GH5 How interested are you in a GH6 anymore?

[stoneinapond]

From an imaging point of view very little to raise the hopes of Panasonic camera users. A very short reference to the LUMIX 20th anniversary at around the 51-minute mark of a 54-minute press release video. Not even a vague reference to the Varicam/Eva camera futures. Is it the end of their cinema lineup? Where are they going I wonder?

I hear you. And my feeling, and it's just a feeling, is that the company has ceded the high end cine market to the likes of the Venice and Arri. And it seems the EVA has gone that way too. Sad in many ways.

My reason for asking about watching the presentation wasn't about the camera business per se. It was after all a CES presentation that tried to highlight the many sides of the company's business. The camera side was obviously a scattering of crumbs fto the hopeful. And I do understand that companies are interested in making money and therefore much of what was presented was self serving. But I was impressed with the tone of the presentation focusing on a global issue that affects us all. The idea that a company would calculate the carbon footprint of its worldwide consumers and strive (at least in words) to mitigate it gave me some hope, especially after the apparent failure of the world's political elite to do something substantial about an existential crisis. Whether it really does anything is another matter.

(Hope this isn't considered political...:huh

 

[stoneinapond]

....but they have so many things cooking at once they don't need it for the purely financial reasons.

What a delicious pun.

I do think that they have larger interests in the audio/visual sphere and the world of entertainment, and to that end having some sort of visual capture devices fits into that paradigm. But it seems the S1H fills that need and is cheaper to produce than high end cine cameras.

 

[DLD]

I hear you. And my feeling, and it's just a feeling, is that the company has ceded the high end cine market to the likes of the Venice and Arri. And it seems the EVA has gone that way too.

Eva and Varicam certainly look gone. And if the company exit one portion of the market - especially, a rapidly falling market - the rest is pretty much tying up the loose ends. I have mentioned this before too - at some point, the photo video industry will be a two horse race. And Panasonic will only be the reminder that they shoot horses. Don't they?

 

[ahalpert]

the reality is most FF cameras can barely manage 60p right now and 120p is just not possible at all. Even for a few minutes.
.

It's coming. I recently shot a music at 120fps the whole way (except for the ultra wide angle shots, because the distortion is awful and you can't use in-camera distortion correction at 120 so I dropped to 60)

The beauty is that you can fold 120 into 24 without having to interpolate frames. But you also have 20%, 40%, 60%, and 80% slow motion available without frame interpolation. 60fps doesn't fold into 24.

A7siii and fx3 can do unlimited 4k120. It should be even easier heat-wise in M43

 

[aram]

ahalpert, I do not think I understand. 24 is 40% of 60, so speeding down to 24 from 60 needs no interpolation, unless we are talking about the 23.9 and 59 frame rates which are terrible. Am I right or am I missing something?

 

[Zim]

Weird. Unless they are going to rename it?

New camera new name. Maybe

 

[ahalpert]

ahalpert, I do not think I understand. 24 is 40% of 60, so speeding down to 24 from 60 needs no interpolation, unless we are talking about the 23.9 and 59 frame rates which are terrible. Am I right or am I missing something?

Right, what I meant was that if you shoot something in 60fps and then want to play it back in real-time in a 24fps timeline, then you're forced to conform the 60fps framerate to 24 either by repeating and skipping frames or by interpolating frames. So, if you want to shoot in slow-motion but reserve the option to play back the footage at regular speed, then you're making a big compromise. 60fps can only play back at 40%, 80%, 120% while using only recorded frames playing at the correct times.

Whereas if you shoot 120fps, you can play it back at 20%, 40%, 60%, 80%, or 100% without interpolating frames or playing any frames twice or doing anything to screw up your motion cadence. So, aside from the fact that your shutter speed will need to be at least as high as 1/120, you're not making any compromises for using the footage as slow-motion or regular speed in the edit

 

[OnSet]

ahalpert, I do not think I understand. 24 is 40% of 60, so speeding down to 24 from 60 needs no interpolation, unless we are talking about the 23.9 and 59 frame rates which are terrible. Am I right or am I missing something?

Agreeing with ahalpert!

A different way of thinking about it is that to get from 60 to 24 without combining frames you do so by alternately throwing away either one or two frames out of your sequence. So your used frames shot at 60 might be 1,3,6,8,11,13, etc... This produces a slightly uneven motion.
The other way to do it was the old tv system of alternately combining fields (the 3:2 pulldown) - again producing an irregular cadence.
Going from 120 -> 24 would mean using every fifth frame. So no uneven aspect to that cadence, simply frames 1,6,11,16,21,26, etc...
Of course you're probably going to want to enable the motion blur feature in your postproduction system because of the shortened exposure time!

