. Are they no longer needed for the 1440x1080p MJEG mod?

Vitaliy Kiselev
06-13-2010, 10:25 AM
They are included in 1280m->1920m encoder patch.

Kellar42
06-13-2010, 10:36 AM
Guys, I'm headed down to the harbor in about an hour to make a little video with the new AVCHD settings. I'm going to pick up a class 10 card on the way.

Is there a specific set of mjpeg settings with the new 4:2:2 mode that you'd like tested against AVC on similar shots? Or maybe a recipe you'd like to try but haven't yet? Just feed me some numbers, and I'll have some video for you this evening.

Lpowell
06-13-2010, 11:10 AM
They (i.e. MJPEG 1280p Encoder width & MJPEG 1280p Encoder buffer) are included in 1280m->1920m encoder patch.
If so, PappasArts, could you update the first post in this topic with the correct patch instructions for making the 1440x1080 mod in the current 3.36 version of PTools?

PappasArts
06-13-2010, 12:27 PM
Just tested the 720p setting you have pappa...im getting around 54-58mb max...shot same scene with 1440...got around 69mb
wierd huh?

Hey mimirsan,

Not weird at all, 1440x1080 is bigger than 1280X720, so the Mbits would be higher. I'm glad that it's working for you! :-)


Pappas

PappasArts
06-13-2010, 12:34 PM
I set 720p, haven't tried the 1440 yet.

As for 720p with pappas's settings...

Oh my effin god.

But on the card that works, damn. I'm happy. I just want PAL.

But still, I'll deal with it in post. I do have one question.

I am now shooting 30p. If I set my shutter to 60 it looks like crap, but it is 180 degrees. If I set it to 50, it looks way better to me, but it ain't 180 degrees.

T

It's awesome quality isn't it; Mjpeg at such a high Mbits rate...... The 720P's are smooth and upscale very good cause of that. At 30fps it's 1/60th by the book, however if 1/50th is working, go with it. I wish I could answer the Pal question, it's just that I'm not all clear on handling those post techniques with conversions. There are plenty of people here that can because of experience in that area though..


Pappas


Pappas

PappasArts
06-13-2010, 12:37 PM
PappasArt can I ask what card you use for your tests? Thanks again!


Hey mimirsan,


Im using the sandisk extreme 8gig class 10.

This one: http://www.sandisk.com/products/imaging/sandisk-extreme-sdhc-cards-

Pappas

Oedipax
06-13-2010, 12:39 PM
Glad to hear you're having success with that 8gb Sandisk, that's what I ordered from Amazon and it'll be here tomorrow... both types of class 6 cards I've tried (Kingston 8gb and Transcend 16gb) are unpredictable. They'll usually record 5-10 seconds or so but after that it's a toss-up whether it errors out or not.

PappasArts
06-13-2010, 12:40 PM
PappasArts, can you clarify? In the first post in this topic, you recommend making the following settings:

MJPEG 1280p Encoder width - input 2096
MJPEG 1280p Encoder buffer - input 4821120

However, the current 422 version of PTools 3.36 does not include these two patches. Are they no longer needed for the 1440x1080p MJEG mod?

Hey lpowell,

Rolled into the patch now.

Pappas

PappasArts
06-13-2010, 12:42 PM
If so, PappasArts, could you update the first post in this topic with the correct patch instructions for making the 1440x1080 mod in the current 3.36 version of PTools?

Doing that right now. Thanks for the heads up!

pappas

nubins
06-13-2010, 01:40 PM
After a day of testing many different settings I can say that the Transcend 32 GB Class 6 card works very well. No write errors at all. Tried high and low detail scenes, tripod still and pans with no problem.

Here are the settings.

AVC 1080 24p "C" settings:
24p native
1080p24 GOP: 8 (6 seems to freeze camera)
buffer: 40.000.000
VBA: 50.000.000
OBA: 52.000.000
LBA: 60.000.000

MJPEG 1080 MJPEG:
MJPEG 1280m Encoder settings.
MJPEG 1280p width - input 1440
MJPEG 1280p height - input 1080
MJPEG SIZE 1280m - SELECT
MJPEG ENCODER 1280m Encoder -SELECT
QUALITY SETTINGS [ 384, 330, 300, 276 ]
TABLE SETTINGS [ 24, 24, 24, 24 ]

Using MJPEG 4:2:2 option seems to stress the card too much unfortunately. 4:2:2 should have a noticeable difference especially for color correction so I am ordering a class 10 card today.

Park Edwards
06-13-2010, 01:54 PM
After a day of testing many different settings I can say that the Transcend 32 GB Class 6 card works very well. No write errors at all. Tried high and low detail scenes, tripod still and pans with no problem.

Here are the settings.

AVC 1080 24p "C" settings:
24p native
1080p24 GOP: 8 (6 seems to freeze camera)
buffer: 40.000.000
VBA: 50.000.000
OBA: 52.000.000
LBA: 60.000.000

MJPEG 1080 MJPEG:
MJPEG 1280m Encoder settings.
MJPEG 1280p width - input 1440
MJPEG 1280p height - input 1080
MJPEG SIZE 1280m - SELECT
MJPEG ENCODER 1280m Encoder -SELECT
MJPEG 4:2:2- SELECTION IS OPTIONAL
QUALITY SETTINGS [ 384, 330, 300, 276 ]
TABLE SETTINGS [ 24, 24, 24, 24 ]


why are you adjusting GOP size?

nubins
06-13-2010, 02:49 PM
Smaller GOP means more I frames. More I frames = less AVCHD compression.

I used 8 because its a multiple of 24. A usual GOP for MPEG2 for example is 15 (half the frame rate of 29.97 for NTSC). So using multiples of your frame rate "usually" compress better with most compression schemes.

Lpowell
06-13-2010, 03:17 PM
why are you adjusting GOP size?
I've also had good results on a Class 6 Transend 16GB SD card after reducing GOP length. I reduced the 1080p GOP from 15 down to 12, and the 720p GOP from 30 down to 15 (after checking the 720p 59.94 -> 29.97 patch as well). These settings produce a 0.5 second GOP length in both modes.

A shorter GOP length produces better image quality when panning and filming moving objects. Since we have more bitrate available now, it seems reasonable to use some of it to reduce GOP length.

Kellar42
06-13-2010, 08:45 PM
I bought a Kingston Class 10 card today, but unfortunately it froze up after 10 seconds recording with the 720/30p 4:2:2 settings from the 'stable settings' thread.

I didn't do exactly scientific tests, but I did try and shoot some of the same scenes with both the AVCHD c settings and the suggested MJPEG 4:2:2 (for less than 10 seconds).

I'm going to try and upload some grabs as soon as I figure out how to best do that, but I will say that in motion, the AVCHD seems sharper and with much less aliasing, but when comparing a grab from the two videos side by side, the 4:2:2 mjpeg appears to have much better dynamic range and color.

PappasArts
06-14-2010, 03:53 AM
I notice that the 4:2:2 causes more errors with the settings shooting charts that have hi-detail..

So I tried the DVCPRO HD 1280X1080 frame size.. It appears the same charts are topping at 79.10mbits- and it records. I'll know better tomorrow though. You can do it yourself, just set the width in Ptool from 1440X1080 to 128OX1080.


MJPEG 1280m Encoder settings.
MJPEG 1280p width - input 1280
MJPEG 1280p height - input 1080
MJPEG SIZE 1280m - SELECT
MJPEG ENCODER 1280m Encoder -SELECT
MJPEG 4:2:2- SELECT
QUALITY SETTINGS [ 384, 330, 300, 276 ]
TABLE SETTINGS [ 24, 24, 24, 24 ]


Pappas

MR Fanny
06-14-2010, 04:36 AM
I've also had good results on a Class 6 Transend 16GB SD card after reducing GOP length. I reduced the 1080p GOP from 15 down to 12, and the 720p GOP from 30 down to 15 (after checking the 720p 59.94 -> 29.97 patch as well). These settings produce a 0.5 second GOP length in both modes.

