Does the GH2 exhibit any aliasing?

Rick Burnett said:
Hehe, funny thing, I was using a C64 emulator the other day trying to remember how to do something :) I could not remember for the life of me (although I was more of an Atari 130XE guy) :)
Click to expand...

We live in the greatest miracle of miracles right now. For ANYTHING you can think of - someone has dedicated their life to it and has a website up on it with all the info that you could never have the time to track down on your own. Good GOD man someone is running a QuantumLink emulator system now that you can telnet to!
 
Rick Burnett said:
Well frankly, then you don't understand image sensors then. A higher MP camera has higher spatial resolution which is SUPERIOR to getting rid of aliasing. It's that simple. The problem with DSLR cameras is they don't actually sample normally all the pixels, they use fast less than desirables techniques like pixel binning and the like to avoid reading ever pixel on every row since the system as a whole is not capable of handling the throughput. Take a photo with a DSLR and then you see the full resolving power of the MP of the camera. It looks beautiful. Once the DSLR gets to the point it can take video at the same resolution as the stills, and either use the full resolution or use a GOOD post sensor reduction algorithm, the image is going to be fantastic looking.

If you don't believe it, take a 60D, or GH2, take a short bit of video, then take a picture, shrink that picture down to 1080p and be prepared to see how much better the image looks than the video grab. THAT is the problem.
Click to expand...
I may not understand image sensors, but you are a dreamer for sure. Hopefully the future arrives soon at affordable prices. For the time being, keeping 14MP is better than going 24MP.
 
Hehe, most creative people are dreamers :) But I am also an electrical engineer who has been doing CMOS chip design for 16 years so I do understand how technology moves. I think the next five years are going to be AMAZING for camera design.
 
Rick Burnett said:
Hehe, funny thing, I was using a C64 emulator the other day trying to remember how to do something :) I could not remember for the life of me (although I was more of an Atari 130XE guy) :)
Click to expand...

You guys are way to high tech for me. All I had was a VIC 20 that I played Adventure and Pirates Cove on. I did enjoy a good game of Beach Head on the C64 though. I always thought the command was Load "*.*",8,1. God that brings back some memories just typing that.
 
Rick Burnett said:
Hehe, most creative people are dreamers :) But I am also an electrical engineer who has been doing CMOS chip design for 16 years so I do understand how technology moves. I think the next five years are going to be AMAZING for camera design.
Click to expand...

So what do you think is the future technology? 4K, 8K, ETC? Personally I think the next step is something along the lines of what the Canon T3i will offer. I see an full frame interchangeable lens camera with a zoom lever just like a point and shoot. However, the zoom lever will go from full frame down to 1080p or 720p in a continuous motion. If they can make a fast(F1.8 maybe) wider angle lens perhaps with IS then you could have hand held videos like nothing we have ever seen.

Or perhaps the camera could have a movable sensor/lens that would allow us to use all of the sensor or just a portion.

I would also like to see a camera that could vary not only the shutter speed but also the frame rate during filming. It would be great to be able to just push a lever and crank it up to 120 FPS when you needed it. Just wild guesses though. So what things do you all want in a future camera?
 
I do believe 4K is the future, but I don't exactly know how long it will take to become standard. Look how long it has taken 720/1080 to get into more homes. I know there is A LOT of technology being developed now to facilitate 4K digital in theaters, but, given the six or seven theaters that are near me, they don't seem to be spending much money on them to keep them standard. Only the IMAX is nice here (and of course, since you live here too, you've probably seen the same thing!) :)

I think 1080 is going to be around for quite awhile. What I want to see is a 3K or 4K camera that records natively to that size if wanted, or down converts to 1080p as well. I'd be really happy with that.

I don't want a Full Frame sensor, I like S35. To me it is the perfect balance. When I used a 5D, for wide deep shots you REALLY have to stop the lens down a lot. I'd also like to see global shutter. :)
 
Rick Burnett said:
I don't want a Full Frame sensor, I like S35. To me it is the perfect balance. When I used a 5D, for wide deep shots you REALLY have to stop the lens down a lot. I'd also like to see global shutter. :)
Click to expand...

