MJPEG 70mbits+ 1080p settings

Jordell Jarnell said:
...is it possible to combine Pappas #3 with lpowell 75 Mbps Hi performance patch, i.e. essentially replace the quality/table values of it with the Pappas values?
Click to expand...
Yes, in PTool the MJPEG settings are completely separate from the AVCHD settings, and you can freely combine MJPEG and AVCHD settings from different INI patch files. For some insight on how the MJPEG settings in my Peak Performance Patch were fine-tuned for a broad range of shooting conditions, the following discussion may be of interest:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...estions-here&p=2244539&viewfull=1#post2244539
 
icon1.gif
@ lPowell Thank you for the reply; it really helps. Also, with the latest pTool (3.51d) I assume other parms that used to be of interest to MJPEG modders aren't really needed and that the Quality/Table parms are the ones that, by far, most affect MJPEG's performance. Much thanks for the link; I had passed over it briefly but it certainly paid to look more closely. And, as I don't want to go against the no questions request, I noted that there doesn't seem to be a definitive answer to the exchange here http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?213425-MJPEG-Encoder-Research-no-questions-here/page6: "I'd be most interested to see a comparison of this set of MJPEG patches using a low-light scene with sharply-focused color gradients rather than busy details." Does the opinion "From my tests, it appears that your Q2/T2 settings are totally sufficient for a high detail, sharp-focus scene. Probably overkill (wasted bandwidth) for a low-detail, low-light, soft-focus, or shallow-DOF scene." hold? Or, putting it more directly, overkill or not, are there other settings more suitable for that particular situation? P.S. Sorry for kind of raking over ploughed ground but there may be a bit more of that coming as those of us who can now affort GH1's on the used market come on the train y'all have been on for the past couple of years - and let it be said we add our most grateful thanks for all of the pioneering work done on the GH1.
 
Last edited:
@ PappasArts Thank you for the reply. As noted in the reply to lPowell, I apologize for raking over ploughed ground; there may be a few posts from us who are taking advantage of the GH2 to get a GH1 and are now only getting on a train you guys have been running for a couple of years. I think it amounts to us trying to sift the many, many posts on the GH1 hack to cull the conclusions of all the hard work done on the GH1 as the GH2 will undoubtedly command future attention and our ability to make a contribution is next to nil. Don't like the "vultury" sound of that but it's probably reality so I greatly appreciate any help in simply getting the context for some past work done using pTool versions that aren't applicable today. As also noted in the reply, if it's now simply a Quality/Table entry with the other parms for MJPEG no longer of interest, I now know how to do that but I will certainly be interested to know if it's now that simple so look forward to your checking out 3.51d and its usability in this context. Thank you and all the others for the pioneering work done on the GH1.
 
Jordell Jarnell said:
icon1.gif
...I assume other parms that used to be of interest to MJPEG modders aren't really needed and that the Quality/Table parms are the ones that, by far, most affect MJPEG's performance... Does the opinion "From my tests, it appears that your Q2/T2 settings are totally sufficient for a high detail, sharp-focus scene. Probably overkill (wasted bandwidth) for a low-detail, low-light, soft-focus, or shallow-DOF scene." hold? Or, putting it more directly, overkill or not, are there other settings more suitable for that particular situation?
Click to expand...
In addition to the Qn/Tn settings, 4:2:2 color depth and MJPEG width and height settings make a direct impact on the amount of data packed into each video frame. There are internal limits on frame data size as well as bitrate that cannot be exceeded without undermining reliability.

While low-detail, low-light, and/or soft-focus scenes do not require high bitrates, they do benefit from using Quantization Matrix Table 4. This encodes image details and gradients with minimum quantization loss, which is essential for avoiding banding and posterization. The Q1/T1 settings are tuned for these conditions, not for highly detailed, sharply focused scenes.
 
First, thank you for your replies and patience; it may be starting to get through. I take it that the bitrates for MJPEG are governed by the AVCHD Compression parms even though to the really uninitiated (me) it would appear, from the title, they would control only the AVCHD bitrates. This comes from simply comparing the 75 & 60 .ini's. Given all this, my first patch card of choice is the 75er with 24p enabled fully aware of possible problems, backed up by the 75er "native". Generally I'll have a small laptop available for playback and won't miss the convenience of in camera playback of the MJPEG; hey, got a back up card for that capability too!
 
Jordell Jarnell said:
I take it that the bitrates for MJPEG are governed by the AVCHD Compression parms even though to the really uninitiated (me) it would appear, from the title, they would control only the AVCHD bitrates.
Click to expand...
No, the MJPEG patch settings are completely separate and unaffected by the AVCHD settings. PTool helpfully lists the MJPEG and AVCHD patches under separate headings to make it easy to tell them apart.
 
Yes, there are headings but they don't seem to reveal the secret sauce! Comparing H and I doesn't obviously reveal how MJPEG gets to 75Mbps from 60 as pTool indicates they are identical in the MJPEG area except for 720p30 height. I don't get how MJPEG bitrates are modified.
 
lpowell said:
Check the link in my signature for my Reliable In-Camera Playback Patch.
Click to expand...

thanks.


i'm just a little confused about the whole 24p wrapper thing. What is the advantage of having it checked? is it only that you save time transcoding (sp) it from 60i to 24p....or does it change the quality of the colours etc?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top