How far can we go with sony H264 compression ? Illustration inside.

I'm coming from a 5dmkiii and I don't see this being any crappier than the h264 stuff I was grading there. I downloaded and utilized flat profiles as well, if anything I think what you've managed to get out of the Sony looks much better after grade.
 
chromeboy007 said:
Is it me? I have never thought of AVCHD as "Sony's H264", as other camera companies use AVCHD as their capturing formats as well. Also, I always hate coloring H264 DSLR footage and feel that AVCHD is better to work with.
Click to expand...

From Wikipedia: "For video compression, AVCHD uses the MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 standard,"

All of these current compressed video standards are built around some flavor of MPEG-4. They have different file formats built around the actual video content for audio and metadata.
 
Last edited:
I'm about to shoot the last scenes of a feature (DVD and limited theater) and have had no problems with the built in codec. Obviously the 7Q was not available in time so I had no choice, but as it worked out, I'm glad I went this route. Even with the last feature, shot on an AF100, there were only two short scenes involving foliage where the codec couldn't handle it. The FS700 seems to be more robust and so far, no issues (other than obvious limitations as to how far you can take it in post).
 
I assume you shot this on SLOG2 (yes?), an 8 bit profile that can fall apart under certain circumstances. Though as others said, the corrected footage looks a little crushed, I think it looks pretty good. So what are your problems with AVCHD?
 
Jim Ritscher said:
I assume you shot this on SLOG2 (yes?), an 8 bit profile that can fall apart under certain circumstances. Though as others said, the corrected footage looks a little crushed, I think it looks pretty good. So what are your problems with AVCHD?
Click to expand...
No SLOG2. I still use the old regular firmware. I have not done any update yet. Will do when upgrading to 7Q.
As I said it looks crushed because of severe jpeg/web compression. It retains a lot more details when looking on calibrated monitor.
Well, one of the problem with this codec is that it produces severe banding, noise, and lack of detail in certain circumstances, especially when shooting interior nights.
I've had to do a lot of corrections to avoid banding by using gradients, denoising with Neat Video (which is a fantastic plugin for editors or colorists, the best ever used), and then retrieve sharpness that had gone after denoising.
After all, it's a great codec assuming it's only 24mbps 4:2:0.
But It took me a lot of work to achieve the look I want and it's not as perfect as i wanted it to be. As I also shoot raw on other systems, I think I lost patience and tolerance :)
Time for the big screen premiere now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top