I have been waiting so long for global shutter I actually forgot about it. Yea that would be really nice. I guess all I really want is for interlaced video to FINALLY DIE! Why are we still using interlaced video in a progressive world?
 
Rick Burnett said:
I do believe 4K is the future, but I don't exactly know how long it will take to become standard. Look how long it has taken 720/1080 to get into more homes. I know there is A LOT of technology being developed now to facilitate 4K digital in theaters, but, given the six or seven theaters that are near me, they don't seem to be spending much money on them to keep them standard. Only the IMAX is nice here (and of course, since you live here too, you've probably seen the same thing!) :)

I think 1080 is going to be around for quite awhile. What I want to see is a 3K or 4K camera that records natively to that size if wanted, or down converts to 1080p as well. I'd be really happy with that.

I don't want a Full Frame sensor, I like S35. To me it is the perfect balance. When I used a 5D, for wide deep shots you REALLY have to stop the lens down a lot. I'd also like to see global shutter. :)
Click to expand...

The issue why 4k won't become standard for consumers but MIGHT become standard for shooters is simply that the perceived quality increase is allmost null unless you are on a actual public movie house large theater screen

It has been hard enough for the industry to push consumers to blu-ray because in the begining many hd-dvds and blu-rays were in 720p and a lot of people just could not see the difference between their DVDs and their hd-dvd (which died a horrible death) or their bu-ray. So now EVERY blu-ray is
1080p and they came up with the marketing term FULL HD and proudly pop that and the 1080p right on the packaging. The industry smartened up that high tech pixel peepers are always their first adopters who 'spread the good word' to the regular peeps and so now blu-rays have gone as far to boast the actual average BITRATE on the spec sheet on the box because they know people like bigger numbers.

Honestly though, from seeing 4k myself, and I'm a quality nut - there is not really that much improvement - especially to consumers. Some scanned negatives really just show there age on a full 1080p mastering as it is and to shine they must have a full restoration done on them because all you are noticing now with the increased detail of 1080p is the film grain and out of focus shots that you could never spot on a DVD.

So for shooting and release in theaters on the professional market.... 4K will most likely eventually take over but I can't see it taking over the home market for a loooooooong time. That's gonne be a real tough sell. It's going to have to be for some insane holographic virtual reality holodeck like this:


Now THAT would benefit from 4K but unless people start installing 40 foot screens in their home I just don't see it. But they industry will figure out a way.
 
720P is fine on the GH2 http://vimeo.com/19927743 the same as 50i but cleaner,24P may have more resolution but its unusable for me in pal land,720P Blu Rays from GH2 footage look sharp.DVD is less than mini dv
the test is 50i not 1080P
 
My home screen is 126" projected and I have still been at 720p although I am going to upgrade to 1080p. I was using this projector at 108" before I moved and it was sufficient, but at 126" I can start to see pixels. I absolutely agree that 4K is going to be overkill for most home scenarios. What will drive it is manufacturers trying to outdo one another to sell more televisions. Once someone gets the manufacturing cheap enough, which I have not seen.

For me, I want 3,4 or 5k video for freedom. I want higher resolution so that I can actually resolve to 1080p in the end, or, have the freedom for video cropping in post where I am not going to give up quality in my final image. Maybe I missed that boom mic in the top of the frame :) It happens.

Having working with Red footage, it was beautiful from a resolution standpoint. The final 1080p render just blew me away. I'd like to see others embrace at least a bit higher resolution. Even if I cannot have the full rez capture, just to have the brought down version of that.

Shooting on a GH2 in stills mode and comparing it to a capture from a video stream, it is AMAZING how much less detail there is. Same with all the DSLRs. That's what I want. I did a time lapse with the 7D and the detail in the image is just so pretty in comparison to video I shot of the same scene. I added a tilt shift just to make the effect neat, but look at how nice the detail is in this:

http://vimeo.com/8245898

The video version I compare too had a lot of aliasing in the trees, more noise. It's not horrible, as the 7D does great at night, but, compared to the stills, the detail is just so nice to me. Of course, adding the tilt-shift out of Magic Bullet got rid of a lot of the detail.

