100Mbps Max Latitude Native 24/25p Patch

roxics said:
Just a guess, but it would seem to me that an anamorphic lens is optically capturing more data/detail (wider aspect) and is cramming all those visuals into the same amount of space on the sensor. Like smushing a bigger piece of foam into a garbage bag than the foam pieces you usually use. It will fit, but it will put more tension on the bag, stretching it to its limits.

Do you notice an overall higher bitrate when shooting the same shot with the anamorphic than you do with flat lenses? If so, that would seem to be the answer.
Click to expand...

Yep. That seems about right.
 
Hmmm, maybe an opportunity to apply Andrew Reid's theory, to wit: "The perceived wisdom with anamorphic lenses so far has been to ignore the resolution gain they are designed to produce with 35mm film, and crush the image vertically to get the wider aspect ratio.So for example a 2x anamorphic lens would reduce vertical height by half, and the aspect ratio would be 3.55:1 giving a 1920x540 widescreen image. The digital rulebook has always told us that a digital zoom of any kind makes for a soft image. By instead stretching 1920 pixels to 2x the width, and keeping the height at 1080p with an 2x anamorphic lens must hurt the image? Actually since an anamorphic is optically packing in more horizontal detail than vertical, although the maximum resolving power of the sensor is still limited to 1920 pixels, quite unlike 35mm film, the stretch does not hurt.
By stretching 1920 x2 and giving a 3840x1080 3.55:1 aspect ratio image, you have two advantages:
I. You do not lose vertical resolution in a squeeze (or a crop if no anamorphic is used to produce cinemascope)
II. You can crop horizontally down from 3840 to produce a less extremely wide 2.35:1 cinemascope image from a 2x anamorphic on a 16:9 DSLR
The 2x stretch from 1920 to 3840 is a way to avoid a squash from 1080 to 540 vertically, you are gaining vertical resolution - or at least keeping vertical resolution 1080p whilst achieving the wider aspect ratio the lens is intended to produce."
Of course, appropriate factors would have to be applied for 1.33 and other non 2x anamorphics.
 
Andrew Reid said:
"The perceived wisdom with anamorphic lenses so far has been to ignore the resolution gain they are designed to produce with 35mm film, and crush the image vertically to get the wider aspect ratio.So for example a 2x anamorphic lens would reduce vertical height by half, and the aspect ratio would be 3.55:1 giving a 1920x540 widescreen image. The digital rulebook has always told us that a digital zoom of any kind makes for a soft image. By instead stretching 1920 pixels to 2x the width, and keeping the height at 1080p with an 2x anamorphic lens must hurt the image? Actually since an anamorphic is optically packing in more horizontal detail than vertical, although the maximum resolving power of the sensor is still limited to 1920 pixels, quite unlike 35mm film, the stretch does not hurt..."
Click to expand...
It sounds like Reid is conflating image detail with sensor and/or lens resolution. While the anamorphic's compressed horizontal field of view increases the perceived density of image detail, the horizontal resolving power of the lens and image sensor remain unchanged, and the maximum possible resolution remains 1920x1080 pixels (or 1280x720 in SH/HD modes).

If you stretch an FHD 1920x1080 frame to 3840x1080 in post, you'll get a softer upscaled image, regardless of whether you're using an anamorphic lens or not. By contrast, scaling a 1920x1080 frame down to 1920x540 can produce a sharper result, since the original image contains twice as much vertical image detail as the downscaled version. In short, anamorphic lenses cannot produce higher resolution than the camera's native frame size.
 
Lpowell, I think that I've seen this question before on this forum, but I can't find it again (too many messages).... Does reliability of 100Mbps patch improve if Native mode is not checked? Now I use 75Mbps patch and it works perfectly. Will I gain something by using 100Mbps without Native mode? Namely, 75Mbps patch was made with older version of Vitaly's SW.
 
Yes, the 100Mbps Max Latitude Patch can be used with the Native 24/25p patch turned off, and it will then record interlaced 1080p video files. While it appears to work as reliably in interlaced mode as in Native 24/25p, I wasn't able to do enough testing to verify which version is statistically more reliable. If you'd like to try this out, I'd be very interested in your results.

The 75Mbps Peak Performance Patch was designed to work only in interlaced mode when recording FHD 1080p video. In addition, it works in SH 720p at 50/60p and produces the highest bitrate in those modes of any of the patches I've developed. If this patch has worked well for your purposes, you can look forward to the V2 version I'm planning on releasing next week.
 
lpowell said:
If you'd like to try this out, I'd be very interested in your results.
Click to expand...

I'll let you know if I experience any difference in reliability!

If this patch has worked well for your purposes, you can look forward to the V2 version I'm planning on releasing next week.
Click to expand...

This is great! It seems that you are never resting... :)
 
lpowell said:
The 75Mbps Peak Performance Patch was designed to work only in interlaced mode when recording FHD 1080p video. In addition, it works in SH 720p at 50/60p and produces the highest bitrate in those modes of any of the patches I've developed. If this patch has worked well for your purposes, you can look forward to the V2 version I'm planning on releasing next week.
Click to expand...

Can't wait for Version 2 of this one Mr Powell .... i think i might nominate you for a Nobel.

UPDATE - V2 HAS BEEN RELEASED AND I RECOMMEND YOU CHECK IT OUT - AWESOME MR POWELL.
 
Last edited:
Aack. Just read 27 pages of this thread to catch up. Thankfully most comments are direct and not too verbose! Looking forward to completing my hack. One question for lpowell, will the NEW 75Mbps Peak Perf Patch record interlaced only?
 
