GH5 NR -3 vs -5?

F

filmguy123

Veteran
Has anyone really dug into this yet? There was debate early on that the expected “-5, for sure!” wisdom may be flawed on the GH5 due to how it handles temporal NR and much cleaner high ISO in camera.

How does higher ISO fair with -5 ? Any official or unofficial in depth tests and experimentation on the NR settings specifically as they relate to the GH5, as well as how they relate to ISO 1600-3200?
 
In GH4 any other than NR -5 adds tons of mud in high iso. I have not yet tested it with GH5 because I always use NR -5. NR -5 contains a fair amount of NR already but I will test NR -4 to NR 0 when I will have time.
 
cause y'all are smarter than me ;)

Learned a lot from other people's more scientific assessments that I wouldn't have noticed, but likely saved me from being bit when I would've noticed a bit too late in post. This forum has been invaluable in that.

I know Paul has studied this stuff in obsessive depth, but not sure if he's yet gotten around to any closer GH5 specific assessments of this in detail. Perhaps it's identical to GH4, however there was debate on this early on.
 
Filmguy, I don't know the answer, but I love your response!! These forums are about a great cooperative learning to keep each other from re-inventing the wheel and share information when we learn it. All goes to make the craft better. I am watching to see if anyone has constructive input.
 
newadam said:
Filmguy, I don't know the answer, but I love your response!! These forums are about a great cooperative learning to keep each other from re-inventing the wheel and share information when we learn it. All goes to make the craft better. I am watching to see if anyone has constructive input.
Click to expand...

Co-opertive learning is all good, but some people like to ask the same question over an over, instead of finding out what works for them personally. If we all did that, then the wheel reinvention thingy wouldn't come up for discussion.

So what if I told you I never lower the NR setting on my GH5. What does that do for you? Nothing, right? You could get 9 different answers and still the question would not be satisfactorily addressed as to what qualities someone prefers in an image.

And just for clarification, I don't touch the NR setting.
 
stoneinapond said:
So what if I told you I never lower the NR setting on my GH5. What does that do for you? Nothing, right?
Click to expand...

Nothing, correct.

filmguy123 said:
Any official or unofficial in depth tests and experimentation on the NR settings specifically as they relate to the GH5
Click to expand...

Something like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oefLDnP2mk would be more helpful, if such a test exists, but also a better written understanding of how it affects the specific GH5 pipeline. I don't know and cannot find information on how the GH5 handles its cleaner ISO vs GH4 (GH5 has significantly more photo sites, yet vastly cleaner image); however, to what extent do NR settings in GH5 affect that clearly different pipleine? Does it differ in what it affects in the image processing pipeline from GH4's effect? The concern is that there may be less than obvious degradation of some of the GH5s key advantages over the GH4 by turning down NR in ways that may be less than immediately obvious.
 
I know this is going to be an unpopular opinion, but I leave NR at zero if recording internally. The reason is simple - noise is hard to compress. NR algorithms are designed to intelligently deal with noise, compression algorithms are not. The noiser the image you record, the more precious bandwidth is wasted on noise vs signal. The default setting is generally the best balance of those two concerns.

Now, if I am recording externally, have bandwidth to spare, and have the time budget to do noise reduction in post, then I'll knock it down to -5. (But don't fool yourself, the GH5 is still doing significant, sophisticated NR at -5.)
 
I agree with filmguy: people here see/find things deeper than I might, so its nice to ask the experienced people. :)
 
newadam said:
filmguy, i don't know the answer, but i love your response!! These forums are about a great cooperative learning to keep each other from re-inventing the wheel and share information when we learn it. All goes to make the craft better. I am watching to see if anyone has constructive input.
Click to expand...
Ditto!
 
I've just done a quick test with a locked down camera in 400mbps HLG with the Leaming LUT 400ISO. Viewing at 100% on a UHD timeline the differences between 0 and -5 in NR and sharpness are so small as to be insignificant. You have to go to +5 sharpening to see any noticable sharpening of the image. I'll do further tests at different ISO's but for now I can't see any practical difference in shooting 0 or -5. Likely exposure and focusing/lens quality differences are a greater influence on noise and sharpness and if you are delivering HD you will see no difference whatever sharpness and NR setting s you choose. +5 NR looks very good. It's very gentle and I can't see it softening details so this could be my new default.....
 
Last edited:
I noticed a diff when I did some 4k testing on GH4. I wasnt looking at the SHARPNESS though, just the blur of the "grain". at -5, there is not much splochiness, just digital grainy, and at 0 more smeary, splotchy in the "noise reduced" areas. Since I don't have NEAT VIDEO, but don't care for smeary splotchy, I usually roll at -2 to -3 just to cut smeary from the sharper areas. My inexperienced experience. :)
 
Last edited:
-5 for me.

Why? Because if you think how hard your computer works with something like Neat Video to get rid of noise, do you think that the camera running live compression at 30p or more is going to do a better, more accurate job? No chance in hell.

I'd much rather not have detail removed due to a NR algorithm optimised in camera for speed over accuracy. The GH5 isn't noisy to begin with, and even if you go into the higher ISOs, the noise is pretty even across the image, without any real pattern noise I can see.

Noise is a complicated beast to tame, so I'd much rather have the detail and noise there for me in post, to get rid of using an algorithm optimised for accuracy instead of speed, which is tweakable to the exact scene requirements by me.

Just my 2c.

Cheers,

Paul :)
 
Paul, how does the GH5 process -5 and noise in general different than the GH4? Is it's natively better noise performance unaffected by moving to NR -5?

Have you tested -3 vs -5 in the GH5 in particular? I know you ran these extensively in GH4, just wondering if you have relied on that same assumption when building GH5 recommendations, or if you re-tested the net differences to see how the GH5 handles in comparison?
 
stoneinapond said:
Why? What are your perceived benefits?
Click to expand...

NR 0 just feels a little "sterile", as if it's cleaning up small details that should be in the texture. NR -5 is my preference, not much more to add except in low light NR 0 is good. NR on the GH5 seems very effective, and the default 0 is a smidge too effective in good light.
 
visceralpsyche said:
-5 for me.

Why? Because if you think how hard your computer works with something like Neat Video to get rid of noise, do you think that the camera running live compression at 30p or more is going to do a better, more accurate job? No chance in hell.
Click to expand...

I'm not an engineer and don't pretend to understand fully all that is involved with noise reduction, but my feelings are the exact opposite. Yes, Neat Video has to work harder because it is working from scratch, based on the noise profile you provide. But the camera sensor's noise profile is already a given to the rest of the pipeline of the GH5, allowing the camera to work more efficiently with the image. Plus, if you can't find an even-noise pattern in your footage, NV has a hard time figuring out what is what. That's not to say I don't use the software, but it can seriously slow down production.

Again, this is just a feeling. To each his/her own.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top