Whether it be Nikon, Panasonic or Canon, whoever figures out how to full raster their DSLR to 24p 1080 video is going to make a fortune :) (With good rolling shutter that is, none of the D90 shutter speed!)
 
That was pretty cool Rick.. looked like little toy cars on a model set... but the depth of field was so shallow I don't get how you say there is so much detail in there.. it's all smoosh except for the one feather sharp in focus point.
 
I am talking about that strip. Look at the tree branches in there. When I shot that with video, they were NOTHING like that. Unfortunately, I shot this so long ago I didn't keep everything around as I was just playing with the camera seeing what it could do. And at night, aliasing on lines is REALLY bad on the Canon. Those tree branches would have blue and red all over them. Wish I had a better example.

But like I said, take your DSLR and do a compare of a still to video. Then, you see what is coming hopefully some day :) (And by coming I mean at a price tag that a lot more people can afford).
 
Blackout said:
The issue why 4k won't become standard for consumers but MIGHT become standard for shooters is simply that the perceived quality increase is allmost null unless you are on a actual public movie house large theater screen

It has been hard enough for the industry to push consumers to blu-ray because in the begining many hd-dvds and blu-rays were in 720p and a lot of people just could not see the difference between their DVDs and their hd-dvd (which died a horrible death) or their bu-ray. So now EVERY blu-ray is
1080p and they came up with the marketing term FULL HD and proudly pop that and the 1080p right on the packaging. The industry smartened up that high tech pixel peepers are always their first adopters who 'spread the good word' to the regular peeps and so now blu-rays have gone as far to boast the actual average BITRATE on the spec sheet on the box because they know people like bigger numbers...
Click to expand...

I've never heard of any Blu-rays or HD-DVDs being encoded at 720P. From day one, nearly all Blu-rays were encoded at 1080P- in fact that was one of the main marketing points- and most HD-DVDs were, too. It's true that the initial HD-DVD players could only output 1080I, but the content (with some exceptions that were 1080I encodes- Alliance in Canada has been guilty of this frequently, and still is on many of their Blu-rays) was almost always encoded at 1080P. As for listing the bit-rates on the packaging, Fox has been doing that from the beginning. They also list the codec used.

Vincent
 
I'm sure it will happen if we live long enough. But will it be a game changer? Aliasing is just annoyance, not a showstopper. The digital processing has advanced so much, but I'm struggling most of the time with the classical issues like color, exposure, wb, framing, lighting, etc. In the near future I wanna see built-in ND filters so that it becomes easier to install other filters to mitigate the aliasing issue. How difficult will it be on GH3? AF-100 has it. So does Oly XZ-1.
 
Vincent Pereira said:
I've never heard of any Blu-rays or HD-DVDs being encoded at 720P. From day one, nearly all Blu-rays were encoded at 1080P- in fact that was one of the main marketing points- and most HD-DVDs were, too. It's true that the initial HD-DVD players could only output 1080I, but the content (with some exceptions that were 1080I encodes- Alliance in Canada has been guilty of this frequently, and still is on many of their Blu-rays) was almost always encoded at 1080P. As for listing the bit-rates on the packaging, Fox has been doing that from the beginning. They also list the codec used.

Vincent
Click to expand...

I have a few 720p hd-dvds and blu-rays. I'd have to look through to find them but I know I have them. Now everything is 1080 but again, consumers don't even know what the hell that means... it's like the insane numbers being thrown out with contrast ratio. If I tell me mom I want a blu-ray 1080p, she'd think I wanted a fish & peas dinner.
 
I never hearded of 720p blu ray, but I'm born in different place! Lol! But maybe tophat thinking of 720p tv? They got plenty!
Btw blu ray is a little bit sucks? So many movie I rent on blu ray only look tiny bit better than sd dvd. But commercial for blu ray dvd look so beautiful that I could smokee it! Omg!
 
most BDs are 4 times as good as dvds watch a film like the sound of music in blu ray and also the dvd you get free with it [chalk and cheese]if the film was made in rubbish quality you wont get a good blu ray,also it depends how the older films are restored.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top