A shorter GOP length produces better image quality when panning and filming moving objects. Since we have more bitrate available now, it seems reasonable to use some of it to reduce GOP length.


How does one check if their GOP values get the required 0.5 value? Can you do it through simple calculations or do you have to review footage to see?

cheers.

nubins
06-14-2010, 07:28 AM
How does one check if their GOP values get the required 0.5 value? Can you do it through simple calculations or do you have to review footage to see?

You could use an AVC stream analyzer like Elecard Stream Analyzer to check the GOP size.

That ratio of half your frame rate is not required just simply a guideline. You can change the GOP size to any number you would like but some numbers are better optimized for AVC and the GH1. It seems like the GH1 freezes with GOP sizes 6 and under from what I have tested.

A good rule of thumb is to divide the frame rate by 1/2, 1/3 or 1/4. Just remember the smaller the GOP size the more I-frames. More I-frames means a less compressed higher quality file.

GOP size can effect the video quality even more than the bitrate within reason. We should be using both bitrate and GOP size to optimize the video quality.

Timmyjoe
06-14-2010, 12:02 PM
Man this is weird. My camera must be the exception that proves the rule or something.

So for the last few days I've been experimenting with the AVCHD settings, going up as far as the "C" settings to see what would happen with my lowly SanDisk Ultra class 4 card. Shooting some "foliage of death" for clips up to 45 seconds long and couldn't lock up the camera. Today I tried a two minute clip, not foliage, but lots of wild pans, and everything went fine.

So, I thought I would try the MJPEG settings Pappas lists at the beginning of this thread. Remember, I am still using the lowly class 4 SanDisk Ultra 8GB card. Do the patches and fire the camera up. As expected, even in a static shot, got 1 second of footage and the camera quit. Tried again and got 2 seconds of footage before the camera quit. So I switched over to AVCHD and shot some stuff. I compared the AVCHD with the MJPEG and must admit the MJPEG looks much better to my eyes (lower contrast, more organic and realistic colors).

So I wanted to see if I could get the AVCHD to look more like the MJPEG (since I won't be getting my class 10 card for a few days). I went into the camera menu and changed the Film Mode from Standard to Smooth and changed contrast to (-1) and Saturation to (-1). Shot some more AVCHD and did a two minute clip (still testing to make sure I can shoot unlimited with this class 4 card).

Then just for fun I switched back over to MJPEG. Started shooting a static shot, expecting the camera to quit after a couple of seconds. But it kept going. After 15 seconds I picked the camera up and started slowly moving it around to see if that would crash it, but it kept going. After 30 seconds I started moving around faster. And it just kept going. Finally after 1 min I shut it off.

So this is Pappas settings, with a lowly SanDisk Ultra 8GB class 4 card. Maybe it has something to do with the Film Mode settings. Maybe smooth doesn't tax things as much as Standard does. But when I look at the clip in Quicktime, it tells me the data rate is 73.89 mbits/sec.

Amazing. And confusing.

Best,
-Tim

PS: Here are all the patch settings I am using with this build:
Version change - naturally
Third Party Battery - Checked
Native 24p/25p - Checked
MJPEG Size 1280m ->1920m Checked
MJPEG Encoder 1280m ->1920m Checked
MJPEG 1280 width - 1440
MJPEG 1280 height - 1080
MJPEG 1280 420 -> 422 color sampling Checked
MJPEG E1 Quality - 384
MJPEG E1 Table - 24
MJPEG E2 Quality - 330
MJPEG E2 Table - 24
MJPEG E3 Quality - 300
MJPEG E3 Table - 24
MJPEG E4 Quality - 276
MJPEG E4 Table - 24
Video Buffer - 40000000
Video Bitrate Adjust - 50000000
Overall Bitrate Adjust - 52000000
Limiting Bitrate Adjust - 60000000
1080p24 GOP size - 8

nubins
06-14-2010, 12:27 PM
I notice that the 4:2:2 causes more errors with the settings shooting charts that have hi-detail..

So I tried the DVCPRO HD 1280X1080 frame size.. It appears the same charts are topping at 79.10mbits- and it records. I'll know better tomorrow though. You can do it yourself, just set the width in Ptool from 1440X1080 to 128OX1080.


MJPEG 1280m Encoder settings.
MJPEG 1280p width - input 1280
MJPEG 1280p height - input 1080
MJPEG SIZE 1280m - SELECT
MJPEG ENCODER 1280m Encoder -SELECT
MJPEG 4:2:2- SELECT
QUALITY SETTINGS [ 384, 330, 300, 276 ]
TABLE SETTINGS [ 24, 24, 24, 24 ]

Papas,

I am trying to use the 4:2:2 setting with your settings but I think my Transcend class 6 card can not handle the 4:2:2 with your settings. Your settings without 4:2:2 work grear with the Transcend 32GB Class 6 card

Are you having any problems with the Sandisk Class 10 and 4:2:2? I want to make sure 4:2:2 will work with that card before I buy it.

Timmyjoe
06-14-2010, 12:32 PM
Papas,

I am trying to use the 4:2:2 setting with your settings but I think my Transcend class 6 card can not handle the 4:2:2 with your settings. Your settings without 4:2:2 work grear with the Transcend 32GB Class 6 card

Are you having any problems with the Sandisk Class 10 and 4:2:2? I want to make sure 4:2:2 will work with that card before I buy it.

As mentioned above, I'm getting 4:2:2 with Pappas' settings onto a SanDisk Ultra 8GB class 4 card. There's something going on here that we're missing.

Best,
-Tim

PappasArts
06-14-2010, 12:44 PM
So, I thought I would try the MJPEG settings Pappas lists at the beginning of this thread. Remember, I am still using the lowly class 4 SanDisk Ultra 8GB card. Do the patches and fire the camera up. As expected, even in a static shot, got 1 second of footage and the camera quit. Tried again and got 2 seconds of footage before the camera quit. So I switched over to AVCHD and shot some stuff. I compared the AVCHD with the MJPEG and must admit the MJPEG looks much better to my eyes (lower contrast, more organic and realistic colors).

So I wanted to see if I could get the AVCHD to look more like the MJPEG (since I won't be getting my class 10 card for a few days). I went into the camera menu and changed the Film Mode from Standard to Smooth and changed contrast to (-1) and Saturation to (-1). Shot some more AVCHD and did a two minute clip (still testing to make sure I can shoot unlimited with this class 4 card).

Then just for fun I switched back over to MJPEG. Started shooting a static shot, expecting the camera to quit after a couple of seconds. But it kept going. After 15 seconds I picked the camera up and started slowly moving it around to see if that would crash it, but it kept going. After 30 seconds I started moving around faster. And it just kept going. Finally after 1 min I shut it off.

So this is Pappas settings, with a lowly SanDisk Ultra 8GB class 4 card. Maybe it has something to do with the Film Mode settings. Maybe smooth doesn't tax things as much as Standard does. But when I look at the clip in Quicktime, it tells me the data rate is 73.89 mbits/sec.

Amazing. And confusing.

Best,
-Tim

PS: Here are all the patch settings I am using with this build:
Version change - naturally
Third Party Battery - Checked
Native 24p/25p - Checked
MJPEG Size 1280m ->1920m Checked
MJPEG Encoder 1280m ->1920m Checked
MJPEG 1280 width - 1440
MJPEG 1280 height - 1080
MJPEG 1280 420 -> 422 color sampling Checked
MJPEG E1 Quality - 384
MJPEG E1 Table - 24
MJPEG E2 Quality - 330
MJPEG E2 Table - 24
MJPEG E3 Quality - 300
MJPEG E3 Table - 24
MJPEG E4 Quality - 276
MJPEG E4 Table - 24
Video Buffer - 40000000
Video Bitrate Adjust - 50000000
Overall Bitrate Adjust - 52000000
Limiting Bitrate Adjust - 60000000
1080p24 GOP size - 8


Hey Timmyjoe, Excelent report!

