GH1 firmware research volunteers required

butler360 said:
Is there any benefit to patched 1080P/24 native, bitrate-wise, versus 1080/60i? If not, if you're editing with CS5 it would seem like high-bitrate 1080/60i would offer best of both worlds: In-camera playback and 24P editing.
Click to expand...

Generally I find bitrate to be higher for 60i, as we have longer GOP, more P frames. And main improvements of current patch lies in P frames size.
 
mpgxsvcd said:
I am very interested in updating my GF1 with the new changes. However, I want to make sure that you can revert back to the original firmware. Will it let you reload firmware with an older version number or do you just have to make new firmware that has nothing applied to it?

Thanks to everyone who has worked on this. I plan on shooting a ton of indoor video this weekend. I will shoot with it unpatched at first and then shoot patched later to compare the two.
Click to expand...

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=212263
 
tester13 said:
To be really good we need GH2 to have:
New sensor with much improved speed.
New LSI with better AVCHD implementetion.
Really good, manually controlled audio.
Click to expand...

I completely agree - at that point though it seems that we'd be talking about the AF100, doesn't it?

Though I agree, a GH2 with those specs would sell like hot cakes.
 
I mentioned traffic testing earlier (before/after of cars passing at a likely constant speed). Another thought - a shot (close) of an object on a rotating record turntable, before and after. This would be likely to be indoors so low light would be an interesting extra element. Something absolutely scientific would be good to see, so nobody can say the playing field wasn't level.

The worst example of mud I've personally ever seen from my own footage was doing a follow pan on close passing traffic. Not only was the background muddy but the cars relatively static in the frame were rendered "impressionist". Another interesting before/after test there.

Yes, I should try stuff myself. But I'll have to get a faster card first - and donate!
 
Well that's exciting news. i can leave my 24p patch unchecked and just drop it into premiere. i never knew that. thanks.

tester13 edit: Could you please add this to FAQ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Okay, one last tidbit for you folks -- the 24pN footage plays on a blu-ray player! It doesn't play back in camera, but it sure did when I put it in my blu-ray and played it on my 67" DLP TV. It will probably work from a PS3 as well.

Now, with that said, I have 30 clips that look pretty much amazingly fantastic, and one that's glitchy (pulsing fuzzy every half second). This thread isn't about glowing results, it's about research and fixing things, so I'll post the glitchy clip in this thread for tester13 to evaluate; any further discussion of great footage should take place in the other "mud free" thread.
 
sam rides a mtb said:
not to get too greedy, though this has got me wondering if there is any chance for 1080 60p in the future for the GH1? surely this demands greater bitrate, though that doesnt seem to be as much of an obstacle any more.
Click to expand...

No, no chance.
We have some illusory chanse to use sensore mode 1 for MJPEG encoding to get about 2500x880 resolution at 30fps.
I don't know if this have any advantage for filming pros.
 
tester13 said:
No, no chance.
We have some illusory chanse to use sensore mode 1 for MJPEG encoding to get about 2500x880 resolution at 30fps.
I don't know if this have any advantage for filming pros.
Click to expand...

if we are able to get higher resolutions, then we could use the digital zoom feature in the camera (2x and 4x options available in menu) to increase our focal length with less of a loss in final quality. even if we didnt use the in-camera digital zoom, it would allow cropping is post production.

too bad about the increased (60p) framerate in 1080 mode... :( who knows though what may be discovered down the road
 
philip bloom said:
wonderful Job Tester 13...my gh1 is now out of the dusty cupboard and back in my hands!
Click to expand...

Thanks.
I really appreciate for your work on DSLR usage in filming.
But suggest not to use Andrew Raid materials on your site, like current one.
ask any of our active testers or Barry Green if you want fast qualified answer.
Andrew material is just 33% copy&paste, 33% looks like useless, 33% holy crap. Like all this MJPEG 1920 true resolution :) He is not accurate and no one really thrusts his opinion. And if anyone thrusts it is usially Andrew himself under different nickname (I remember like 5 or 6).
 
tester13 said:
To be really good we need GH2 to have:
New sensor with much improved speed.
New LSI with better AVCHD implementetion.
Really good, manually controlled audio.
Click to expand...

