Has anyone seen this? 86Mbit AVCHD

Look farther down in the comments for my remarks. EOSHD never even bothered to correct the hyperbole in his article after the facts were explained to him.
 
Yeah lpowell, I noticed you commented on there right after I posted. I still think its interesting that like this is possibly achievable...His question (Chris) seems pretty logical as well. From trolling around the forums I've noticed that similar questions are being worked on regarding the write speed errors.
 
I noticed that an hour ago, EOSHD just happened to reply to my one-month-old post debunking his exaggerated claims about cbrandin's original research:

EOSHD said:
"Sorry L Powell, I wrote this article early on in the process going purely off what you said. I will update my site when a breakthrough is reached, as I am sure it will be in the near future..."
Click to expand...

The above bold-faced statement is untruthful. None of the misleading claims made by EOSHD were based on any post I made in the dvxuser thread that EOSHD's unsourced article was actually based on:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?222904-Possible-breakthrough-on-Native-24p!

Where cbrandin titled this thread "Possible breakthrough on Native 24P!" EOSHD hyped up that tentative claim into boldly premature certainty:

EOSHD said:
"A programmer and tester named simply Chris, has enabled reliable 86Mbit native 24p AVCHD recording on the GH1."

"Chris was able to get 100% stable 86Mbit footage from the camera..."
Click to expand...

Unfortunately for EOSHD's credibility, cbrandin publicly contradicted those rash claims just three days after the article was posted:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?222904-Possible-breakthrough-on-Native-24p!&p=2106295&viewfull=1#post2106295

As the "breakthrough" that EOSHD has been waiting for occured last month, I think it's about time he updated his claims to reflect cbrandin's last words on the matter:

cbrandin said:
In other words - I think we are screwed with the Native option checked if any single frame gets bigger than 897,152 bytes. Sorry for the bad news.

Chris
Click to expand...
 
Well, in fairness, cbrandin's last words were actually this:

Actually, I might have it wrong. We may not be screwed after all - stay tuned. Many thanks to DaLiv for pointing out my error! I misread an address and went to the wrong places.
Click to expand...
But EOSHD is really taking some liberties in their stories. Especially the excuse of "going purely off what you said." That just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I read the thread at the time and never had the impression that the settings were 'confirmed 100% stable' like EOSHD claimed. They just pulled that out of a hat.

Also, even the headline of their story is totally wrong. cbrandin's settings do NOT double the bitrate to 86MBPS. They attempt to allow headroom to prevent crashing by doubling the "Overall Bitrate" setting in PTool, but it's quite obvious that this has a pretty small effect on the actual real-world bitrate, which stays around 40-something in detailed scenes. I think the reporter is demonstrating a basic lack of research into how the hack works.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I see you're right, dasbin. In that light, I wouldn't object if EOSHD chose to update the bold headline of his original article to read: "

We May Not Be Screwed After All!
 
Sad that I read all of those threads before I posted about the EOSHD :-S...I wasn't trying to start anything I just found the article interesting not knowing "Chris" was cbrandin. Although, now that its brought up again I'm curious about his last words and possible findings. Despite the articles fact based approach I wish there was a link in there to this forum. Anyone who reads that has no idea where to even look.
 
Yeah, somewhere in there he edits someone's post to remove a link to this site, saying something about being censored here. Anyone know what that's about?
 
Don't know if they still do but links to the site here get bounced to the main page @ DVX user.
 
I've personally found that the few EOSHD's articles I read to be sensationalist, hyperbole-infused non-sense that quote things completely out of context. There's no credibility there.
 
I'm afraid I don't know what to think of how EOSHD has handled this. In the short time since I first quoted his fresh reply to my month-old post, EOSHD has revised that reply to dig the hole even deeper:

EOSHD said:
I wrote this article early on in the process going purely off what you said, verbatim. As is made clear in the article your results were not final and I am sorry you did not deliver on it. I will update my site when a proper breakthrough is reached, as I am sure it will be in the near future.
Click to expand...
While the bold-face emphasis above is mine, the purposeful addition of the word "verbatim" makes EOSHD's claims seem even more ludicrous.

Could it be that he's confusing LPowell with cbrandin? That he really didn't notice that the person he referred to in his article as "a programmer and tester named simply Chris" is in fact cbrandin?

At the least, it would explain why EOSHD has yet to credit cbrandin as the originator of this research.
 
Re-reading the article/posts it would seem like that is possible. EOSHD doesn't really lay claim to anyone other then "Chris" and since you had knowledge on the subject maybe it was assumed.
 
Looks like this thread made an impact on EOSHD. At some point in the last 24 hours, he added a bold-face update to the beginning of the article:

EOSHD said:
Update - unfortunately it has been brought to my attention that since this article was first written, attempts by the tester to make the functionality reliable have so far failed and the patch was never released. To be clear - you cannot achieve stable 86Mbit AVCHD on the GH1. I have also now tried it myself and it doesn't work.
Click to expand...

