Burn in process: Experiment for validity

S

Shinobi Productions

Active member
Hello all,

I bought a new GH1 from B&H a few weeks ago and had been aware of the speculation around the "burn in process" [leaving the camera on movie mode with lens cap on for days]. The process claiming to decrease artifacting/noise in darkened areas in shots.

With some people claiming to see vast improvement and some thinking that the process is pure fiction, I propose people post to this thread with their own controlled experiments and their results.

Having done an experiment myself, I have noticed a difference in some of the shots in my test. This however does not necessarily mean their is a correlation to the burn in process. For such a claim, there would need to be many more controlled experiments with other users showing similar results.

I have made this test with the lens cap on because scenery/subject shots can vary greatly with results and interpretation. The camera was not warm [had been off for long periods of time before each test and let cool down after burn in].

So, for my test and results:

BURN IN:
Hooked up camera to AC power for uninterrupted use. Kit 14-140mm lens in place. Took highest quality JPG photos with lens cap on at various settings. Took video with lens cap on at various settings. Switched camera to creative movie mode 1080P 24, ISO 1600 1/50 shutter. Camera was on tripod, lens cap on and was left for two days. Camera was shut off and left for two days. Post tests were done at the same setting as pre tests. All tests were conducting in my equipment/dark room. See bellow for specific test results.

PRE EXPERIMENT CONDITION:

Still shot [highest JPEG setting] with lens cap on stock 14-140mm lens
Full manual control
No IExposure
F/4
25 Sec shutter
ISO 1600

VIRGIN CAMERA IMAGE FILE [no level boosting/alteration[
P1000358.JPG


POST EXPERIMENT CONDITION:

Still shot [highest JPEG setting] with lens cap on stock 14-140mm lens
Full manual control
No IExposure
F/4
25 Sec shutter
ISO 1600

VIRGIN CAMERA IMAGE FILE [no level boosting/alteration[
P1000359.JPG


XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX


PRE EXPERIMENT CONDITION:

Still shot [highest JPEG setting] with lens cap on stock 14-140mm lens
Full manual control
No IExposure
F/4
30 Sec shutter
ISO 3200

VIRGIN CAMERA IMAGE FILE [no level boosting/alteration[
P1000356.JPG


POST EXPERIMENT CONDITION:

Still shot [highest JPEG setting] with lens cap on stock 14-140mm lens
Full manual control
No IExposure
F/4
30 Sec shutter
ISO 3200

VIRGIN CAMERA IMAGE FILE [no level boosting/alteration[
P1000361.JPG

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

VIDEO TESTS PLACEHOLDER

Note: Due to video transcoding at youtube and vimeo, it is much harder to see the FPN and banding. Original files show a sharper comparison. I figure the transcoders have trouble because I literally filmed noise. I was only able to observe a small difference in the shots on my source video files.

AVCHD 720p 60

Note: I noticed that the youtube transcoders added some strobing exposure artifacts. These were not present in the source files. A download of the originals would provide better results.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later.
I AGREE


VIMEO

http://www.vimeo.com/13665872

AVCHD 1080p 24

IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later.
I AGREE


VIMEO

http://www.vimeo.com/13666711
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Again, jumping to conclusions based off of one or two tests would not reflect a substantiated tested observable claim that this so called "burn in process" does anything at all.

Whether perceived or real, based off of my single experiment I have observed a difference in the pre and post burn in tests. There is a visible reduction in noise in the post shots. There is an a observable distinction of horizontal banding in the 3200 ISO post shots that was not as prominent in the pre experiment shots.

I encourage others with NEW cameras that are interested in contributing to the test to post their experiments in this thread. Again, I stress that these test be under controlled conditions that are the SAME pre and post experiment. This way, we can have the most reliable results from the test.
 
Last edited:
I gotta say I notice a I can see a real change in the amount of red tint... very much lessened after burn in process!
 
Your images will improve dramatically if you TAKE OFF THE LENS CAP! BAM....burn-in debate solved!! ;)
j/k...good luck!
 