Yes, different settings can change the bit rate slightly. BTW these Mjpeg settings top out at 83.01Mbits. I shoot certain charts that forces the camera to push the mbits rate to peak. One goods real world thing to films is the ocean crashing over rocks.

**New MPEG Setting tests**
Last night I tried the DVCPRO HD 1280X1080 frame size..
It appears the same charts are topping at 79.10mbits- and it records. Give it a try, just set the width in Ptool from 1440X1080 to 128OX1080.

This combination could be the most stable yet! If it is, I will update the first post.

**New settings!
MJPEG 1280m Encoder settings.
MJPEG 1280p width - input 1280
MJPEG 1280p height - input 1080
MJPEG SIZE 1280m - SELECT
MJPEG ENCODER 1280m Encoder -SELECT
MJPEG 4:2:2- SELECT
QUALITY SETTINGS [ 384, 330, 300, 276 ]
TABLE SETTINGS [ 24, 24, 24, 24 ]



Pappas

PappasArts
06-14-2010, 12:48 PM
Papas,

I am trying to use the 4:2:2 setting with your settings but I think my Transcend class 6 card can not handle the 4:2:2 with your settings. Your settings without 4:2:2 work grear with the Transcend 32GB Class 6 card

Are you having any problems with the Sandisk Class 10 and 4:2:2? I want to make sure 4:2:2 will work with that card before I buy it.


Last night I shot my charts that peak the codec. It shut off with the 4:2:2 patch. So I decided to lower the headroom a bit by adopting the ""DVCPRO HD 1280X1080"" frame size instead of the 1440x1080 being used. That worked! Dropped the Mbits rate in the 10 range. More tests today, so far so good.

Give it try.

Pappas

nubins
06-14-2010, 12:53 PM
Just tried 1280x1080 and 4:2:2. Seems to work well with the Transcend Class 6 cards.

1440x1080 and 4:2:2 seems to have a lot of write errors and does not work for more than 2 seconds.

Should a class 10 card handle 1440x1080 @ 4:2:2 or are there problems with 1440?

PappasArts
06-14-2010, 01:03 PM
Just tried 1280x1080 and 4:2:2. Seems to work well with the Transcend Class 6 cards.

1440x1080 and 4:2:2 seems to have a lot of write errors and does not work for more than 2 seconds.

Should a class 10 card handle 1440x1080 @ 4:2:2 or are there problems with 1440?


Excellent!

It seems that ""DVCPRO HD 1280X1080"" in 4:2:2 mode is working. Still more tests needed to push it. However, I noticed that average is 75mbits and peak is around 81.97 mbits.

I have sanddisk class 10 extreme. I got the failures too at 4:2:2 with older settings. Class 10's are at the 80mbits threshold.


**NEW 1080 MJPEG 4:2:2 SETTINGS TO TRY**

MJPEG 1280m Encoder settings.
MJPEG 1280p width - input 1280
MJPEG 1280p height - input 1080
MJPEG SIZE 1280m - SELECT
MJPEG ENCODER 1280m Encoder -SELECT
MJPEG 4:2:2- SELECT
QUALITY SETTINGS [ 384, 330, 300, 276 ]
TABLE SETTINGS [ 24, 24, 24, 24 ]




Pappas

sirk
06-14-2010, 04:07 PM
short question: you resize 1280x720 MJPEG to 1440x1080 in camera to sqeeze it to 1920x1080 in post, is that correct?
why dont you resize it to 1920x1080 im camera directly? too much bitrate?
thanks

nubins
06-14-2010, 04:29 PM
Has anybody else noticed a softness to the footage.

I have used some DVCPRO HD cameras and always thought they looked soft because of the 1280x1080 anamorphic scaling. While doing some tests at 1280x1080 all the footage looks fairly soft just like DVCPRO HD.

I almost think we would be better off recording at 1280x720 and upresing to 1920x1080 in post.

Timmyjoe
06-14-2010, 06:28 PM
Just got back in from getting eaten alive by the Chicago mosquitos while shooting "foliage of death".

Using the previous MJPEG settings (1440 x 1280), my lowly class 4 card couldn't handle the foliage and the camera quit after a couple of seconds. So I loaded the new settings Pappas posted, which basically is just lowering the 1440 to 1280, I left everything else the same. Back out to the foliage/mosquito field and bam, couldn't get the camera to quit. Handled it like a pro. So the new settings worked great for me:

**NEW 1080 MJPEG 4:2:2 SETTINGS TO TRY**

MJPEG 1280m Encoder settings.
MJPEG 1280p width - input 1280
MJPEG 1280p height - input 1080
MJPEG SIZE 1280m - SELECT
MJPEG ENCODER 1280m Encoder -SELECT
MJPEG 4:2:2- SELECT
QUALITY SETTINGS [ 384, 330, 300, 276 ]
TABLE SETTINGS [ 24, 24, 24, 24 ]

I now need to process the footage and see if I'm noticing the same image quality things that Nubins did, but there were no problems with the camera quitting with these new settings, even with my SanDisk Ultra 8GB class 4 SD card and hand held panning through "foliage of death".

Best,
-Tim

PappasArts
06-14-2010, 06:36 PM
Has anybody else noticed a softness to the footage.

I have used some DVCPRO HD cameras and always thought they looked soft because of the 1280x1080 anamorphic
scaling. While doing some tests at 1280x1080 all the footage looks fairly soft just like DVCPRO HD.

I almost think we would be better off recording at 1280x720 and upresing to 1920x1080 in post.


I agree. I don't like having to use the HDcam/DVCpro squeeze process either. Though at this Mbit rate it's a lot less
destructive. The bandwidth, especially since 4:2:2; filled up more. Shooting 720P 4:2:2 at 70+mbits is
like having 1080 around 140mbit. If you look at my 720P samples, they were smooth and resolute.
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=2008984&postcount=1

70+ mbits thrown at a 720P image is a great deal of quality compression that produces a gorgeous image.

That said, getting 70+mbits at 1080P in 4:2:2 at a DVCPRO HD's squeezed format for a 1000 bucks seems like theft.

I haven't used the 4:2:2 on the 720P mode yet. Gonna do that latter...-

Here are some macros I did while testing settings for MJPEG 1080. These Macros are little soft since
I slapped a 2X adapter on the macro 210mm lens.
http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d94/PappasArts/Picture13.jpg

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d94/PappasArts/Picture14.jpg

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d94/PappasArts/Picture4.jpg

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d94/PappasArts/Picture15.jpg

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d94/PappasArts/Picture20.jpg


Pappas

Emanuel
06-14-2010, 06:55 PM
Hi Michael,

How are you going? Are you sure you haven't shot this macro stuff with a RED ONE by mistake, by any chance? ;-)

E. :-)

PappasArts
06-14-2010, 07:26 PM
Hi Michael,

How are you going? Are you sure you haven't shot this macro stuff with a RED ONE by mistake, by any chance? ;-)

E. :-)


Hey Emanuel,

I'm doing good, how about you?

Shhhhh, ( whispered ) "I'm beta testing scarlet- it's not really the GH1".......

I wish it was Red! That's a great system, and a cool company.

Pretty amazing what that little guy is capable of; isn't..?

Lots more testing to do though- :-)

Pappas

Emanuel
06-14-2010, 07:33 PM
Hey Emanuel,

I'm doing good, how about you?

Shhhhh, ( whispered ) "I'm beta testing scarlet- it's not really the GH1".......

I wish it was Red! That's a great system, and a cool company.

Pretty amazing what that little guy is capable of; isn't..?

Lots more testing to do though- :-)

PappasFine, thanks. LOL I knew you are the guy :-) What have you been preferring most? Higher 1080p resolution or 720p with higher bitrate per pixel?

nubins
06-14-2010, 07:33 PM
I have not had any luck trying to use 1280x720 and 4:2:2. I keep getting card errors so it could be my Class 6 card but I don't think that is it.

