Why is that?The 720p AVC-HD is good but it really just can't hold upto the 100 mb/sec MJPEG right now.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Why is that?The 720p AVC-HD is good but it really just can't hold upto the 100 mb/sec MJPEG right now.
Why is that?
I can confirm this weirdness- I've seen this happen too. Also- cover the lens with your hand etc, and slowly reveal the chart, and it will record for a short while before error.
If recording is started with chart exposed- no covering- error right out the gate. This was in 24PN research though. Still the same thing.
There must be some kind of codec bit rate analyzer that checks the image before recording, just a guess
Pappas
I can confirm this weirdness- I've seen this happen too. Also- cover the lens with your hand etc, and slowly reveal the chart, and it will record for a short while before error.
If recording is started with chart exposed- no covering- error right out the gate. This was in 24PN research though. Still the same thing.
There must be some kind of codec bit rate analyzer that checks the image before recording, just a guess
Pappas
I guess what I'm getting at: is what's your definition of "better?" MJPEG 720p is 30 fps vs AVCHD's 60 fps, so these are quite different beasts.Well I would say that the 100 mb/sec MJPEG 720p is better than any other form of 720p. Even the 720p @ 60 FPS on the GH1.
Now, I am not saying that the MJPEG 720p is better than the GH1 1080p AVC-HD. There is a clear difference in favor of the 1080p in that case.
Does anyone prefer 720p AVC-HD over ultra high bit rate 4:2:2 MJPEG?
I guess what I'm getting at: is what's your definition of "better?" MJPEG 720p is 30 fps vs AVCHD's 60 fps, so these are quite different beasts.
Motion looks very different at 60 fps than it does at 30 fps. Personally I would not "compromise" footage where such differences are critical, like action. Some things change -- Youtube now offers resolutions higher than 1080, but some things don't -- once you shoot something more often than not you can't go back and have another go at it.Since there isn’t really a great way to share 720p @ 60 FPS right now I can’t realize any of the benefits of the increased frame rate.
modulr - was wondering if your approach could be generalized as follows...
1. For each quality level L=1,2,3,4 define a reference frame with L=1 being the lowest detail (eg., headshot) and L=4 being the highest detail (as you have done). L=2 might be an indoor still life and L=3 might be an outdoor scene with modest detail.
2. Find the maximum value of Q4 that will safely encode all highest detail scenes (as you have done). Set Q1=Q2=Q3=Q4, shoot the highest detail L=4 scene and gradually increase Q4 until it breaks on your card and then back off.
3. Find the value of Q3 that maximizes the quality factor for the L=3 scene (or indeed any constant mixture of scenes). Set Q1=Q2=Q3, shoot the medium high detail L=3 scene (or any known mixture of scenes), and adjust Q3 to maximize the number of frames at 100% quality. Now you know Q3 and Q4.
4. Repeat for Q1-Q2 on medium detail scene and then Q1 alone for low detail scene.
Following this approach, it should be possible to optimize the four MJPEG quality settings for the card you're using and for the specific scenes that you're shooting. All you need to achieve the optimal values is a repeatable sequence of images with a representative distribution of image detail.
Motion looks very different at 60 fps than it does at 30 fps. Personally I would not "compromise" footage where such differences are critical, like action. Some things change -- Youtube now offers resolutions higher than 1080, but some things don't -- once you shoot something more often than not you can't go back and have another go at it.
Not to mention, the MJPEG codec is capable of very cool time lapse, when you set the framerate to something like 2fps with the ptool, record some stuff with an very slow shutter, then jump in dumpster (osx) and change the frame rate in the header to 24 or 30fps. Instant time lapse with no rendering.
Perhaps you are right on the over-thinking part. I believe in using the right tool for the right job :thumbsup: Which requires thorough understanding of both requirements of the job and the tool itself. By the way, I was reminded in another thread of something that pertains to this discussion. Since GF1 is not capable of shooting at 60 fps natively, those benefits I mentioned only pertain to GH1.imho you are kinda over thinking this. MJPEG is a tool... it's just another option, and this one in particular yields very high quality results. There is absolutely nothing wrong with shooting 30fps.
imho you are kinda over thinking this. MJPEG is a tool... it's just another option, and this one in particular yields very high quality results. There is absolutely nothing wrong with shooting 30fps.
Not to mention, the MJPEG codec is capable of very cool time lapse, when you set the framerate to something like 2fps with the ptool, record some stuff with an very slow shutter, then jump in dumpster (osx) and change the frame rate in the header to 24 or 30fps. Instant time lapse with no rendering.