Noise Reduction and Sharpness Test

[Ben_B]

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=72QSZK5Y

Sorry for massive size of everything

Also sorry for any slight exposure differences between shots...this was lit mostly by natural light but all were shot right next to each other and there are no clouds in the sky when I did this.

Labels are BELOW photo they label on this post.

Here is a quick test of Noise Reduction and Sharpness. There are 16 full sized screen grabs in this zip file, as well as a guide to each, which is reposted below. There is a noticeable exposure or dynamic range shift or something when ISO is changed to 800 and lens is stopped down (camera read same exposure...but things look a little brighter.) The most noticeable differences so far that I see looking at these stills occur in the shadow on the left, and of course, on the wall itself. Not sure if this test was particularly conclusive...it is hard to judge noise from stills. What I do see is that things can still get blocky in the shadows. However, an underexposed white wall has always been the enemy of the GH1, and for the most part the shots look nice...will leave you to see what settings you like. I actually don't mind higher sharpness because it looks...sharper...and doesn't seem to alias too much.

Ptool C settings. 1/60th shutter. Lumix 20mm f/1.7
Standard, contrast -2, saturation 0. Converted and pulldown removed with Compressor to Apple ProRes 422, Automatic Gamma Correction Off.

Shot 1:
f/1.7
ISO 200
Sharpness -2
NR -2

Shot 2:
f/1.7
ISO 200
Sharpness -2
NR +2

Shot 3:
f/1.7
ISO 200
Sharpness: 0
NR +2

Shot 4:
f/1.7
ISO 200
Sharpness: 0
NR: -2

Shot 5:
f/1.7
ISO 200
Sharpness: +2
NR: 0

Shot 6:
f/1.7
ISO 200
Sharpness: -2
NR: 0

Shot 7:
f/1.7
ISO 200
Sharpness: +2
NR: -2

Shot 8:
f/1.7
ISO 200
Sharpness: +2
NR: +2

 

[Ben_B]

These are the shots at ISO 800.

Shot 9:
f/3.5
ISO 800
Sharpness: -2
NR: -2

Shot 10:
f/3.5
ISO 800
Sharpness: -2
NR: +2

Shot 11:
f/3.5
ISO 800
Sharpness: 0
NR: +2

Shot 12:
f/3.5
ISO 800
Sharpness: 0
NR: -2

Shot 13:
f/3.5
ISO 800
Sharpness: +2
NR: 0

Shot 14:
f/3.5
ISO 800
Sharpness: -2
NR: 0

Shot 15:
f/3.5
ISO 800
Sharpness: +2
NR: -2

Shot 16:
f/3.5
ISO 800
Sharpness: + 2
NR: + 2

 

[butler360]

Thanks for the test! And I'm glad the images are huge.

To me it looks like the NR doesn't do a whole lot, but the sharpness being at 0 or +2 seems to improve the noise on the space poster, which is the only place I see much of a problem with these stills. It seems to be much more noticeably blocky when sharpness is at -2.

 

[jenningsp]

even with -2 sharpness you can see there is still some digital edge enhancement going on... most noticeably on the numbers. i wonder if we can get that turned off

 

[Adventsam]

Ben, did you evaluate the AdobeRGB colour space?

Ben, did you evaluate the AdobeRGB colour space?

I know I'm banging on about this, but it does flatten the tone, you only uncover it in still mode icon ie PASM settings, but it carries over to video in CMM too. Be interested in your comments?

 

[Ben_B]

I know I'm banging on about this, but it does flatten the tone, you only uncover it in still mode icon ie PASM settings, but it carries over to video in CMM too. Be interested in your comments?

I haven't been using AdobeRGB for anything but I will shoot some tests of it for my self later...I don't really think it will have too much of an effect on this particular test, because I wasn't necessarily going for the flatest possible image...hence why I shot standard (actually I kind of prefer the look of standard and shoot it a lot even though it's not the flatest.) This is partially because I actually wanted that relatively shallow shadow to be a little deeper so we could see what goes on in shadows, blacks, edges, etc.

 

[Ben_B]

even with -2 sharpness you can see there is still some digital edge enhancement going on... most noticeably on the numbers. i wonder if we can get that turned off

Yeah I see that too....at first I was thinking that there was just aliasing on the numbers, which sucks but is a reality of shooting with these cameras...in fact if you zoom in on these images in photoshop with a pixel grid turned on you can start to see blockiness show up before the pixel level...so the camera is not resolving the full 1080p, but we already knew that.

But yeah! I see what you're saying....if you look at the white space immediately around the numbers you'll see that it looks like it has been sharpened by some kind of edge enhancement....interesting.

 

[Ben_B]

So anyone know what they personally will be shooting on after looking at this? I think I am gonna keep shooting on NR -2 and Sharpness +1...which I had been doing back in the pre hack days to try and help the codec recognize when there was detail that needed to be kept. It's treated me well and made images I like and I don't really see the need to change it. Once you downscale the footage for the web you don't really notice any aliasing added by the sharpness, just on big lines, on which it will happen regardless, but I feel like it helps the camera retain more detail in areas like the wall, that would normally have a tendency to get muddied after the codec, color correction, and web compression are applied. I am also going to stay on standard, at least until the blue shift issue gets fixed, which the thought is this new mysterious update that is not yet fully released from Panasonic will do.