Hi guys I just installed the patch: 100Mbps Max Latitude Native 24/25p Patch
It works except quicktime says the file are 30fps?? Is that true? how can I change to 24?
Also, how do you convert easily the anamorphic files to play without deformation?
And Finally, is it real 1080p near resolution, or a kind of upscaled 720p?

Thanks for your help ! I am lost.

PS: I am a mac user
 
Last edited:
Adamorph said:
Thanks for your help ! I am lost.

PS: I am a mac user
Click to expand...

Ohhhh it is really hard to resist a Anti-Apple-User joke here!
(Get real. Get Avisynth-ed... etc etc)
MPEG is always 30 fps with the GH1(3) this has been documented on many threads. Likewise LPowell documents how to scale his anamorph Mpeg-patch to full HD (or 720p) by interpeting the format size video in Premiere or FCP. It is very easy take a look at the thread, search is your friend. (mpeg anamorph LPowell).
For those without an anamorphic adapter, this patch can also be used with a standard lens to record clips that can be post-processed to produce FHD-sized 1920x1080 MJPEG videos at 30p. To do so, simply take the 1920x810 video produced by the patch and use a video editor to stretch it vertically to 1080p. The resulting image will have the correct, undistorted FHD aspect ratio and show only a minimal decrease in sharpness from the vertical resampling (preferably using bicubic interpolation).
Click to expand...

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...x810-MJPEG-Mode/page5&highlight=mpeg+anamorph

and exactly instructions for Mac-users who need their hands held:

Anamorphic transcode in Final Cut:
1. Import all your Anamorphic 1920x810 footage in Final Cut
2. Make new Sequence with settings
Frame size: 1920x1080, Aspect ratio: (Custom 16x9)
Pixel aspect ration: Square
Field dominance: none
Editing databese: 30
Anamorphic 16:9 checked
3. Drop your footage to timeline
5. Pop up "Do you want to change sequence settings to match clip settings?" Select NO
6. Again go to Sequence setting (cmd+0) and uncheck box for Anamorphic 16:9

And thats it! Your footage is automatically optimized to 1920x1080 and ready for editing.

Good luck and best... n.m.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for this great answer! you re the man

But something I dont get, I tried by myself to put in 24p in ptools
there is a box I checked and the test I made seems to work (??) whereas you say it is not possible

What am I doing wrong (or right?)
Is it not native? Thats maybe the point?? OR IS IT FREAKING 720p upscaled in 1980x810??
and why the patch is called [h=1] 100Mbps Max Latitude Native 24/25p Patch [/h]
24p?? no? Aouch my head hurt please help me !!
BTW what is the best 24p patch then?

Thanks, I still lost

PS: I am a mac user
 
Last edited:
lpowell said:
No, the FHD 1080p mode in the Max Latitude Patch records non-interlaced Native 24p files in NTSC mode, as does the Blackout-Powell Patch. Native 25p FHD recording is selected by putting the camera in PAL mode, which also changes the SH video mode from 60p to 50p.
Click to expand...

To clarify further then. UNLESS the Max Latitude patch is being used in Pal-mode, it records FHD 1080p 24p native AND has an SH mode with 60p?
 
I have an anamorphic question. When using a 2x anamorphic lens on the MPEG setting (30fps), what should I adjust the patch dimensions to in order to get a more typical 2.66 cinemascope aspect ratio (or anything wide but more typical of standard aspect ratios). I followed one thread where the math was getting out of control.
 
Which patch for 30fps/1080P?

Which patch for 30fps/1080P?

I confess to being a little confused by the options.
I have a client that in short order needs 1920x1080 material at 30fps progressive, and I'm not sure which patch to use. AVCHD/MJPEG, FHD/SH, frame rate, and resolution options rather muddle the choices. Can someone clarify for me which patch would work best (or at all) for 1080P/30? This is mostly architectural, so not too heavy on movement.

I would love to see a simple table, guide or chart that lists patches and their options/specs, all in one place. I'd even volunteer to put it together if I could enlist assistance from the developers and users. Has anyone made such a chart?

Thanks.

~~~~~~
Chris Mosio
Cinematographer - Seattle
www.MosioMedia.com
 
Mjpeg records in 30p I believe. There is a patch for 1080p Mjpeg somewhere here. Ignore the rest and focus on that as that may be what you are looking for. Large files can be achieved so have a fast card.
 
sean90291 said:
When using a 2x anamorphic lens on the MPEG setting (30fps), what should I adjust the patch dimensions to in order to get a more typical 2.66 cinemascope aspect ratio.
Click to expand...
With 2X anamorphic adapters, I recommend using MJPEG VGA mode in the Max Latitude Anamorphic Patch. This will produce 1920x720 videos with a 2.66:1 aspect ratio that do not require post-production stretching.
 
I'm testing this patch lately and I have the "error due to writing speed limit...".

I got this error with 3 different cards. I've done a quick bench of this 3 cards on my laptop sd card reader.

Kingston 8GB class 6 = 10 200 kb/sec
Transcend 16GB class 10 = 17 200 kb/sec
SanDisk Extreme HD Video 16GB class 10 = 17 700 kb/sec

So we can see a huge difference between the class 6 and the class 10 (by the way don't waste your money on this particular SanDisk sd card since its not really better than cheap Transcend).

After that I filmed the same scene with the 3 cards using this patch and 1080@24p setting. I was shooting at my backyard including grass and trees... producing kinda high bitrates.

With the 3 cards I had writing speed error. So I'm wondering if it's really concerning the sd cards or something else since I don't really have more errors with the class 6 card.

Is it due to the 24p native patch ? I didn't have time to test with another patch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top