He also included a link to EOSHD's Legal Disclaimer, which includes the following advisory:

EOSHD said:
EOSHD.com and Andrew Reid may keep updating old posts on a regular basis and is not bound to explicitly state all corrections made.

From time to time EOSHD.com may contain satirical writings, videos and other information which are intended purely as satire & creative writing and do not represent the facts, nor do they contain any malice intent.
Click to expand...
 
attempts by the tester to make the functionality reliable have so far failed and the patch was never released.
Click to expand...
Ugh. Just horrible, horrible choice of wording, which gives completely the wrong impression of how the patch works.

They also changed the headline to, "Panasonic GH1 hack breakthrough 'may double AVCHD bitrate to 86Mbit'"
Which is still totally and completely incorrect. The 'possible breakthrough' was changing a single setting to 86 million, which never was intended to double AVCHD bitrate, only to make Native 24P more stable. This was ABUNDANTLY clear in the original thread.
 
Last edited:
I can get 90mbit, but only on static grass, and it doesnt look any better than 50mbit, so whats the point really.
 
Thanks dasbin. I thought I was clear about upping the Overall Bitrate and that it was related to how fast the flash card is, not the video bitrate. It did improve the 24pN situation, but didn't fix it. I'm still working on a solution - but I promise you, it will not result in a 86Mb video bitrate! In fact my target is to be able to make Lpowell's reliable settings stable with Native 24p checked, and they are around 40Mb.

It frightens me that we might have to start censoring what we post in the development thread - it rather defeats the purpose of having the forum in the first place. I believe we are all best served when we can post ideas, etc... without having to be sure we are completely right all the time. Remember, this is not a commercial effort - we're just a bunch of people trying to get the most out of the GH1 and we rely on this forum to exchange ideas, help each other out and share our results.

Chris
 
cbrandin said:
It frightens me that we might have to start censoring what we post in the development thread - it rather defeats the purpose of having the forum in the first place. I believe we are all best served when we can post ideas, etc... without having to be sure we are completely right all the time. Remember, this is not a commercial effort - we're just a bunch of people trying to get the most out of the GH1 and we rely on this forum to exchange ideas, help each other out and share our results.

Chris
Click to expand...

First off thanks for your work! I haven't had a chance to play with AVCHD yet but I am eagerly awaiting a stable solution for the codec...Secondly, I think censoring on a forum is a really, really bad idea. Something that is driven by a community needs to be as open as possible otherwise progress begins to halt. If other publications or bloggers want to incorrectly interpret information that is their own prerogative. I highly doubt EOSHD's goal was to spread incorrect information. I mean, in the end we are all human and when things excite us we want to share them. Either way, EOSHD has a few readers so even if the information isn't 100% true the message is still spreading. I don't advocate rumors but the article did make me want to know more lol.
 
omnidecay said:
If other publications or bloggers want to incorrectly interpret information that is their own prerogative.
Click to expand...

I agree with this... I wouldn't worry about what others are going to think about what you say. We can get mad at them AFTER they screw it up :)

I highly doubt EOSHD's goal was to spread incorrect information. I mean, in the end we are all human and when things excite us we want to share them.
Click to expand...

I'm not completely convinced of this. Any even tiny amount of journalistic integrity would require a basic level of research. I know I would want to at least understand a tiny bit of what I'm talking about before I tell others about it. Journalists (even bloggers... most of them) are even more aware of this than regular folk.
Regardless though, EOSHD has a pretty bad track record for rumors IMHO. They post pretty much any and every weird thing that they like the look of regardless of its possible credibility. The big thing about the Canon Micro 4/3 camera a while back was just ridiculous... they got everyone all worked up for what was CLEARLY a totally refutable source, and they already knew who it came from when they posted it.
 
why don't we take EOSHD out in the street and shoot him? (i'm joking of course!)

he hasn't committed a crime or anything, id think EOSHD is a good guy just trying to bring knowledge to us all, we shouldn't make him feel like a bad guy for getting something wrong, thats how bad guys are created!

i've not read all EOSHD's articles but the ones i have read i've enjoyed, if he jazzes something up and over hypes it than thats just his style. readers de-sugar coat it and take what you want from it.

i could be wrong but i imagine EOSHD was doing articles before the hack was even created, everyone who seems very angry at him for talking about the hack should ask what they were doing before the hack to inform the people of new things!

if everyone desires to pick up on false claims lets turn our energies to the the newspapers making billions from it! :smile:

peace to EOSHD!
peace to everyone who can forgive EOSHD of this terrible crime!
and rest in peace to everyone who cant!

if we are fixed on what people said yesterday then what chance is there for tomorrow! get over it!
 
Last edited:
I agree, terra1. The guy who runs the site is guilty of occasionally being over-enthusiastic, but that's really not so bad.
I'd say EOSHD is my favorite DSLR filmmaking blog. It's updated the most, lacks the anti-Panny sentiment so prevalent on all the others, and is not trying to sell me Zacuto gear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top