I am thoroughly expecting some improved banding supression. Also, I used to own a TM700 before I exchanged it up for a GH1... 1080p60p for the GH2 seems like an obvious selling point to shoot for... outdoor shots looked fantastic on the TM700.. and that was 60p only at 28mbps AVCHD. Might of even concidered keeping the TM if it wasn't for the lack of manual control.

Also, I might expect improvement in areas such as video autofocus and such... so long story short there's plenty of avenues for improvement to make the GH2 worthwild. Even if they improve on all those other areas and still crap out on the compression routines... it'll still be okay because you can expect a slew of donations on your future GH2 patch thread ;)
 
Barry_Green said:
What exact settings are you using? Let me try those, but it sure looks to me like it's uprezzed 720p...
Click to expand...

I'm getting top bit rates of 80Mbits on 720P footage with 512.352.220.200 on class 10 cards

80Mbits 720 is better than 50Mbits 1080. The bottle neck isn't my cards. 1080 for some reason can't do 80mbits, however 720 has worked flawless for me. My 720P footage looks great. I think the buffer settings might be wrong on the 1080 Mjpeg patch. The GH1 has no issue writing 70 to 80mbits to a class ten. However when it's a 1080 frame and not a 720 at the same Mbits bandwidth, the camera stops stops on the 1080 of the same material after a few seconds while the 720 just goes and goes with the same test shot and mbits. Weird....

Also if you load a lower 50ishmbits code, the 720 performs as it does, however still the 1080 can't do it. If you keep your 1080 at 50mbits and not higher it will record forever. Which makes me think its the 1080 patch that is causing some error.

I feel Mjpeg is very much worth its research. I believe both have great value to production.

Pappas
 
Last edited:
I have been trying find the "d" settings that Barry and a few others have talked about, could someone direct me to it..spent and hour searching here and can't find it.

I've been testing with B settings but also interested how you can push the buffer to 60? (as the current ptool is only drop down max to 40)
 
Bishaway said:
I have been trying find the "d" settings that Barry and a few others have talked about, could someone direct me to it..spent and hour searching here and can't find it.

I've been testing with B settings but also interested how you can push the buffer to 60? (as the current ptool is only drop down max to 40)
Click to expand...

+1. I'd like to add this to the FAQ.
 
Car3o said:
Well that's exciting news. i can leave my 24p patch unchecked and just drop it into premiere. i never knew that. thanks.

tester13 edit: Could you please add this to FAQ?
Click to expand...

Added to FAQ. Also FAQ has been updated. Please advise if something needs to be changed.
 
As a Panasonic share holder (lost my ass) I'd like to thank Panasonic for giving this entire DSLR market away when it was theirs from day 1.

Tester13 should be paid big money from them as a consultant. This is really good stuff, thanks Tester13!
 
PappasArts said:
I'm getting top bit rates of 80Mbits on 720P footage with 512.352.220.200 on class 10 cards
Click to expand...
Thanks for that. I'm ordering a proper Class 10 card and will try it when it arrives.

My 720P footage looks great.
Click to expand...
Okay, this might explain it all then. I was using the 1080p MJPG, which in my opinion, based on what I've shot, looks like an artifact-filled uprez from the 720p. Like it scans 720p, then uprezzes it to 1080p. And that doesn't look as "proper" as the actual 1080p scan of the AVCHD. Again, reference the concentric circles.

But if you're using straight 720p at a very high bitrate, then yeah, that's well worth continuing to pursue.

The other drawback is that we're still stuck on 30p and not 24, as far as I know. So from where I'm sitting, the score is:
Size: AVCHD = 1080, MJPG = 720
Frame rate: AVCHD = 24, MJPG = 30

So even with the better bit buffer, to me, 1080/24p beats 720/30p.

I feel Mjpeg is very much worth its research. I believe both have great value to production.
Click to expand...
If the MJPG could be successfully reclocked to 24p, I'd *love* it. A true intraframe codec at a high bitrate and film speed, yes I agree with all that.

But as of my testing so far, I haven't encountered any reason to believe that the 1080 MJPG is a worthy rival to the 1080p AVCHD. From what I've seen (and granted, it's been limited!) the 1080p AVCHD wins handily.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top