GH2 Comparison video unhacked vs. hacked GH2, including hacked GH1

G

GMC

Well-known member
I have made a real life comparison video of the unhacked vs. the hacked GH2 using the latest PTool 3.62 with the settings attached below (44mbits, AQ = 3).
I basically used these settings with PTool 3.62:

Video Bitrate 24H = 44000000
Auto Quantizer for 1080 modes = 3-Most to details
Auto Quantizer for 720 modes = 3 - Most to details
1080p24 FB1 = 1566720
1080p24 Frame Limit = 15728640
1080p24 FB2 = 1968046

As it happens in real life, the sun went away when I changed firmware, and I adjusted the shutter to accomodate that fact. Therefore, the unhacked footage is slightly brighter than the hacked one. But the main findings remain unchanged:

Clearly, the 720p mode benfits the most, and this is a huge improvement. I was a bit disappointed though that several people here claimed to see now much more shadow detail for the 1080p mode as well, especially with the AQ = 3 option. I cannot confirm this. The shadow noise gets grainier and nicer, but the detail level is the same.

Funnily, the hacked GH1 in the same scene looks terrible, and it also crashed twice because of card write speed limitations. The hacked GH2 in turn was absolutely stable. Hence it seems the risk to install the hack is very low, and the benefit is huge.

I deliberately used almost static scenes, with reproducible motion of my motorized slider.

But judge yourself!

 
I personaly see very little to no difference between hacked gh2 and un hacked. On the other hand the gh2 hack compared to gh1 hack is major.
 
the picture profiles look different, the unhacked is less contrasy, and a little bit flatter look.
 
Last edited:
Finally a side-by-side comparison of the avchd mode.

I was a bit disappointed though that several people here claimed to see now much more shadow detail for the 1080p mode as well, especially with the AQ = 3 option. I cannot confirm this. The shadow noise gets grainier and nicer, but the detail level is the same.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I have expected - sad but true. Thanks Gunther for this test...
 
Can you explain de reasons for the different shutters? Is it because the light changed or because the Hacked version does something to the sensitivity?
What is your take on the tests?
 
I could see the macro-blocking/color-smear thing pretty clearly between the GH2 hacked and Stock. Not as drastic as the hacked GH1, but noticeable.
Thankfully we are getting to the point where we are splitting hairs. Another couple of years and image quality issues will be nearly non-existent.
We WILL hit the time where the video quality is just DONE.
It happened to Audio with 24-bit and P4 processors. The specs now exceed human hearing, and you can't get faster than Real-Time!
When do we make the jump to 4K?
 
@DPStewart. Great analogy! For now, keep an eye out for the next round of testing. Gunther's settings were pretty conservative. Look at what Henry ( http://vimeo.com/27877961 ) and others are doing with some very high bitrate settings. There is still a bit more to wrestle out of this cam. Not res on a static shot, but shadow detail and res from detailed moving shots.
 
reem12 said:
I personaly see very little to no difference between hacked gh2 and un hacked. On the other hand the gh2 hack compared to gh1 hack is major.
Click to expand...

But this statement only applies to the 1080p24 mode - in 720p60 the difference is huge!
 
maranfilms said:
the picture profiles look different, the unhacked is less contrasy, and a little bit flatter look.
Click to expand...

No, it is the same picture profile (smooth). As I stated above, when I shot with the original (unhacked) GH2, the sun was gone. Therefore I lowered the shutter (to keep ISO the same), but it became a little bit brighter in comparison. Which should benefit the unhacked version, as here the shadows are a bit brighter. Still the hacked one is better.
 
lpowell said:
That doesn't inspire a great deal of confidence in the test procedure, details please...
Click to expand...

My GH1 was hacked with the "C" settings at that time, with native 24p on. Overall it looks good, but my statement was referring to the 400% zoom which looks terrible in comparison to the GH2. In my opinion the shadow detail can only by improved by bitrate to a certain point, and above that the basic philosophy of AVCHD encoding in the GH1 comes into play (ignoring details in less contrasty scenes). Which certainly is better on the GH2, be it unhacked or hacked.

In my testing, on both cams the settings were the same (smooth profile with -2 on everything except for the color saturation), as indicated in the text of the film.

What other details are needed?
 
Phenixone said:
Can you explain de reasons for the different shutters? Is it because the light changed or because the Hacked version does something to the sensitivity?
What is your take on the tests?
Click to expand...

As said above when I shot unhacked, the sun was gone for a moment, hence I lowered the shutter (in order to keep ISO the same). I could not match exactly the exposure, that's why the unhacked footage is a bit brighter, which should benefit the unhacked one (shadows are less dark). Still, the hacked is better.

My opinion is clear: go for the hack! You get high bitrate 720p now (the only downfall of the GH2)!
 