 

[DLD]

I do think that they have larger interests in the audio/visual sphere and the world of entertainment, and to that end having some sort of visual capture devices fits into that paradigm. But it seems the S1H fills that need and is cheaper to produce than high end cine cameras.

BTW, I am not sure if people know or remember this but the company then known as Matsushiita (with one I) used to own the Universal Studios (that's right, and not CBS). It was the big deal back in the early-mid 1990's. They punted half a decade later. Hollywood just wasn't meant for them.

 

[Thomas Smet]

ahalpert, I do not think I understand. 24 is 40% of 60, so speeding down to 24 from 60 needs no interpolation, unless we are talking about the 23.9 and 59 frame rates which are terrible. Am I right or am I missing something?

60 divided by 24 is 2.5 and not a whole number. That means it is harder to conform 60p to 24p besides a slow down. 60p divided by 2 for example is 30 and no whole number can get to 24p. That makes mixing 24p and 60p kind of cumbersome. 120p is divided by 24 as a whole number so one could skip exactly every 5 frames of 120p to get a perfect 24p. 60p means skipping every 2.5 frames which translates to 2 frames then 3 frames then 2 frames and so forth. It creates an irregular pattern and looks odd.

If one only uses higher framreates for slow motion then yes any framreate can be slowed down by a certain percentage to get 24. Even 30p can be slowed down to 24p. Heck even 25p can be slowed down to 24p. But conforming higher framerates to a lower frame rate for normal speed motion is where it gets problematic.

I used to do conversions of 24p projects to 25p PAL by doing a small speed change. Altered the length of the projects slightly but it created a superior 100% perfect motion conversion. The alternative method of 24p to 25p is to just drop a frame every second. Kept the same length and speed but it obviously created a tiny hiccup every second. I much preferred the slight speed change method. I only bring this up because there is a speed change and then a conversion change. Conversion is much more difficult to convert perfectly. I also really wish PAL countries would have moved away from 25/50p. Its so difficult to work with. They could have easily just moved to 24/48 and the whole world would have been much better off.

 

[ahalpert]

Of course you're probably going to want to enable the motion blur feature in your postproduction system because of the shortened exposure time!

Good idea - do you know of a way to do that in FCP? What would also be cool is if you could shoot 120fps with a 360-degree shutter and then if you want to take it down to 100% or 80% speed, combine every frame with the frame following it. So instead of 1/120 shutter you end up with 1/60 shutter for 24fps or 30fps (80% slow mo in 24fps timebase). Of course, if you use it at 20% slow motion, it would be a bit blurry. Nevertheless. But I'm not sure of a way to combine frames systematically like that. Maybe you could program it in AE

 

[OnSet]

Good idea - do you know of a way to do that in FCP? What would also be cool is if you could shoot 120fps with a 360-degree shutter and then if you want to take it down to 100% or 80% speed, combine every frame with the frame following it. So instead of 1/120 shutter you end up with 1/60 shutter for 24fps or 30fps (80% slow mo in 24fps timebase). Of course, if you use it at 20% slow motion, it would be a bit blurry. Nevertheless. But I'm not sure of a way to combine frames systematically like that. Maybe you could program it in AE

I don't use FCP, but I would suspect you would do it in Motion.

I believe you can create blurs in Premiere Pro using the shutter angle feature in the Transform effect, though it's probably better done in After Effects when in the Adobe realm.
Motion blurs can also be added in the Color Correction tab of Davinci Resolve Studio (the paid version), and I think there may also be some fusion workarounds in the free version.
My main interest in blurs doesn't derive as much from speed change as from wanting to be able to improve green screen keying by using a faster shutter to freeze movement, then motion blur it after creating a clean key. (Think about shooting a dancer or a gymnast in a green screen stage.)

 

[aram]

Thanks for the ahalpert and for the clarification, Thomas Smet , I did not realise that it was about playing at 24fps but without slowing the footage down. That makes total sense!

 

[Thomas Smet]

I don't use FCP, but I would suspect you would do it in Motion.