I have been able to get 1440x1080 with 4:2:2 to work but it is unstable.

Emanuel
06-14-2010, 07:38 PM
I have been able to get 1440x1080 with 4:2:2 to work but it is unstable.
I am afraid it is too much for the small GH1 or am I wrong tester13?

Kellar42
06-14-2010, 07:39 PM
I have not had any luck trying to use 1280x720 and 4:2:2. I keep getting card errors so it could be my Class 6 card but I don't think that is it.

I have been able to get 1440x1080 with 4:2:2 to work but it is unstable.

Same here, but I tried a class 10 card also, although I guess it wasn't the best class ten card so I'll be trying again tomorrow.

PappasArts
06-14-2010, 09:21 PM
Fine, thanks. LOL I knew you are the guy :-) What have you been preferring most? Higher 1080p resolution or 720p with higher bitrate per pixel?


Hey Emanuel,

Well the bigger image is appealing, however my eye's can see and my brain knows that 720p with higher bitrate per pixel is logical. 720P is smother at that bit rate, as it should at the equal bit rate given to 720 and 1080- 720 is just better compressed.


Pappas

PappasArts
06-14-2010, 09:33 PM
I am afraid it is too much for the small GH1 or am I wrong tester13?

Not exactly. A week ago when I was testing various settings for 720P, I would get very high bit rates. Ones even higher than this. I was filming extreme stuff just to see the break point on the GH1 which recorded and passed through much higher data bandwidith, so that means that the path ways are there, quite possibly something else is at play here.

Look it these- The top five show performance tests to see maximum bandwidth peak.


http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d94/PappasArts/Picture104.jpg
http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d94/PappasArts/Picture107.jpg
http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d94/PappasArts/Picture105.jpg
http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d94/PappasArts/Picture106.jpg
http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d94/PappasArts/Picture108.jpg
HERE ARE A COUPLE OF 1080P DONE TONIGHT IN THE SQUEEZE MODE 1440X1080P
http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d94/PappasArts/Picture111.jpg
http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d94/PappasArts/Picture110.jpg

Pappas

Kholi
06-14-2010, 09:37 PM
What ISO were those last two at?

Do you have moving footage of those?

PappasArts
06-14-2010, 09:45 PM
What ISO were those last two at?

Do you have moving footage of those?

Hey Kholi,

320 on the two guys and the bottom was- I believe 800. I will check my notes later when I get back. The GH1 did really well that night, the better codec lets the GH1 show that it is very good in lowlight, and very clean too! Even in the Zacuto test they made a mention how clean the GH1 was. Just the codec was its weak link- No more!

However we knew that already!

Pappas

Isaac_Brody
06-14-2010, 09:49 PM
Man Pappas, you are killing it. Can you upload something to vimeo?

Kholi
06-14-2010, 09:51 PM
Hey Kholi,

320 on the two guys and the bottom was- I believe 800. I will check my notes later when I get back. The GH1 did really well that night, the better codec lets the GH1 show that it is very good in lowlight, and very clean too! Even in the Zacuto test they made a mention how clean the GH1 was. Just the codec was its weak link- No more!

However we knew that already!

Pappas

Damn man. That 800ISO at night looks quite killer at first glance.

High res stills or vimeo vid would be much appreciated.

Tomorrow, when I get the glass and PL mount, I'll be applying your "DVCProHD" settings and shooting with those versus the AVCHD "D" settings.

Hoping it helps out.

J Davis
06-14-2010, 10:02 PM
Its interesting to see that all the deep focus shots are pushing the data rates up

Kellar42
06-14-2010, 10:43 PM
Damn man. That 800ISO at night looks quite killer at first glance.

High res stills or vimeo vid would be much appreciated.

Tomorrow, when I get the glass and PL mount, I'll be applying your "DVCProHD" settings and shooting with those versus the AVCHD "D" settings.

Hoping it helps out.

He's got grabs from that evening posted much bigger in another thread. I'm shocked at the lack of FPN.

FoodDude
06-14-2010, 11:17 PM
So the new hack allows 1440x1080 raw video? Anyone try it with a Kowa or Sankor 2x with 1440x1080 and ending up with a 2.35:1 in nice raw instead of the typical 3.56:1 squeezed from a 16:9 native camera?

Barry_Green
06-14-2010, 11:35 PM
Its interesting to see that all the deep focus shots are pushing the data rates up
Shouldn't be surprising; the more that's in focus, the more sharp detail that's in the frame, and the higher the bitrate necessary to properly encode it.

We learned early on that the thing to avoid with the original GH1 was a wide deep-focus shot, because the codec just couldn't handle all the detail. With the new GH13, tester13's given the codec all the bandwidth it needs, so now wide deep-focus shots look spectacular, but they definitely drive the bitrate way up!

Emanuel
06-15-2010, 12:11 AM
Shouldn't be surprising; the more that's in focus, the more sharp detail that's in the frame, and the higher the bitrate necessary to properly encode it.
Exactly like that.

EDIT -- The GH1 smaller sensor size has been an add-value from the bone for minimizing the issue and aliasing problems associated to the reading of a higher res sensor used @ full format (5D Mark II).

PappasArts
06-15-2010, 12:31 AM
Man Pappas, you are killing it. Can you upload something to vimeo?


Hey Issac,

I'm planning to get something up, most likely vimeo..



Damn man. That 800ISO at night looks quite killer at first glance.
High res stills or vimeo vid would be much appreciated.
Tomorrow, when I get the glass and PL mount, I'll be applying your "DVCProHD" settings and shooting with those versus the AVCHD "D" settings.
Hoping it helps out.

Hey Kholi

Soon I hope

This camera does dam good at 800ISO.

PL mount and this camera. A Marriage made in heaven. I would love to get some Hawks on that PL mount. Jesus that would make for killer images



He's got grabs from that evening posted much bigger in another thread. I'm shocked at the lack of FPN.

I posted two large grabs in this thread..

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=2017000&postcount=93



Pappas

Ryan McCarvill
06-15-2010, 01:48 AM
I'm curious that on my Pal GH1 my 1080p Mjpeg is at 30fps, surely if it used to be 50fps we can get it working with 25?

Adventsam
06-15-2010, 02:03 AM
AVC, was 25p 1080p and 50p 720, PAL cameras.

There was tests for mjpeg to 24/25p, but they were skipping

Ryan McCarvill
06-15-2010, 02:11 AM
Yep I read that within ptool (i've also been following the testing since the start but only now decided to play with it).

I always thought that the mjpeg mode was 720x50fps for a Pal camera, I could be wrong though as I think I only ever shot one thing on it before deciding that it was a useless addition to the camera.... How wrong was I.

Adventsam
06-15-2010, 03:06 AM
to go with new fps, xfps in the ptool I think, but the 50fps was locking as I remember. The original mjpeg has always been 30fps 720p, pal and ntsc.

J Davis
06-15-2010, 04:37 AM
Its interesting to see that all the deep focus shots are pushing the data rates up

Shouldn't be surprising; the more that's in focus, the more sharp detail that's in the frame, and the higher the bitrate necessary to properly encode it.

We learned early on that the thing to avoid with the original GH1 was a wide deep-focus shot, because the codec just couldn't handle all the detail. With the new GH13, tester13's given the codec all the bandwidth it needs, so now wide deep-focus shots look spectacular, but they definitely drive the bitrate way up!


Yes that was the point of my post.

Whats also ironic is that all the images that threaten the codec with high data rates are all images that we would normally see from small sensor CCD cameras.

The shallower dof images that brought us to vDSLR's in the first place are the ones that threaten the codec least.

.

greymog
06-15-2010, 05:15 AM
I have been shooting on pappas' settings, first ones, for 720p. I updated, same settings, except next time I ticked 422 and left avc alone.

