GH2 RAW 4.2.2 HD Out?

Barry_Green said:
And death to all interlaced, too. Please.

I was profoundly disappointed that the ATSC and EBU couldn't work out a worldwide standard for HD between the two of them. So we're saddled with the 23.976/29.97/59.94 nonsense in NTSC land, and we're stuck with incompatible signals between NTSC and PAL even though we entered this glorious new HD age.

I say by all means, delete, destroy, and eliminate 29.97/59.94. The new standard should have been 24/25 and 50/60, all progressive, and prior 29.97 and 59.94 programming would just have to be sped up by 1/10th of 1%. No viewer would ever have noticed, but ... man, it would have returned sanity to the television landscape that disappeared six decades ago! (with the introduction of color, when they changed the USA television rate from 60.00 fields per second to 59.94).
Click to expand...
But, in this case, GH2 PAL version should rule out of this each 17 seconds freeze, no?
 
philiplipetz said:
In the discussion at Philipbloom.net Makoto posted the following where he says that Panasonic does not give a HDMI signal suitable for sustained video encoding.

"The HDMI live-view output is not suitable for recording use, using nanoFLASH or Ki pro, Ki pro mini, etc.. You will get one freezing image every 17 seconds. It happens because of the difference between 60 fps, which is the frame rate at which the sensor reads the light, and 59.94 fps, which is the frame rate of the HDMI output. This is the explanation I had from Panasonic.

"Although you can not use it for recording, I found it great that you can view the recording image at 1920 x 1080 resolution.The most beautiful thing about the new GH2 is that its image sensor reads at 60 fps. So, the 60i is a real 60(59.94)i and 60p, although at 1280 x 720, is a real 60(59.94)p. I am sure that you will do the slow motion by converting 60p to 30p soon, and you will see the difference. The 4/3 image sensor is smaller than EOS’s, but EOS’s image sensor can read only at 30fps."
Click to expand...
This is only a concern for the otherwise hobbled 60i mode. If one cares about image quality enough to deal with an external recorder why would he/she want to record the crummy interlaced signal anyway? I think most people here care that at least in Cinema Mode the output is 24p as it was on Phillip Bloom's early prototype model. Hopefully, he can confirm that to be the case with the Japanese retail model he has.
 
svecher said:
This is only a concern for the otherwise hobbled 60i mode. If one cares about image quality enough to deal with an external recorder why would he/she want to record the crummy interlaced signal anyway? I think most people care that at least in Cinema Mode the output is 24p as it was on Phillip Bloom's early prototype model. Hopefully, he can confirm that to be the case with the Japanese retail model he has.
Click to expand...
And the GH2 PAL version should be out of this, no?
 
svecher said:
This is only a concern for the otherwise hobbled 60i mode. If one cares about image quality enough to deal with an external recorder why would he/she want to record the crummy interlaced signal anyway? I think most people here care that at least in Cinema Mode the output is 24p as it was on Phillip Bloom's early prototype model. Hopefully, he can confirm that to be the case with the Japanese retail model he has.
Click to expand...
Richard's tests have confirmed it.
 
Barry_Green said:
HDMI is most definitely not a stream of the sensor output. The sensor outputs a raw, unprocessed, unvarnished, ugly-to-look-at, Bayer-pattern mess. That's called "raw". It has to undergo extensive processing to turn it into a lovely-to-look-at video signal. And as part of that process, it will be demosaic'd, the various gamma and picture profile settings will be applied, then it will be tuned into the HD-standard Rec709 color space, and subsampled to a video-signal 4:2:2 color sampling system, and quantized at either 8-bit or 10-bit (and, considering it's a $899 stills camera, my money is on it being 8-bit). Once all that processing is done, it is then output over the HDMI port.

The only difference between that, and what gets recorded, is the application of the AVCHD codec compression. Getting a live HDMI output of the uncompressed data means that it should be artifact-free and possibly 4:2:2 instead of 4:2:0.

So it's a step up, yes. But it's not revolutionary; like I said, every consumer HDV and AVCHD camcorder has been doing this for years. But it does seem new to the DSLR world, where the GH1 had no HDMI output whatsoever, and the Canons have some lower-res subsampled output, so in that context it's a big step up because it appears to make an external recorder a viable option.
Click to expand...

Ahh, thanks for explaining!
 