I believe you can create blurs in Premiere Pro using the shutter angle feature in the Transform effect, though it's probably better done in After Effects when in the Adobe realm.
Motion blurs can also be added in the Color Correction tab of Davinci Resolve Studio (the paid version), and I think there may also be some fusion workarounds in the free version.
My main interest in blurs doesn't derive as much from speed change as from wanting to be able to improve green screen keying by using a faster shutter to freeze movement, then motion blur it after creating a clean key. (Think about shooting a dancer or a gymnast in a green screen stage.)

You could also just use better keyers that can handle motion blur. The method you describe is one method but its not the only method. Anytime you add processing like creating motion blur where there was none you can introduce artifacts. A similar process to optical flow slow motion. The fake motion blur tools essentially create many new frames to merge together as motion blur. That may have artifacts and isn't as natural as it could be.

A good Keyer and a well lit screen should be able to keep the motion blur. I use the Delta Keyer in Fusion for that reason. Before that I always used Keylight in After Effects. Both keys will keep the motion blur. The key, ha, is to not choke the edges or use too much range in what colors are removed. Doing so will crush the motion blur. With the Deltas Keyer the trick is to shoot a clean plate which is a blank shot of the green/blue screen. That is then used to even out the lighting so you don't have to crush the edges or use too many variations of color to remove the background. It allows the Keyer to keep the motion blur and create the most natural key.

I learned compositing from Jay Cooper the VFX lead at ILM. He taught me to always keep the edges and motion blur as natural as possible. Sometimes that means rotoscoping and garbage masking out parts of the shot. Most VGFX are never a drop a Keyer on and boom its done. Much like fine grading there is multiple steps to a good key. Having a tool like the Delta Keyer helps a ton for Locked off camera shots. If the camera isn't locked off you really need a motion control system. $$$

You also want a Keyer capable of preserving detail like that for shadows and transparent objects like glass or fabric. Things like motion blur, glass and fabric can really get messed up by fudging with the values too much. Even if you shot with a certain shutter speed and added fake motion blur you still run the risk of crushing shadows and transparent objects. Thats why its better to get into the practice of keeping edges and details as natural as possible. If its a talking head static kind of thing like an interview maybe not a big deal but that really limits the creativity and use of a green screen to only use it for that kind of material. The real fun happens when you do full body virtual sets or have to move the camera.

 

[Zim]

Yeah...and completely change it. Scrap MFT and release a new FF or S35 camera.

There is no reason not to name it after already calling it a GH6 unless it's a brand new, amazing MFT line, which we'll pretend it is.

Weirdest thing I've ever seen/heard at a conference.

Maybe it will be a brand new amazing MFT line. I hope so. Until then I guess I use my 12 Pro Max and GH3! to make my next film. If the GH5II would drop in price maybe. I'm sure the AF is improved. Remember when people would say, "Pros don't use AF" It still looks like a great camera and improves on the GH5 which was a great camera.

 

[OnSet]

You also want a Keyer capable of preserving detail like that for shadows and transparent objects like glass or fabric. Things like motion blur, glass and fabric can really get messed up by fudging with the values too much. Even if you shot with a certain shutter speed and added fake motion blur you still run the risk of crushing shadows and transparent objects. Thats why its better to get into the practice of keeping edges and details as natural as possible. If its a talking head static kind of thing like an interview maybe not a big deal but that really limits the creativity and use of a green screen to only use it for that kind of material. The real fun happens when you do full body virtual sets or have to move the camera.

Hello Thomas,

Yes, for most of my typical corporate or documentary green screen stuff it's not an issue - and for someone sitting or standing and talking at 30fps a shutter speed of 1/60 or 1/80 produces great results with Delta Keyer in Resolve/Fusion. But in cases like that there's very little motion blur to deal with - maybe some hand movement or a bit of wispy hair - and this can be dealt with fairly easily. Lately I've been playing with adding a Glow node (set very low) after the Merge -- to smooth older skin tones/details a bit and take the curse off the 4k sharpness - since on a lot of shoots since Covid the subjects (or company policies) have eliminated full makeup.

But one specific shoot comes to mind where the motion blur without a faster shutter was crazy -- a full height shot with two cheerleaders doing 'jump splits' (I don't know what you call the move??) with pom-poms and their long hair moving all over the place. But you get the idea... The 30p (1/60th) blurs from a 'normal' camera were a nightmare -- but the 120p footage from the slow motion camera (w/180 degree shutter) proved a better option for us, even when brought to normal speed by frame skipping.

 

[OnSet]

Remember when people would say, "Pros don't use AF" It still looks like a great camera and improves on the GH5 which was a great camera.