Out of 4 cards, a class 4 and 3 class 6's, only one class 6 worked, and it wasn't a transcend, it was a generic make.

Till now I get about 4 min of clip time without hiccups, using kit lens, IS on or off, 14mm wide, all the way to f22 on a bright and sunny day.

I haven't tried any class tens, I'm kinda scared to update if I hit a sweet spot. Does messing with avc settings alter anything as far as bandwidth goes?

Kellar42
06-15-2010, 02:46 PM
So, finally got my hands on a 16gb Panny class 10 today and it works like a charm. 4:2:2 720p MJPEG which stopped on my class six after 10 seconds and froze a kingston class 10 now records for 3 minutes, 40 seconds, no problem.

These were the settings, with 4:2:2 ticked. Thinking of trying higher res, now...


QUALITY SETTINGS [ 384, 330, 300, 276 ]
TABLE SETTINGS [ 24, 24, 24, 24 ]
This mode give you a glorious 720P at a very high bit rate.

Adventsam
06-15-2010, 02:52 PM
am coming down to 720p or not ticking 422.

PappasArts
06-15-2010, 03:58 PM
am coming down to 720p or not ticking 422.

4:2:2 added more data, and makes it harder to avoid write errors. Working on new formula that might make it better. I personaly haven't posted anything that was from the new 4:2:2 patch. And the color looks like 4:2:2 or better already. Maybe at this High-bitrate, it becomes less of an issue.


Pappas

Ryan McCarvill
06-15-2010, 05:31 PM
Ok so I have found something interesting, in MJPEG 1080p 4:2:0 my class 6 SD cards wont work, but a ratty old card that I found somewhere does work, I spent quite a bit of time yesturday playing with it shaking it, fast pans, shallow and deep depth of field, all ok.

This morning I formatted the card in camera, tried to record, and it said that I couldn't write to that card as it wasn't fast enough. I had to pull the battery to restart the camera as it appeared to have crashed and wasn't responding to even the off switch. I did this a dozen or so times trying to figure out why it previously worked flawlessly but then didn't. In my random changing of settings in camera I dropped the ISO down from 600 that it was set to from a still that I took to 100, and it worked. Now the funny thing is that after it started recording at iso 100 I pushed it back up to 600 and even higher without any problem, so it appears that once it started recording to that card it was fine.

Now as I said I don't really know where the card that I was using came from, what its rated, etc. So the problem most likely lies there but I am concerned that in the high pressure environment of a film set I might get a write speed problem and have to put everything on hold while I repeatedly eject the battery in order to get it going. And heaven forbid it happens mid shot!

PappasArts
06-15-2010, 05:45 PM
I had to pull the battery to restart the camera as it appeared to have crashed and wasn't responding to even the off switch. I did this a dozen or so times trying to figure out why it previously worked flawlessly but then didn't
!



Hey RyanMc,

Since I have shot so much test footage, one thing for sure that crashes like that is when the shutter is below 1/30th. Outside of that only when dealing with extreme experimental settings other than those posted, does that happen. Of course- the unknown SD card, is the wild card in this mix.


Don't forget this approach either- I updated the front page with these settings as well.

**METHOD 2. 1280X1080P DVCPROHD SQUEEZE FRAME METHOD- This process gives a little more head room if you choose 4:2:2 color space than Method 1.
Remember 4:2:2 adds more data, and is still under research. For best bandwidth performance- Don't use 4:2:2 in either 1080P mode.

MJPEG 1280m Encoder settings.
MJPEG 1280p width - input 1280
MJPEG 1280p height - input 1080
MJPEG SIZE 1280m - SELECT
MJPEG ENCODER 1280m Encoder -SELECT
MJPEG 4:2:2- SELECTION IS OPTIONAL - THIS ADDS OVERHEAD TO THE BITRATE- IN 1080P I DON'T SEE A MAJOR DIFFERENCE IN QUALITY- MORE RESEARCH NEEDED-
QUALITY SETTINGS [ 384, 330, 300, 276 ]
TABLE SETTINGS [ 24, 24, 24, 24 ]


Pappas

Adventsam
06-16-2010, 01:53 AM
Need to get the new bin in though LOL, as this new version compare thing had me baffled.

adammada
06-16-2010, 03:03 AM
I tested the 720p settings with the GF1
Q: 384,330,300,276 - T:24,24,24,24
and 420 > 422
I think is great - beautiful:Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)
vimeo: download the originalfile

12599793
http://www.vimeo.com/12599793

Ryan McCarvill
06-16-2010, 05:13 AM
Thanks Pappas,

I had seen those settings before but it's hard to keep up with everything. I had seen information on setting different aspect ratios for ultra wide shots but can't find that either.

It does appear that the shutter speed must have been low and that my problems as I can't replicate the ISO problem.

Interestingly it appears that you can set the shutter speed above 30, press record and then drop it below 30 when your recording without any problem.

Timmyjoe
06-16-2010, 10:01 AM
Pappas,

Using the settings below (including having 4:2:2 selected), I have been shooting for three days now with picture set to Standard (as opposed to Smooth), ISO 100, AWB, fully manual movie mode with Hot Rod PL mount adapter and Cooke Speed Panchro lenses. Been capturing to a Sandisk Ultra 8GB class 4 card. Been shooting alot of foliage and other things that I think will test the camera. And not a hiccup. No freezing, no skipping frames.

MJPEG 1280m Encoder settings.
MJPEG 1280p width - input 1280
MJPEG 1280p height - input 1080
MJPEG SIZE 1280m - SELECT
MJPEG ENCODER 1280m Encoder -SELECT
MJPEG 4:2:2- SELECT
QUALITY SETTINGS [ 384, 330, 300, 276 ]
TABLE SETTINGS [ 24, 24, 24, 24 ]

I think the card class is not the whole story about when and why this works. I think the card plays some part in it, but I think maybe we are taxing the camera electronics overall and the card is just one part of that. Because if the card were the whole story, there's no way my camera should be recording on the above setting to a class 4 card. I think the reason my camera is doing this might be because I'm not taxing much of the electronics, since I'm not using autofocus, autoexposure, image stablization, etc.

Just some thoughts.

Best,
-Tim

PS: If I haven't said this before Pappas, thanks for all the work you did coming up with these settings, the resulting image quality is really something.

Jerky hand held shot of flowers (http://www.lilfolksproductions.com/MJPEG.htm)

sms460dvx
06-16-2010, 02:41 PM
PappasArts (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/member.php?u=3500)
Hi, I like to try your setting, could you please write it for us from start to the end and tell me with which PTool.. I could upgrade my GH1 Firmware I already Upgrade it with PTool v3.35

PappasArts
06-16-2010, 03:03 PM
Thanks Pappas,

I had seen those settings before but it's hard to keep up with everything. I had seen information on setting different aspect ratios for ultra wide shots but can't find that either.

It does appear that the shutter speed must have been low and that my problems as I can't replicate the ISO problem.

Interestingly it appears that you can set the shutter speed above 30, press record and then drop it below 30 when your recording without any problem.

Hey Ryan,

Yeah I did that, however I would get the error message when slowing the shutter while recording. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. The sensor must over load the data bandwidth when doing that.

Pappas

PappasArts
06-16-2010, 03:16 PM
Pappas,

Using the settings below (including having 4:2:2 selected), I have been shooting for three days now with picture set to Standard (as opposed to Smooth), ISO 100, AWB, fully manual movie mode with Hot Rod PL mount adapter and Cooke Speed Panchro lenses. Been capturing to a Sandisk Ultra 8GB class 4 card. Been shooting alot of foliage and other things that I think will test the camera. And not a hiccup. No freezing, no skipping frames.

