Thank you, my good friend
I did a rebuild without the audio patch, and everything works fine now!
Has anyone done a comparison with and without the patch on 720 avchd footage? Any improvements in this mode?
AVCHD high bitrate tests- MUD FREE footage
- Thread starter jobless
- Start date
Thank you, my good friend
I did a rebuild without the audio patch, and everything works fine now!
Has anyone done a comparison with and without the patch on 720 avchd footage? Any improvements in this mode?
headintheclouds46
New member
Setting #3 works great for me. I'm using a SanDisk Extreme class 10 card.
Just donated. This is great work by tester!
headintheclouds46
New member
AVCHD 720P 50fps bitrate is 44.7Mbps . M-JEPG 720P 30fps is 59.8Mbps. 1 minute recording with no problems.
Last edited:
bumkicho
Well-known member
Testing out higher bitrate AVCHD although the setting I used is not as high as what some people try. Shot with 28-70mm fd with 2x extender, 80-200mm lens with 2x extender, 20mm pancake lens, all on a monopod. Color graded in AE CS4. All I can say is this higher bitrate codec shines when color grading.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Posted this in the other thread, but ... wait until you see 1080/24pN footage patched with the "D" settings, playing back on a 67" screen. It's fantastic. If you have a blu-ray player with an SD slot on it, or a PS3 or something, you should be able to take the card straight out of the camera and play it on the big screen.
x_WOrPIG_x
Well-known member
I just spent about an hour testing different footage and testing the " #3 " setting and a few others had this problem. Everything I recorded did not stop or freeze ( AVCHD 1080 stuff ) but when I went to go upload it ( via usb cable to computer ) It froze on the PLEASE WAIT . . . screen and i had to remove the battery. ( I tried 2 different cards and they both did the same ) Anyone know?
sammysammy
Well-known member
x worpig take a still pic ,just make sure the last thing on the card is not a patched 24p file, and the usb connection will wrk..
Barry do you mind sharing the D settings .i also tried to find it on here with out any luck,thanks!
Barry do you mind sharing the D settings .i also tried to find it on here with out any luck,thanks!
Barry_Green
Moderator
x_WOrPIG_x
Well-known member
Thanks.
When I uploaded my clips something weird happend. I only got 0.5mb/s for each clip. Just a bunch of choppin blocks. I was using:
Video buffer 84000000
Video bitrate adjustment 3)60000000
Overall bitrate adjustment 3)62000000
Limiting bitrate adjustment 3)70000000
sammysammy
Well-known member
Thanks Barry!
sammysammy
Well-known member
x worpig , these settings are higher than the D settings, im not sure if it has to do with your card speed with those settings..
I'm tempted to give this all a shot, but I do have some questions about all this and not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I'll do it anyways.
I always prefer to shoot 1080p. Which is going to be better overall quality for 1080p @ 23.98fps with these hacked firmwares, AVCHD or MJPEG?
With AVCHD, aside from not having to do pulldown in post is there any quality advantage to shooting native 24p in camera? This is a concern because I'd want to be able to play back shots in camera.
Also, do these improved bitrates help with the banding in GH1 footage?
Thanks!
I always prefer to shoot 1080p. Which is going to be better overall quality for 1080p @ 23.98fps with these hacked firmwares, AVCHD or MJPEG?
With AVCHD, aside from not having to do pulldown in post is there any quality advantage to shooting native 24p in camera? This is a concern because I'd want to be able to play back shots in camera.
Also, do these improved bitrates help with the banding in GH1 footage?
Thanks!
The 1080P MJPEG is just upscaled, and Barry's test shows AVCHD 1080P has more detail.
I asked the same in the main thread, tester13 said 60i is better for quality. Plus it can be played back in camera.
Barry_Green
Moderator
That one's easy -- MJPG is still 30.000 fps, AVCHD is 23.976. So if you want 24p, you want AVCHD.
Perhaps. I have to test this further, but it's possible that the native 24p is using progressive 4:2:0 chroma, vs. the 60i-pulldown version using interlaced 4:2:0. Progressive 4:2:0 is just quite a bit better. But I haven't tested properly for that yet.
Depends on what you mean by banding. Are you talking about fixed-pattern noise, or are you talking about gradient banding in the skies or on flat walls or such? Because it should have a huge effect on improving the gradient banding (that happens in an 8-bit codec when the compression is taxed too much) but I can't see how it would have any effect on fixed-pattern noise.
Barry_Green
Moderator
My testing is preliminary. What I found was that the 1080p MJPG was wrong somehow, and it is my guess that it's an upscaling artifact. I don't want that proclaimed as absolute fact until we know for sure. All that I'm prepared to say for sure is -- look at the picture of the concentric circles, there's obviously something going on with the MJPG that shouldn't be there, and I'm guessing that it's from uprezzing.
It is my guess that the 1080P MJPG is really just 720p MJPG being blown up into a 1080p frame. And if that's the case, you'd probably be better off just shooting 720p MJPG, as Pappas has been doing. You can certainly do a better upscale in post than the in-camera upscaler, I'd bet.
Not sure that the statement could be directly interpreted to say that 60i is "better for quality." I believe what tester13 said (although I could be wrong) is that the 60i version was showing higher bitrates. But that doesn't necessarily mean it's better quality! It might be requiring higher bitrates because 60i is more complex to compress than 24p is. My guess is that on a strictly quality basis, the 24pN would look better than the embedded-in-60i. But even if that's true, you'd still have to ask "how much better, and is that improvement worth the inconvenience of not being able to play back in-camera".
Okay I thought I saw an option in Ptool to make MJPEG 24p. I must be mistaken.
That would be good to know and I'll wait for results on that. Color is very important to me, although I've been happy with color from the camera thusfar without the hack.
I meant the gradient banding on sky shots and flat wall shots. FPN hasn't bothered me that much. I usually put those things out of focus (slightly or very much) whenever possible to reduce the noise.
Thanks for your answers!
Barry_Green
Moderator
You're not mistaken, the option is there. It just doesn't work right (at least not yet). So far it appears that the camera is still running at 30fps, but the encoder only records 24, so it effectively is just dropping one frame out of every six. So not "real" 24p at all.
Ah, well I thought it had basically been determined that it was upscaled 720P. Guess that's not for sure yet.
Well I assumed since tester had it added to the FAQ that he was saying it was the best mode to use, bitrate-wise. His answer was a bit brief, though, so I guess we can't say that for sure. Although the FAQ does say:
"And it has also been suggested to record in 60i as the files will have a better bitrate"
Of course, that says bitrate and not quality. So I should be more precise with my words.
Barry_Green
Moderator
I just don't want anyone taking a first impression and running with it as if it's a known fact. We need more testing.
Yes, but "better bitrate" doesn't necessarily mean "better quality". That's the distinction I was trying to draw. The question over which is "better quality" is, in my mind at least, unanswered as of yet. Some direct side-by-sides of repeatable circumstances would need to be done. Or, ideally, we'd need two cameras that could be set up side-by-side; that'd be the right way to do it.