133 Mbit Mpeg clip (Stalin hack)

Andrew Reid said:
Ipowell, it is not so important to stamp a name on some numbers, rather I am more interested in results. I am looking forward to your tests.
Click to expand...

Ok, just to make sure I get that right what u just wrote.
You said to lpowell: well, I'm more interested in results, so do your tests so I can use your settings. When settings are available they belong to the comunity, credits to lpowell are dispensable and once I made some minor changes or transfer these settings to a new camera I stamp my own name on the "numbers".(yes i saw your eoshd 80Mbit settings)

I don't know what to say about that.... maybe.... WTF?!

Whenever someone asks me about my GH1, I tell that I applied the hack by Vitaliy Kiselev and I am running settings by lpowell. ptool and settings are for free why not respect the work.

I really hope lpowell keeps sharing his work, but would understand if not...
 
Yeah aside from all the childish banter...one thing remains...Mr Reid still "tags" "his settings" with "EOSHD". Its understandable why Lpowell would be annoyed.

Simple answer...Give credit where credits due...and lose these "blackouteoshdpowell" tags....and share the love.
 
The honest use of "Tags" is not only appropriate and sure helps keep track of alternative settings. As far as I'm concerned if someone puts the effort into developing USEFUL NEW settings they're entitled to a bit of acknowledgement....
 
mimirsan said:
Yeah aside from all the childish banter...one thing remains...Mr Reid still "tags" "his settings" with "EOSHD". Its understandable why Lpowell would be annoyed.

Simple answer...Give credit where credits due...and lose these "blackouteoshdpowell" tags....and share the love.
Click to expand...
Give it a rest, people.
 
I'm fully aware of the fact, there's more important things to be developed, as far as the GH2 firmware hack is concerned... But I don't have the time for that and don't care that much about fame - anyway, more interesting perhaps: I just got my new card, did some fast test shots - and got up to 160 Mbit (Gspot value = 163910 Kbit; Quicktime says 180 Mbit) ;-)
Settings were 600/450/230/200 (Table 4/4/4/4), card Sandisc Extreme 30 MB/s.

Cheers, Michiel


Edit: just discovered, I partly reacted to a post which is quite old, didn't notice page 3 before ...
 
Last edited:
FlyingDutchman said:
I'm fully aware of the fact, there's more important things to be developed, as far as the GH2 firmware hack is concerned... But I don't have the time for that and don't care that much about fame - anyway, more interesting perhaps: I just got my new card, did some fast test shots - and got up to 160 Mbit (Gspot value = 163910 Kbit; Quicktime says 180 Mbit) ;-)
Settings were 600/450/230/200 (Table 4/4/4/4), card Sandisc Extreme 30 MB/s.

Cheers, Michiel


Edit: just discovered, I partly reacted to a post which is quite old, didn't notice page 3 before ...
Click to expand...

I've kinda lost track of what you guys are doing. are you achieving these results with the gh1(17)??
can someone give me the "cliff notes" version of what's going on, and how these "patches" are working out?? any test video?
 
Well the fastest clip is actually even faster, but only 5 secs and looks terrible - simply (way too) fast moving trees - now I may be vain, but I don't wanna contaminate my Vimeo account with too much test-bullshit :grin:
I was still thinking of a way, to make tests which yield similar results and don't look that terrible, but if you like, I can also upload it somewhere else... Or well wft I'll put it on Vimeo anyway and delete it in 2 weeks, who cares
 
Well because it's just a bitrate shot - I already wrote in this thread as well as in Vimeo, it doesn't look good - it's simply a bitrate test, for fun! If you're shooting from a tripod, you probably don't achieve these kind of bitrates; but you might have some other testing purposes (like comparing image quality).
For me, it's not uninteresting to know, what the CPU etc. are capable of; but that's personal of course.
 
If you have the time and means... A good test would be fast running water, in the whole frame.... this should be enough motion to push the bitrate skyhigh, but also will give an more interesting and usable video for the viewers.
 
I checked that out a couple of days ago, hence the 133 Mbit clip at Vimeo - there was also some waterfall there, but it was too fast & too little details. The good thing about the other motive was, there was a huge lot of contrast. Then the other thing is, it's best if you have quite a wide DoF, but this is complicated when zooming into subjects (like running water), especially in indoor situations (like this zoo kind of thing, where I filmed the waterfalls etc.).

But don't worry I have some ideas for nice settings, or anyway less boring than trees, to test it upon - you'll see it soon :-)
 
Something locked off but with a similar amount of detail might be a bit more useful if you have time - the camera movement is a bit distracting. Thanks for posting anyway
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top