 

[PappasArts]

So anyone know what they personally will be shooting on after looking at this? I think I am gonna keep shooting on NR -2 and Sharpness +1...which I had been doing back in the pre hack days to try and help the codec recognize when there was detail that needed to be kept. It's treated me well and made images I like and I don't really see the need to change it. Once you downscale the footage for the web you don't really notice any aliasing added by the sharpness, just on big lines, on which it will happen regardless, but I feel like it helps the camera retain more detail in areas like the wall, that would normally have a tendency to get muddied after the codec, color correction, and web compression are applied. I am also going to stay on standard, at least until the blue shift issue gets fixed, which the thought is this new mysterious update that is not yet fully released from Panasonic will do.

Hey Ben,

Excellent test & thanks your doing it.

Amazing to see how this GH1 has gotten a second wind.... In these you shot 60i wrapper correct? Sine you mentioned pull down removal I'm assuming - Have you tried 24PN ticked? Did you alter your GOP?

As for detail- I do the same as you, as well NR- Pre-hack days the codec needed all you could give it...


Pappas

 

[cbrandin]

Have you found that there is any advantage to sharpening in camera versus doing it in post (aside from the extra work doing it in post)? Also, is there any extra quality to be gained by doing NR in post versus letting the camera do it?

I ask because both these settings affect the ratio between I frames and P frames. When detail is added by these settings the I frames become relatively bigger, reducing the bandwidth available to P frames and thus potentially adversely affecting overall image quality.

If sharpening in camera offers no advantage over doing it in post then it seems to me that there is no reason to make the CODEC deal with this extra "pseudo-detail".

NR is a little different in that it removes actual detail, although hopefully mostly meaningless detail, so the decision as to how high to set it is somewhat subjective.

I've seen a couple of postings where there is a little mud in dark but highly detailed sections of frames even though fairly high bandwidth settings are being used. I assume this is happening because the CODEC runs out of steam with so much detail. Reducing meaningless or unnecessary detail might eliminate this.

Chris

 

[Ben_B]

Hey Ben,

Excellent test & thanks your doing it.

Amazing to see how this GH1 has gotten a second wind.... In these you shot 60i wrapper correct? Sine you mentioned pull down removal I'm assuming - Have you tried 24PN ticked? Did you alter your GOP?

As for detail- I do the same as you, as well NR- Pre-hack days the codec needed all you could give it...


Pappas

Yeah I used 60i wrapper, I am avoiding 24pn for now because of the potential for card speed issues and because I haven't had the time to do a proper test to see if it will affect me. Would rather not have to deal with repatching the camera in the field. No I didn't alter the GOP. You have any recommendations?

 

[PappasArts]

Yeah I used 60i wrapper, I am avoiding 24pn for now because of the potential for card speed issues and because I haven't had the time to do a proper test to see if it will affect me. Would rather not have to deal with repatching the camera in the field. No I didn't alter the GOP. You have any recommendations?

Hey Ben,

Well, for 60i 15gop seems to be necessary- I tried lower ones in testing and then ran a motion wheel to see what would happen. Lower gops had weird image tearing. I don't know if that is Neoscene going "WTF" is this footage- since the GH13 did not exist when Neo was created.

However in 24PN, lower gops is not a bad thing. JVC's HD system ran 6 GOP for it's 24P and 30P. Those are good, however 24PN has issues. Hopefully the 24PN can get figured out, if not 60i is good. It's all gravy with our new GH1's.

I'm still focused on MJPEG as well, though many have swayed away from it. The compression artifacts are higher in the AVCHD when examining the image- Also I can underexpose a scene ( in MJPEG which is safe to do, at this higher bit rate- then lift the gamma in post with out consequences and have clean smooth shadows. I can't do that with AVCHD- however AVCHD has more high frequency detail & formulas can still get better. It's a camera with two codecs to choose- that's so awesome...


Pappas

 

[JoeJITSU]

Hey Ben,

Well, for 60i 15gop seems to be necessary- I tried lower ones in testing and then ran a motion wheel to see what would happen. Lower gops had weird image tearing. I don't know if that is Neoscene going "WTF" is this footage- since the GH13 did not exist when Neo was created.

However in 24PN, lower gops is not a bad thing. JVC's HD system ran 6 GOP for it's 24P and 30P. Those are good, however 24PN has issues. Hopefully the 24PN can get figured out, if not 60i is good. It's all gravy with our new GH1's.

I'm still focused on MJPEG as well, though many have swayed away from it. The compression artifacts are higher in the AVCHD when examining the image- Also I can underexpose a scene ( in MJPEG which is safe to do, at this higher bit rate- then lift the gamma in post with out consequences and have clean smooth shadows. I can't do that with AVCHD- however AVCHD has more high frequency detail & formulas can still get better. It's a camera with two codecs to choose- that's so awesome...


Pappas

So PaPas,
In your humble opinion what is the best settings to this date for your "pick"? Stable,reliable,Sharp,Color,etc?

 

[Chris Light]

i'm right in the middle of the "Neoscene w/24pn" dillemna myself, and the GOP thing just confuses me, so i'm curious to hear your answer to Joe's question.

at this point, the 24pn thing seems to be trouble...i like using Neoscene for editing purposes. i use the "c" settings in 3.36, so i might just turn the damn 24pn off and see what happens.