MJPEG 1280m Encoder settings.
MJPEG 1280p width - input 1280
MJPEG 1280p height - input 1080
MJPEG SIZE 1280m - SELECT
MJPEG ENCODER 1280m Encoder -SELECT
MJPEG 4:2:2- SELECT
QUALITY SETTINGS [ 384, 330, 300, 276 ]
TABLE SETTINGS [ 24, 24, 24, 24 ]

I think the card class is not the whole story about when and why this works. I think the card plays some part in it, but I think maybe we are taxing the camera electronics overall and the card is just one part of that. Because if the card were the whole story, there's no way my camera should be recording on the above setting to a class 4 card. I think the reason my camera is doing this might be because I'm not taxing much of the electronics, since I'm not using autofocus, autoexposure, image stablization, etc.

Just some thoughts.

Best,
-Tim

PS: If I haven't said this before Pappas, thanks for all the work you did coming up with these settings, the resulting image quality is really something.

Jerky hand held shot of flowers (http://www.lilfolksproductions.com/MJPEG.htm)


Hey Timmyjoe,

Yeah I agree, there's more to it than just the SD card and the driver within the camera. Something else is at play. That's why the differing reports. BTW as for the 4:2:2- I would avoid it, I did 1440x1080 4:2:2 not enabled vs 1280X1080 4:2:2 enabled. I got more edge jaggies on the 1280 process. It looked like 4:2:0 rather then the 4:2:2 it should be. Did the test again same results. Did the test again one more time- same results.

So for now in my opinion either use the 1440x1080 or the 1280x1080 with no 4:2:2. I think that Mjpeg at this data rate is not like our video codecs. This Mjpeg is a photography standard, wrapped in a motion file. I have never heard of photographers asking for 4:2:2 in the DSLR's. More research needed. ALL my shots that I have posted have never been 4:2:2, and they came out pretty good. Also the 4:2:2 is putting to much over head. I'm still trying to get the other settings to have zero card write errors- that's the goal.

Nice setup- PLmount from Hotrod with Cooke Speed Panchro lenses- Sweet!

Pappas

rambooc1
06-16-2010, 04:53 PM
Sorry if this is off topic a bit, but as it's related to Mjpeg and hacked firmware i thought it would be interesting for some as a related history.

As you might know there is hacked firmware for Canon P And S cameras done by the CHDK community. http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK

Some time ago i used this firmware to change the video bitrates and quality on a fixed lens Canon S2IS, the results were amazing compared to the default settings in the original firmware. Very similar to the difference experienced here with the Mjpeg codec.

The video resolution is only SD but is so clean and motion so smooth, so i'm also a fan of this codec. I also had a Canon TX1 which used mjpeg in 720p and it was a beautiful filmic image as well, but wasn't hackable to a larger bitrate.

Obviously manufacturers have moved away from Mjpeg because of the file size/quality ratio but for small high quality projects it's the bee's knees.

Hope this was interesting for someone.

BTW i mainly now use the S2IS for Time lapses as CHDK can control bracketing and heaps of other camera settings all from the firmware contained on the SD card.

Cheers Ian .... just bought a GH1

sparedog
06-17-2010, 07:15 PM
Pappas

i have just used your settings for 720p 80mbit 422 on my gf1 and would like to share with you the results and ask you a couple questions.

with ptool version 3.36 i selected the following
MJPEG 4:2:2- SELECTED
QUALITY SETTINGS [ 384, 330, 300, 276 ]
TABLE SETTINGS [ 24, 24, 24, 24 ]

I also selected
720P 59,94fps->29,97fps

i did a real world test at my local zoo filming a whole day on a sandisk extreme class 10, 8gb card.

The camera allowed me to write, delete and rewrite all day, except it gave me a write error twice. Both times it wrote for about 3-4 secs and then stopped. Ironically both times were when i saw something really great happening, 'the money shots', like a pair of chimps having a fight. as both times i pressed the record button whilst panning quickly to the action, i wondered if this was tripping the error as the first second the camera would receive would be a whip pan.

with the '720P 59,94fps->29,97fps' setting, is this improving the ability to write to the card in anyway or helping me reduce the size of the files? In your suggested settings, you do not mention this setting, so should i uncheck it next time i run ptool?

The resulting footage looks incredible, can anyone suggest a free place like where i can upload 2 x 640mb video files which will also allow users to download the originals, as i really would like to share the finished films from the day?

PappasArts
06-17-2010, 08:27 PM
Pappas

i have just used your settings for 720p 80mbit 422 on my gf1 and would like to share with you the results and ask you a couple questions.

with ptool version 3.36 i selected the following
MJPEG 4:2:2- SELECTED
QUALITY SETTINGS [ 384, 330, 300, 276 ]
TABLE SETTINGS [ 24, 24, 24, 24 ]

I also selected
720P 59,94fps->29,97fps

i did a real world test at my local zoo filming a whole day on a sandisk extreme class 10, 8gb card.

The camera allowed me to write, delete and rewrite all day, except it gave me a write error twice. Both times it wrote for about 3-4 secs and then stopped. Ironically both times were when i saw something really great happening, 'the money shots', like a pair of chimps having a fight. as both times i pressed the record button whilst panning quickly to the action, i wondered if this was tripping the error as the first second the camera would receive would be a whip pan.

with the '720P 59,94fps->29,97fps' setting, is this improving the ability to write to the card in anyway or helping me reduce the size of the files? In your suggested settings, you do not mention this setting, so should i uncheck it next time i run ptool?

The resulting footage looks incredible, can anyone suggest a free place like where i can upload 2 x 640mb video files which will also allow users to download the originals, as i really would like to share the finished films from the day?

Good report,

Deselect these:
720P 59,94fps->29,97fps
MJPEG 4:2:2- SELECTED

As to 4:2:2-At 80Mbit, it's pushing it to spike when hitting high detail. With those off you shouldn't have any issues.

This is a site you can upload too.
http://www.sendspace.com/

Pappas

Primaural
06-17-2010, 10:54 PM
Ok, sorry to ask such a dumb question, but how can I tell if I clip is in 420 or 422 color sampling?

I've used the firmward on my GF1 to select 422, just curious for sure if it is in fact IN 422. I'm on a Mac, and have Final Cut Pro, but just curious how I can tell for sure?

Tim

Tesselator
06-18-2010, 12:46 AM
Play in it Plex and press "i" while it's playing.

http://wiki.plexapp.com/index.php/Downloads#Current_Version


You should see a transparent overlay looking something like this:

http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/Temporary/PlexSnapz_001.jpg

YUV is the data format, J is the JPEG compression variant, 422 is the sampling resolution, and P is the progressive frame rendering method. YUVJ422P :)

Primaural
06-18-2010, 02:10 PM
Woot, thanks much!

Yep, it's in 422. Am confused by the audio I'm seeing, it reads, as does your example, s16be, which I assume is 16 bit. But curious to see 16000 Hz, as it should be 48000 Hz. But hmm, everything else checks out.

Thanks!

adys
06-29-2010, 11:22 AM
I read almost the full thread, lot of info..

My question was why 1440 and not 1920?

From what I understand I am changing the footage when importing into the video editing software?

Can I work with native 1920 X 1080 instead?

mpgxsvcd
06-29-2010, 11:34 AM
I read almost the full thread, lot of info..

My question was why 1440 and not 1920?

From what I understand I am changing the footage when importing into the video editing software?

Can I work with native 1920 X 1080 instead?

You can't reliably record at 1920x1080 @ 30 FPS MJPEG yet. Even the 30 mb/sec Sandisk cards will error out after a second or two with very high detailed scenes. I tend to like the 100 mb/sec 4:2:2 720p MJPEG videos myself. The 1080p @ 24 FPS high bit rate AVC-HD files are mighty impressive as well.

adys
06-29-2010, 11:53 AM
yes...

It was nice if we could change only some of the settings, so for daily shoot like family and stuff we could use the lower quality. not always I want such a huge files...

I think I will go with the B setting for the AVCHD, and save the MPEG like factory default and shoot all "non pro" stuff with it.