I also remember when I had an operator for (almost) every camera -- at least every camera except for the wide establishing.
But in the last year the number of shoots where I've been DP'ing and operating 3 or even 4 cameras to limit the number of people (due to Covid protocols) has made me wish for better AF from my GH5s and BGH1, and really see the need for an EVA2 with great continuous AF (to match that of the FX6 and FX9).

 

[NorBro]

Maybe it will be a brand new amazing MFT line. I hope so. Until then I guess I use my 12 Pro Max and GH3! to make my next film. If the GH5II would drop in price maybe. I'm sure the AF is improved. Remember when people would say, "Pros don't use AF" It still looks like a great camera and improves on the GH5 which was a great camera.

The GH5II is nickels and dimes. You should just get it and make your next film and then when it's done I'll go in and zoom in 300% on all of the parts where focus is dancing around. lol

And people say a lot of things...it's why we've had world wars.

 

[Thomas Smet]

Hello Thomas,

Yes, for most of my typical corporate or documentary green screen stuff it's not an issue - and for someone sitting or standing and talking at 30fps a shutter speed of 1/60 or 1/80 produces great results with Delta Keyer in Resolve/Fusion. But in cases like that there's very little motion blur to deal with - maybe some hand movement or a bit of wispy hair - and this can be dealt with fairly easily. Lately I've been playing with adding a Glow node (set very low) after the Merge -- to smooth older skin tones/details a bit and take the curse off the 4k sharpness - since on a lot of shoots since Covid the subjects (or company policies) have eliminated full makeup.

But one specific shoot comes to mind where the motion blur without a faster shutter was crazy -- a full height shot with two cheerleaders doing 'jump splits' (I don't know what you call the move??) with pom-poms and their long hair moving all over the place. But you get the idea... The 30p (1/60th) blurs from a 'normal' camera were a nightmare -- but the 120p footage from the slow motion camera (w/180 degree shutter) proved a better option for us, even when brought to normal speed by frame skipping.

But that Motion blur shouldn’t be a problem. The Delta keyed on its own is not enough. You need a clean plate to even out the screen and lighting. Then the Delta keyer range doesn’t need to be as high and you can keep the motion blur.

less motion blur is only easier to key with the basic view of using the range slider to get a good result. In that case yes less motion blur will be easier but that’s not the most natural way to do it. It leads to a lot of post processing that can make the shots look fake. Plus it’s much harder to work with and requires a lot more light. Adding motion blur in post takes a lot more processing power as well. It’s a solution but it’s not the most optimal solution and it is not the only solution.

next time you have a shoot like the cheerleaders shoot a clean plate with the camera in it’s locked down position or just grab a second or so of the video when they move away from the green screen. You can loop a small segment. It’s all the same thing. Then Delta can use that clean plate to even out the screen and lighting. This gives you a perfect color screen behind your subject and when you apply the key color you can use a much smaller range that will maintain the motion blur. Fusion also has a clean plate node to help fake a clean plate if you don’t have any portion of just the naked green screen. It’s much better to have a naked section of video however. You do want to make sure it’s a small video section as well and not just a still frame. A still frame doesn’t have a moving noise pattern and may not look as good as a small video segment that does have noise that moves around each frame. Of course you should shoot as clean as possible to not have my noise at all. Noise can create edge chattering which means you have to choke or blur the edges even more.

absolutle best key I ever pulled with affordable cameras was shot a raw 3:1 4K on a P4k and keyed with Delta and a clean plate. Every pixel and strand of hair was maintained even with fast motion and motion blur. The fluid movement of hands moving very fast looked exactly like it should have on a real background thanks to maintaining the perfect motion blur. It’s insane the level of VFX ability we have now with a $1,300 camera including the full version of Resolve/Fusion. If they could just make a global shutter camera at this price point it would be the ultimate VFX camera.

 

[ahalpert]

Thanks for the ahalpert and for the clarification, Thomas Smet , I did not realise that it was about playing at 24fps but without slowing the footage down. That makes total sense!

right, so what we're saying is totally irrelevant if you're definitely going to use the 60fps as slow mo. But I shoot a lot of stuff that is all 60fps just in case the editor wants to slow mo something. And two shots from the same clip could be used separately as normal speed and as slow motion right next to the other in the edit. So, I'm keen to experiment more with 120fps for that scenario. If I shoot is 1/120 shutter then I'm probably at the same shutter speed I was going to use for 60fps anyway