Barry_Green said:
So it's a step up, yes. But it's not revolutionary; like I said, every consumer HDV and AVCHD camcorder has been doing this for years. But it does seem new to the DSLR world, where the GH1 had no HDMI output whatsoever, and the Canons have some lower-res subsampled output, so in that context it's a big step up because it appears to make an external recorder a viable option.
Click to expand...
Not revolutionary except as far as sensor size and price point combo concerns. To my book, it is a milestone :-)
 
svecher said:
AFAIK Richard has confirmed that HDMI signal can be made clean, i.e. free of overlays. Phillip Bloom has reported that in Cinema Mode the HDMI signal is indeed 1080/24p on a pre-production model. I have not seen a confirmation of the fact with a production one (yet).
Click to expand...
Well, I don't know exactly if it was posted and where. But a co-worker of mine sent me some information with something coming from his tests where the 1080/24p had been verified.


Peter J. DeCrescenzo said:
It's November 22, 2010 ... Do _you_ know what your GH2's live HDMI signal is exactly? If so, please share! ;-)
Click to expand...
;-)
 
Emanuel said:
Well, I don't know exactly if it was posted and where. But a co-worker of mine sent me some information with something coming from his tests where the 1080/24p had been verified.
Click to expand...
This sounds like the game we played when I was a kid called Broken Telephone ;)
 
Back on topic, with respect to the original link to EOSHD's "RAW, 4-2-2 HD-out" article. I commented on the article, taking EOSHD to task fpr headlining the original reviewer's misinformed use of the term "RAW" in referring to the GH2's HDMI output. My post was immediately deleted by EOSHD and the article has not been corrected. This is not the first time I've seen EOSHD refuse to acknowledge mistakes and make corrections when their misleading and inaccurate claims have been pointed out. However, when a site actually deletes posts that point out factual errors, it leads me to conclude that the bullshit is intentional.
 
svecher said:
This sounds like the game we played when I was a kid called Broken Telephone ;)
Click to expand...
LOL I follow your humor but that's the way that it is. You know, life is bigger than web. People trade PMs, talk on the phone, meet at the set and cafe. We still have to try to pick up the accurate information from the misplaced one;-) I won't just post it literally, for several reasons. One of them follows the thread I posted last August and rendered one hundred posts announcing this camera we talk about now:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?219160-GH1-discontinued-GH2-in-September-October&highlight=

Last but not least, apparently -- as you said in an earlier post, theoretically (related to the PAL countries version), 1080/24p should be free of any disturbance but what I know?

Only the information I've got, no more no less :-)
 
I do think this is a good thing to see. Yes consumer cameras have had it for awhile....but there didn't seem to be as motivation to put a NanoFlash on a HFS100 as on a GH2, plus there are less expensive recorders coming out...

I hope we can get clean 24p though, that still seems to be up in the air?
 
lpowell said:
Back on topic, with respect to the original link to EOSHD's "RAW, 4-2-2 HD-out" article. I commented on the article, taking EOSHD to task fpr headlining the original reviewer's misinformed use of the term "RAW" in referring to the GH2's HDMI output. My post was immediately deleted by EOSHD and the article has not been corrected. This is not the first time I've seen EOSHD refuse to acknowledge mistakes and make corrections when their misleading and inaccurate claims have been pointed out. However, when a site actually deletes posts that point out factual errors, it leads me to conclude that the bullshit is intentional.
Click to expand...

Yes, and he gets stroppy very fast if people comment critically. I think he once was a dvxuser member and got banned - I might be wrong though.
 
Emanuel said:
LOL I follow your humor but that's the way that it is. You know, life is bigger than web. People trade PMs, talk on the phone, meet at the set and cafe. We still have to try to pick up the accurate information from the misplaced one;-) I won't just post it literally, for several reasons. One of them follows the thread I posted last August and rendered one hundred posts announcing this camera we talk about now:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?219160-GH1-discontinued-GH2-in-September-October&highlight=

Last but not least, apparently -- as you said in an earlier post, theoretically (related to the PAL countries version), 1080/24p should be free of any disturbance but what I know?

Only the information I've got, no more no less :-)
Click to expand...
Yes, very premonitory that thread was. By the way, fresh of the digital press, pg. 159 of the UK manual (links posted by Peter DeCrescenzo in another thread).

GH2 HDMI Out 24P pg 159.jpg

Clean HDMI out at 24P!!! So looks like you were right (again) :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top