DPStewart said:
I could see the macro-blocking/color-smear thing pretty clearly between the GH2 hacked and Stock. Not as drastic as the hacked GH1, but noticeable.
Thankfully we are getting to the point where we are splitting hairs. Another couple of years and image quality issues will be nearly non-existent.
We WILL hit the time where the video quality is just DONE.
It happened to Audio with 24-bit and P4 processors. The specs now exceed human hearing, and you can't get faster than Real-Time!
When do we make the jump to 4K?
Click to expand...

Hey, I totally agree! We start splitting hairs here (on the 1080p side), but not on the 720p which is clearly improved.
 
Cosimo Bullo said:
@DPStewart. Great analogy! For now, keep an eye out for the next round of testing. Gunther's settings were pretty conservative. Look at what Henry ( http://vimeo.com/27877961 ) and others are doing with some very high bitrate settings. There is still a bit more to wrestle out of this cam. Not res on a static shot, but shadow detail and res from detailed moving shots.
Click to expand...

I would agree that the hack should be more beneficial in moving shots. But I was interested in the static side of things (if bitrate keeps up, details are improved, ...).
 
GMC said:
My GH1 was hacked with the "C" settings at that time, with native 24p on.
Click to expand...
As you indicated in your original post, these settings produced corrupted MTS files, and in my experience, unreliable results. If you have time to repeat your tests, I'd recommend either the GH1 Blackout-Powell Patch for use with Class 6 SD cards, or the 100Mbps Max Latitude Patch for use with Class 10 SD cards, linked in my signature below.
 
lpowell said:
As you indicated in your original post, these settings produced corrupted MTS files, and in my experience, unreliable results. If you have time to repeat your tests, I'd recommend either the GH1 Blackout-Powell Patch for use with Class 6 SD cards, or the 100Mbps Max Latitude Patch for use with Class 10 SD cards, linked in my signature below.
Click to expand...

I will try your GH1 settings, as I regularily use my GH1 along the GH2. Curious to see if it helps with stability.

Thanks, Gunther
 
No offense to the OP, but this type of test is a bit misleading in many ways. If someone does not follow the hack discussion on personalview he might get a very simplistic and false view of the capabilities of the hack. The first thing is that the... 24mbit 1080p codec was quite good on static shots on its own and at first glance you will see much better improvements in the 720p.

But, but, but... the hack version brings some subtle for some but big improvement to someone like me. There are three aspect where I find big big improvement, I put them in how the hack unfolded.

The first thing was the codec in motion (not shown at all in the above test). The hack does improve the image quality when in motion, you will see it much better in high detail scene. No more image breaking up when panning etc. Some have developed low gop settings that they claim result is much more filmic (with the latest ptool there is a bug which is causing some inconsistencies, while it brought 1 gop... avcintra territory).

The second thing is in the shadow details ala dynamic range. Where the base codec was smoothing any underexposed area, the hack just preserve the detail below (it even preserve the noise!!!). Just boost your gamma in post a little and see how those macro-block just pop up. Now you can meter to a certain level for the highlight and recover by boosting the shadows in post, effectively the hack has increase the dynamic range of the gh2. By 1,2, ... stops!!! until further test I don't know, but it is quite substantial and something huge for me. I would like to know (test) what happens to the highlight also, if the same principal applies because the codec is geared towards what I would call normal viewing. That is it cuts details where normally mister consumer won't see, more so in motion, to achieve higher efficiencies.

The quantization/gradient/banding setting from the latest ptool. This is another huge improvement from the hack. In the previous iteration of the hack it was seen that even if you could achieve some high bitrate on detailed scene, on lower detail scene the birate would decrease a lot and could be the cause of the gradient/banding on large surface of flat colours . The prime example being blue sky where the gh2 exhibited a lot of banding, even a bit more compared to other 8bit camera. Again I think it is the consumerist nature of the avchd base codec, tuned primarily toward efficiency before quality. With the work of Chris and Vitaliy they have enhanced/change the base setting resulting in high and more constant bitrate across the board, and the gradient/ banding is greatly reduced.

When you take all of the above for me the GH23.VK is a much much better camera than the base gh2 (which was already good) and as someone personalview who has a red says "I'm a RED owner and am truly amazed at what I'm seeing" . Now, if you are going to shoot some family or tourist shot the hack is surely unwarranted. But if as me you intent to do quite some image manipulation, heavy grading etc, the GH23.VK makes a huge difference. The base image breaks down much much faster than the hacked one.

Again I don't meant in anyway to mean to be rude to the OP. But his test is very misleading because it does not stress the gh2 base codec in anyway to show where it fails and the GH23.VK shines. People that are not following the hack are just dishing the GH23.VK, which is stupid, more so that it is a ongoing process and that we are only at the start of it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top