Disdausdebil
06-29-2010, 02:08 PM
I've read the whole thread but i'm still not sure whats the best mode.. :P
so pappas are you recommending 1280x1080 DVCPROHD mode or the 720p/30 mode? also i'd like to know if you can change the box 'MJPEG Encoder 30fps->Xfps' to 50fps (pal version) or would this couse writing errors ?
sorry for my bad english ;)

adys
06-29-2010, 02:09 PM
BTW, what is going on when choosing H or L AVCHD in the camera? (the steps are FHD, SH, H, L)

From my tests its a little different from SH now, after the patch, so I guess they are also using the values of the AVCHD with some multiply values...

It will be good idea to find this multiply values and patch them so one can have option to have "low quality" setting to simple stuff that don't need top quality.

adys
06-29-2010, 07:02 PM
I done some tests tonight, with the settings of this thread for MPEG, when panning fast there are jumps in the video, same condition with C setting AVCHD native off, smooth panning.

garhodes
08-26-2010, 11:49 AM
I'm a big fan of the MJPEG codec and I've been working to get it to perform reliably on my GH1. I'm now upgrading cards to a Sandisk Class 10, hoping that will allow me to get 1440 X 1080 to work-- I really like that size and codec because it seems to both soften things (like grid noise) but also give a very rich image. I think I like it best with film mode: Nostalgic -2 contrast -2 shardpening and -2 NR, because it looks the most like s16mm. I haven't yet been able to get it to perform reliably-- especially when using a Panasonic auto lens (the 7mm-14mm which is great by the way). I'm hoping the new card makes the difference.

It seems like this thread has been abandoned, and not many people talking about MJPEG anymore... anyone still working with these settings?

I see that Pappas hasn't updated the first page yet for the new version.

I believe now there are only two boxes to check-- the width and heighth of the MJPEG-- and no longer the third box: MJPEG SIZE 1280m - SELECT--- unless I'm wrong and the field labeled 720p30 -> 1080p30 still needs to be checked?

At 720p I have had fairly good success with these other settings posted:

Q1=400, T1 = 4
Q2=300, T2 = 4
Q3=250, T3 = 4
Q4=188, T3 = 4

Although again, when the camera is especially taxed with auto functions it can fail (on a class 6 card anyway).

Anyone else still working with MJPEG out there?

Ryan McCarvill
08-26-2010, 05:23 PM
If only we could get 25p out of MJPEG - 30FPS is killer in PAL countries.

rambooc1
08-27-2010, 03:13 PM
If only we could get 25p out of MJPEG - 30FPS is killer in PAL countries.

Ryan, use TMPGenc 4.0 to convert to 25fps, it does a fantastic conversion that cuts into my other 25p footage flawlessly.

What specific issues are you having??

Rambo

oneted
08-27-2010, 03:49 PM
how do you convert to 24p?

mimirsan
08-30-2010, 11:04 AM
Anyone else still working with MJPEG out there?

I do...heck I even convert my 1080P avchds to 44mbps mjpeg to improve editing stability (Xilisoft converter ultimate 6...very good for this).
I have used modulr's settings and Pappasarts settings and blown away by the image quality (suck it 7d lol)...however sometimes even with my class 10 sandisk gave me one or two write errors recently while shooting a wedding (NOT GOOD!).
After a bit of searching Ive found these settings give me 50mb 100% stable mjpeg and in all honesty the image quality is pretty much the same as the 70mb (maybe a bit overkill with 70mb)

Quality settings (E1 to E4) - 352, 220, 200, 184
Table settings (E1 to E4) - 24, 24, 24, 24

1080 mjpeg give me write errors even with lowbitrate...so I use the 1440 which is super stable and looks great!
I do not use 4.2.2 colour..it makes things worse in my opinion!
Now only of there was progress on it to at least make it 25p (as im a brit)

garhodes
08-31-2010, 03:55 AM
Thank you for that. I'll try these out. It would certainly be nice to get a few more minutes of 2gb recording with similar quality. When setting the 1440 X 1080 size up with the new Ptools, do you leave the mjpeg size box "1280=>1920" blank? And then put your size changes in the other two boxes width and heigth? I only ask because I remember in the older versions you first had to check "1280=>" and then also the other two boxes.

mimirsan
08-31-2010, 09:32 AM
I leave the 1280 unchecked...also ptool has 1440x1080 as default in the resize options ;-)

Berk
08-31-2010, 08:36 PM
Hi
i just tried method #3
it is amazing!!!
thanks a lot Pappas and of course Vitally (tester13)

i could only record 3.5min then checked the file size. it was 1.9GB

my question:
is there a limit on recording time because of FAT32?
no spanning?

bsnyder
09-30-2010, 08:37 PM
Hello Pappas,

How do you quick convert 1440 to 1920 either in QT or better yet in the GH1 itself? Is there a setting in QT that you can check? I tried messing with visual settings under properties in QT but couldn't make it work. Thanks for giving me options. Bill

bsnyder
09-30-2010, 09:16 PM
Hello Pappas,

BTW...I can't get the GH1 to play anything but:
E1 Quality=150
E1 Table=86
E2 Quality=130
E2 Table=56
E3 Quality=115
E3 Table=26
E4 Quality=100
E4 Table=4

It won't play your standard:
Quality settings (E1 to E4) - 352, 220, 200, 184
Table settings (E1 to E4) - 24, 24, 24, 24

I am using an ADATA class 10 card.
I've used my ADATA class 6 perfectly for un-hacked GH1.

To be clear, the files play fine in QT just not the cam.

Do you have any other lower-end settings besides the above set listed that work on playback within the camera?

Thanks for your input.

Bill

omnidecay
10-16-2010, 09:43 PM
Are we no longer able to change to a 1440x1080 frame size? I can't find options in the Ptool v3.5 to pull this off. Also, the only 1080p settings are to upscale 720p...I feel like I am completely missing something.

Lpowell
10-16-2010, 11:39 PM
You can set MJPEG to 1440 width and 1080 height in the MJPEG settings, just as my Anamorphic Patch set 1920 width and 810 height.

However, I think a frame with 1920 horizontal resolution produces better looking results than a frame with 1080 vertical resolution. Our eyes are designed with binocular vision to be more sensitive in horizontal discrimination, and relatively less sensitive to vertical resolution. That's why interlaced video doesn't usually look as terrible as it actually is.

omnidecay
10-17-2010, 12:13 AM
Thanks for the tip lpowell...idk why I didn't just assume that right away. Vertical vs horizontal huh? I hear a shootout in the near future :-)

Bobomatic
10-18-2010, 08:45 AM
I just tried the QUALITY SETTINGS [ 384, 330, 300, 276 ] TABLE SETTINGS [ 24, 24, 24, 24 ] for 720/30p and the results were very good. I was shooting trees and bushes at 1/60 on a windy day and getting a phenomenal average bitrate of 74 according to my bitrate viewer with no recording failures on my 8gb scandisk class 10. The colors and saturation on my nikon 50mm 1.8 have never looked better. I just may be an mjpeg convert. The depth of color looks really, really good and reminds me of my old kodachrome days.

PappasArts
02-12-2011, 01:21 PM
I just tried the QUALITY SETTINGS [ 384, 330, 300, 276 ] TABLE SETTINGS [ 24, 24, 24, 24 ] for 720/30p and the results were very good. I was shooting trees and bushes at 1/60 on a windy day and getting a phenomenal average bitrate of 74 according to my bitrate viewer with no recording failures on my 8gb scandisk class 10. The colors and saturation on my nikon 50mm 1.8 have never looked better. I just may be an mjpeg convert. The depth of color looks really, really good and reminds me of my old kodachrome days.

Hey Robert, I haven't looked at this thread in while, and missed these posts. Yeah the mpeg mode is awesome. Nikon 50mm is always a nice lens...