Just because the lens cap is on doesn't mean light cant leak. Make sure you close down that iris all the way too.
 
andyjar said:
Just because the lens cap is on doesn't mean light cant leak. Make sure you close down that iris all the way too.
Click to expand...

My equipment was in my dark room so there would be negligible possibility of light pollution during these tests. Like I said, I'm just one guy. I would like to see others do tests to see if there is any real changes.

But you make a good point. I should add that info to the test to make sure that people know lighting conditions should be the same and possible light pollution controlled
 
LOL-swyzlstyx-just when I needed a good laugh! I applaud your tenacity shinobi-I'm SO tired of testing GH-1, it's all about actually using it for shoots now.
 
BrianBrook said:
LOL-swyzlstyx-just when I needed a good laugh! I applaud your tenacity shinobi-I'm SO tired of testing GH-1, it's all about actually using it for shoots now.
Click to expand...

Understandable, however, since I have a new camera and there is debate/claims of burn in procedures doing something, this is the ripe time to document the process since trying a test after a year of use would not fall in line with the claims that "breaking/burning in the CMOS sensor on new cams does something to improve performance.
 
Updated with videos. Check back on the original post. I didn't see to much of a difference in the particular video tests however video compression took away some of the FPN and banding detail so its much harder to see the detail on the online videos. I suggest downloading the originals for a better quality image.
 
awesome.

I wish I had taken the time to do *before* pics/vids with my camera before burn-in. It was even worse than yours looked. Of course I didn't believe it would work so I didn't bother.

After 3 days of burn-in it looked much better, so much so that I thought I was seeing things or imagining things..

I've stopped trying to think about what the process might be actually doing. I'm just enjoying the camera.
 
Svart said:
awesome.

I wish I had taken the time to do *before* pics/vids with my camera before burn-in. It was even worse than yours looked. Of course I didn't believe it would work so I didn't bother.

After 3 days of burn-in it looked much better, so much so that I thought I was seeing things or imagining things..

I've stopped trying to think about what the process might be actually doing. I'm just enjoying the camera.
Click to expand...

Yes I have definitely seen some difference in my stills and a little in my video. The real test would obviously be practical test. I still need to go out and shoot some good shots with dark areas etc to see if there is real situation improvement I have just been swamped with other projects.

Im working on getting the original MTS vids and other vids uploaded to vimeo for better comparison.
 
Im working on getting the original MTS vids and other vids uploaded to vimeo for better comparison. [/quote]


Hi Shinobi!

I would not want to contradict you, but I see that all it does about "burn-in" is only to increase the contrast, (look be darker). But the bands persist.
In Fact, the "after" is seen with more banding.
 
Raw

Raw

I would encourage tests to be done with RAW as well. If we see such a marked difference in JPEG or AVCHD, there is a chance it is due to the camera tuning it's built-in NR to "learned" noise. In RAW we may or may not not see this effect which could tell us more about what's happening.
 
I left the cam on over night about 11 hours, and it seemed to help. I still don't go over 800, and try to keep it at 400 or less.

But even though it didn't completely fix the issue, it got rid of some hideous blue lines going through the image. The grid pattern is still there, but not as bad.
 
Strike One...

Randy

IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later.
I AGREE
 
strike one what?

His "before" vid looks like my "after".

I don't see anything in his "before" that would necessitate doing the burn in anyway.
 
Lol.

Today my vids get posted all over the forum. ( the reason for the color difference is a very tiny amount of light leakage)

Here's the thing. I have FPN just as bad as any camera. I am very careful to control it with a few things.

1. Never let any scene go below -1 above ISO 320. You will get FPN.
2. If you are shooting at night, you will need a very fast lens. f1.8 and faster
3. You absolutely need a copy of Neat Video.
 
plasmasmp said:
Lol.

Today my vids get posted all over the forum. ( the reason for the color difference is a very tiny amount of light leakage)

Here's the thing. I have FPN just as bad as any camera. I am very careful to control it with a few things.

1. Never let any scene go below -1 above ISO 320. You will get FPN.
2. If you are shooting at night, you will need a very fast lens. f1.8 and faster
3. You absolutely need a copy of Neat Video.
Click to expand...

You forgot to say.....get some lights. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top