Straight from the Gh1 to your door

SonicStates

SonicStates

Well-known member
A big thanks to Daniel L for hosting this stuff

Here are the links:
http://gh1.dark-stone.com/sam/Countr...lotest1080.MTS
http://gh1.dark-stone.com/sam/Countr...llotest720.MTS
http://gh1.dark-stone.com/sam/KimbertheQueen1080.MTS
http://gh1.dark-stone.com/sam/TrainJello720.MTS
http://gh1.dark-stone.com/sam/TrainJelloTest1080.MTS

These are unmodified files from my Japanese model GH1. Please note they were shot while on a date with my wife so I kind of shot them without paying too much attention. I just thought everyone would be interested in the files as they are for analysis. I will leave it up to the pros to answer technically questions but I will try my best to answer anything where I can.
Sorry about the dirty train windows... the countryside files are a little cleaner...and the self indulgent kitty cat one was because the colour in Kimber's eyes was pretty spesh.
Cheers.
Sam.
 
Thanks again SonicStates. Many of us have been waiting for this for some time now.

If anybody would like to share more videos and need hosting PM me.
 
I'll be doing some more shooting over the next couple of days...any requests? I won't be near any 'artificial' sources of light (aka studio setup) for the next few days but if there are any settings etc you want to see. Let me know.
Cool.
 
Thanks SonicStates and Daniel. I've had a look at all the footage and yeah... like Kholi said, don't use this for traveling car/train type shots. With the 17mbps compression it starts to look a bit like an impressionist painting! Distant objects look passable, but objects passing closer to the camera not so much.

Was there any autoexposure going on in these clips? A few times it looked to me like the aperture jumped (like from frame 123 to 124 of TrainJello720, look at the left side of the screen, the sky).
 
ALl the footage looks very goof...especially the cat footage (sharp). I can see where the codec fell apart during those quick drive-bys of the trees etc. But honestly...HDV does the same thing...and it's not like you see it while it's in motion. Obviously the interlaced artifacts is bothersome but overall the footage looks good.
 
720/60P is a LOT better for any motion. I'm ready to resign myself to using 720/60P for everything that has any movement in it, and locked down shots switching over to 1080/24P to net the most detail then mastering the project at 720/24P.

Instant HD > 1080P For any hardcore distribution methods.

Goooo Sonic!
 
Exposure jump: Sonic might have his Shadow Correction on. Also, I notice at the wide end of the kit lens, if you zoom in just a HAIR to F4.1 it's actually BRIGHTER than 4.0.
 
Appreciate the footage SonicStates, it's very helpful, however---I have to ask though--seeing that there are titles at the beginning of the two 720 60p clips that I saw, that leads me to believe that the files were edited, and therefore re-encoded. Is that what you did? Was it some form of native AVCHD editing and only the beginning seconds are actually recompressed?

The footage I saw broke down into a blocky mess as the train passes trees/foliage near the window at speed, but it looks a lot better with the wider countryside views.

Just wondering how you actually arrived at the files you put online?

Thanks!
 
I've noticed a lot of interlace artifacts even after pulldown in "countryside...1080". Does it mean that coder is unaware of interlaced structure and simply compress video on frame-by-frame, not field-by-field basis?

Besides, DGAVCIndex definitely shows 13,8 Mbps for video both for 1080 and 720 footage. I suppose everyone would like to see it pushed to maximum, especially on such hard footage.
 
Elton said:
Appreciate the footage SonicStates, it's very helpful, however---I have to ask though--seeing that there are titles at the beginning of the two 720 60p clips that I saw, that leads me to believe that the files were edited, and therefore re-encoded. ..
Click to expand...
I have the same question....I thought it was my player that threw in those titles... But I'm glad you said something.

The footage does not look terrible (aside from the blocks)...but overall it does not look as clean as everyone else' footage.
 
Train footage hurts.

It also hurts so much to know that the nanoflash will be out around the same time the GH1 hits the US and there is NO HDMI OUT.

Come on Panasonic enable this feature and any codec issues are gone, and no transcoding too. Why Panasonic why ( i can guess why tho). So close and yet so far.
 
mico said:
..... there is NO HDMI OUT.

Come on Panasonic enable this feature and any codec issues are gone, and no transcoding too. Why Panasonic why ( i can guess why tho). So close and yet so far.
Click to expand...

Patience mico Patience!
They will do it..! Just have to wait for 6 months.

They cannot ignore so much complains!
GH2 will be perfect in all directions I guess!

By that time, there will be more competition anyway! :violent5:
 
I know sometime in the future they will implement, but its just so unfortunate that this one simple feature, that even small chip avchd cams can do right now, has been crippled by Panasonic.

The nanoflash would give this cam such superiority over their other cams and that may be why its not enabled. Not sure if 6 months will be enough for them to let go.
 
Ian-T said:
I have the same question....I thought it was my player that threw in those titles... But I'm glad you said something.

The footage does not look terrible (aside from the blocks)...but overall it does not look as clean as everyone else' footage.
Click to expand...

There was no editing or re-encoding...I simply dumped the footage from the card into edius to see what I was looking at...deleted it from the timeline and then renamed the files on the card.

What titles are you talking about??? Sorry can't see for myself considering I'm away from the office.

Also, I may have had the exposure set to auto but I just pointed and shot...will be much more attentive to detail in the next couple of tests... I was thinking some night stuff.
 
I'm starting to believe it's my player throwing in that watermark I keep seeing. I had to download the free k-lite codec to get these files to play back. when I do play it a watermark that says "Divx Video" keeps coming up.
 
Ian-T--you're not imagining that. I was using VLC player and I just found it has a feature called "OSD" or On Screen Display that was simply showing the file name as an overlay for a few seconds after the beginning of clip playback. Weird.

Still, that's even worse...it eliminates the recompression question.
 
Last edited:
Elton - I was seeing similar macroblocking when viewing it in VLC (on a mac). It seems to have trouble playing it back. Going through the footage in After Effects, it's ugly, but it's not THAT ugly.
 

Attachments

  • CountrysideJellotest720-(0;00;07;55).jpg
    CountrysideJellotest720-(0;00;07;55).jpg
    167.9 KB · Views: 0
SLoNiCK said:
I've noticed a lot of interlace artifacts even after pulldown in "countryside...1080". Does it mean that coder is unaware of interlaced structure and simply compress video on frame-by-frame, not field-by-field basis?

Besides, DGAVCIndex definitely shows 13,8 Mbps for video both for 1080 and 720 footage. I suppose everyone would like to see it pushed to maximum, especially on such hard footage.
Click to expand...


What program are you using to remove the pulldown?
 
Ramon Boutviseth

What program are you using to remove the pulldown?

I tried 2 methods:
1) Wrote .avs script
directshowsource("CountrysideJellotest1080.MTS").AssumeTFF().doubleweave().Pulldown(0,2)
and fed it to VDub. Used Haali splitter and ffdshow to make "directshowsource..." work properly with this .mts file.
2) Demuxed the original file with DGAVCIndex, then opened .dga project in AviDemux via AVISynthProxy and applied Decomb Telecide filter for pulldown.

So decoding and pulldown removal tools were different. And file was processed in proper way - it can be easily checked with pillars at the beginning. As result I got the same blocky mess with some interlacing remains, but without any interlacing ghosting. Or did I miss something?
 

Attachments

  • blocky_crop.jpg
    blocky_crop.jpg
    97.9 KB · Views: 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top