Pappas

Jordell Jarnell
02-15-2011, 05:55 AM
I have read each and every page of this thread but I admit to being at a loss as to how to apply page 1 settings. There are versions of Ptool no longer available, there are settings mentioned that no longer exist in Ptool 3.51d (MJPEG 1280p width,MJPEG 1280p height,MJPEG SIZE 1280m) and there are settings mentioned by some appliers that seem to be part of this patch but aren't on page one (buffer sizes, etc.).
I've attached a .ini (as the required .txt) that represents my translation of all this into Ptool 3.51d and firmware 1.32. I used the parms from Method 3 (unnamed, last method). I would greatly appreciate corrections in order to achieve the great results of this patch. (The .ini uses 4:2:2 as its "default"). Thanks.
P.S. Although posted in its own thread, no action. So, is it possible to combine Pappas #3 with lpowell 75 Mbps Hi performance patch, i.e. essentially replace the quality/table values of it with the Pappas values? Note this question is a logical follow on to the above, i.e. are there values (e.g. bitrate, GOPs) that could conflict taking this approach?

PappasArts
02-16-2011, 02:39 PM
P.S. Although posted in its own thread, no action. So, is it possible to combine Pappas #3 with lpowell 75 Mbps Hi performance patch, i.e. essentially replace the quality/table values of it with the Pappas values? Note this question is a logical follow on to the above, i.e. are there values (e.g. bitrate, GOPs) that could conflict taking this approach?

Hi Jordell,

I can understand your frustration. Ptool has changed many times - causing this issue with old directions not current anymore. Obviously bit rate settings/gop don't relate to the Mpeg mode like they do with AVCHD. Later I will try to look at the new Ptool and see if there is a way to update the settings.

As to the #3 settings- I assume your referring to the 720P 80mbit setting. This is one of the best of the Mpeg. It's very stable.
This was a blowup test from this setting http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?212609-MJPEG-high-bit-rate-footage-stills-amp-comparisons.&p=2009705#post2009705
These too http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?212609-MJPEG-high-bit-rate-footage-stills-amp-comparisons.&p=2011043#post2011043
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?212609-MJPEG-high-bit-rate-footage-stills-amp-comparisons.

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

Lpowell
02-16-2011, 03:07 PM
...is it possible to combine Pappas #3 with lpowell 75 Mbps Hi performance patch, i.e. essentially replace the quality/table values of it with the Pappas values?
Yes, in PTool the MJPEG settings are completely separate from the AVCHD settings, and you can freely combine MJPEG and AVCHD settings from different INI patch files. For some insight on how the MJPEG settings in my Peak Performance Patch were fine-tuned for a broad range of shooting conditions, the following discussion may be of interest:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?213425-MJPEG-Encoder-Research-no-questions-here&p=2244539&viewfull=1#post2244539

Jordell Jarnell
02-18-2011, 06:34 AM
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/images/icons/icon1.gif @ lPowell Thank you for the reply; it really helps. Also, with the latest pTool (3.51d) I assume other parms that used to be of interest to MJPEG modders aren't really needed and that the Quality/Table parms are the ones that, by far, most affect MJPEG's performance. Much thanks for the link; I had passed over it briefly but it certainly paid to look more closely. And, as I don't want to go against the no questions request, I noted that there doesn't seem to be a definitive answer to the exchange here http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?213425-MJPEG-Encoder-Research-no-questions-here/page6: "I'd be most interested to see a comparison of this set of MJPEG patches using a low-light scene with sharply-focused color gradients rather than busy details." Does the opinion "From my tests, it appears that your Q2/T2 settings are totally sufficient for a high detail, sharp-focus scene. Probably overkill (wasted bandwidth) for a low-detail, low-light, soft-focus, or shallow-DOF scene." hold? Or, putting it more directly, overkill or not, are there other settings more suitable for that particular situation? P.S. Sorry for kind of raking over ploughed ground but there may be a bit more of that coming as those of us who can now affort GH1's on the used market come on the train y'all have been on for the past couple of years - and let it be said we add our most grateful thanks for all of the pioneering work done on the GH1.

Jordell Jarnell
02-18-2011, 07:01 AM
@ PappasArts Thank you for the reply. As noted in the reply to lPowell, I apologize for raking over ploughed ground; there may be a few posts from us who are taking advantage of the GH2 to get a GH1 and are now only getting on a train you guys have been running for a couple of years. I think it amounts to us trying to sift the many, many posts on the GH1 hack to cull the conclusions of all the hard work done on the GH1 as the GH2 will undoubtedly command future attention and our ability to make a contribution is next to nil. Don't like the "vultury" sound of that but it's probably reality so I greatly appreciate any help in simply getting the context for some past work done using pTool versions that aren't applicable today. As also noted in the reply, if it's now simply a Quality/Table entry with the other parms for MJPEG no longer of interest, I now know how to do that but I will certainly be interested to know if it's now that simple so look forward to your checking out 3.51d and its usability in this context. Thank you and all the others for the pioneering work done on the GH1.

Lpowell
02-18-2011, 10:22 AM
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/images/icons/icon1.gif...I assume other parms that used to be of interest to MJPEG modders aren't really needed and that the Quality/Table parms are the ones that, by far, most affect MJPEG's performance... Does the opinion "From my tests, it appears that your Q2/T2 settings are totally sufficient for a high detail, sharp-focus scene. Probably overkill (wasted bandwidth) for a low-detail, low-light, soft-focus, or shallow-DOF scene." hold? Or, putting it more directly, overkill or not, are there other settings more suitable for that particular situation?
In addition to the Qn/Tn settings, 4:2:2 color depth and MJPEG width and height settings make a direct impact on the amount of data packed into each video frame. There are internal limits on frame data size as well as bitrate that cannot be exceeded without undermining reliability.

While low-detail, low-light, and/or soft-focus scenes do not require high bitrates, they do benefit from using Quantization Matrix Table 4. This encodes image details and gradients with minimum quantization loss, which is essential for avoiding banding and posterization. The Q1/T1 settings are tuned for these conditions, not for highly detailed, sharply focused scenes.

Jordell Jarnell
02-20-2011, 12:26 PM
First, thank you for your replies and patience; it may be starting to get through. I take it that the bitrates for MJPEG are governed by the AVCHD Compression parms even though to the really uninitiated (me) it would appear, from the title, they would control only the AVCHD bitrates. This comes from simply comparing the 75 & 60 .ini's. Given all this, my first patch card of choice is the 75er with 24p enabled fully aware of possible problems, backed up by the 75er "native". Generally I'll have a small laptop available for playback and won't miss the convenience of in camera playback of the MJPEG; hey, got a back up card for that capability too!

Lpowell
02-20-2011, 07:11 PM
I take it that the bitrates for MJPEG are governed by the AVCHD Compression parms even though to the really uninitiated (me) it would appear, from the title, they would control only the AVCHD bitrates.
No, the MJPEG patch settings are completely separate and unaffected by the AVCHD settings. PTool helpfully lists the MJPEG and AVCHD patches under separate headings to make it easy to tell them apart.

Jordell Jarnell
02-21-2011, 11:10 AM
Yes, there are headings but they don't seem to reveal the secret sauce! Comparing H and I doesn't obviously reveal how MJPEG gets to 75Mbps from 60 as pTool indicates they are identical in the MJPEG area except for 720p30 height. I don't get how MJPEG bitrates are modified.

meinyvr
02-24-2011, 01:02 PM
can this playback in camera? and if mot what is the highest bitrate patch mpeg that can? link?

thaks

Lpowell
02-24-2011, 01:08 PM
can this playback in camera? and if mot what is the highest bitrate patch mpeg that can? link?
Check the link in my signature for my Reliable In-Camera Playback Patch.

meinyvr
02-24-2011, 10:06 PM
Check the link in my signature for my Reliable In-Camera Playback Patch.

thanks.


i'm just a little confused about the whole 24p wrapper thing. What is the advantage of having it checked? is it only that you save time transcoding (sp) it from 60i to 24p....or does it change the quality of the colours etc?