13 replies to this topic

[raybriant]

Hey Guys/Girls,

I could really use some help...

I purchased the GH2 after seeing all the incredible footage online and reading about the quality of video obtained by applying a patch to the stock firmware.

I have tried Vanilla, Unified, Driftwood Drewnet, Sanity 5, as well as the ones mentioned in Andrew's GH2 book which I purchased to learn more about my camera. Honestly, I am really trying to see a difference but except for the increased file size, I can't see a difference.

I am no expert as my questions below will expose but I am a really quick learner.

Day after day, I have been reading reviews about hacks/patches and have watched amazing videos of water flowing over rocks, movie quality short films and watched intently the "Great camera shootout" documentary which showed that even the experts see things differently.

So, I am now officially confused and have a case of paralysis by analysis.

Can you help me out?

Let me start with what I don't want.... I don't want a hack/patch that requires me to take out my battery and reset my camera. Having to pop out the battery doesn't inspire confidence and I don't want to mess with it. So, please don't recommend SuperDuper 256megabit, Krptonite 190mb, 4th Dimmension 400MB, or Alien Offspring 700mb. (I just made those up to relieve some built up stress)

Now for what I have and what I want...

I have the GH2 with the 14-140 kit lens and a 20MM pancake lens. I am using Final Cut X for my video production. My goal is get the absolute clearest video that this camera can deliver when shooting video outdoors in South Florida. Mostly interview style for clients and and family days at the beach.

My BIG first question: What settings would you choose (nostagic, smooth etc.. -2,-2,-2) and what hack (if any) would best work for me?

My BIG second question: Can someone please tell me if the following is common in final cut x:

When I pause a rendered video in Final Cut the still image becomes incredibly clear but when it plays the video actually looses the sharpness. I thought video still frames are usually slightly blurry and the video is sharp. Is there a way to retain the still frame sharpness throughout the video?

I want to say thank you in advance for taking the time to read my rambling post and providing your input.


It is truly appreciated.

Ray

[andy lee]

I use Driftwood Quantum 9b update hack
with 64gb san disk 95mb/s card

it works great and no issues , you can watch clips back in camera without turning camera off first.

I shoot in 'Nostalgic' as it gives the best latitute for grading.

I had some footage loaded in 'SMIOKE' this week and the grading latitute is huge , you can push this lots before you get any blocking like you do on Canon with H264.

[alexander]

I dont have a GH2 but I ve downloaded footage from patched version and stock version ... In daylight shots I have to say that Ive seen stock camera producing cleaner image then hacked one.. but maybe with slightly less detail... But i dont wont to comment on this. What I will say is that Andrew here of EOSHD also thinks a Sony RX100 and a NEX5n, wich are NOT HACKED and actually have less real resolution in 1080p then a gh2, are greate tools for cinematography too. So its not so much about the hacking... Unhacked GH2 is also greata... u do not need hack. The thing with the Sony NEX cameras is they have quite a bit more dynamic range so it looks very cinematic.

And not to mention that a FS100 has also AVCHD standard bitrate (same as gh2) and image from that one looks beautiful

maybe in terms of grading there is an advantage but i think GH2 grades not hacked better then any canon aps-c

[andy lee]

The Hack does make a differance - in a pro edit suite you can see the differance on a hi res monitor -
plus you have alot of lattitude for grading !
at 1GB per minuite there is alot of detal there to work with.

[alexander]

I am not saing it does not ... But u have to take into concideration that at the end its avchd... and that there are other codecs that are actually made to benefit from higher bitrates... I have to say from what i have seen untill now it deos not make enough difference.
I dont have a 2,5k display but I have a new Panasonic Plasma as a reference monitor and work with adobe cs6 package...

[kirk]

I'm very, very content with no hack and nostalgic.

[andy lee]

We did tests with the Driftwood Quantum 9b hack at Cinema (24p) and High Bit Rate (25p)and loaded the files into 'Smoke' (a hi end compositing and grading platform)



The 24p files are clocking at 150mb/s the 25p files at 88mb/s
Intresting to know this! as this means with the Quantum 9b hack
if you shoot at Cinema rate 24p this gives you the hightest quality files - (you could project these in a cinema) and shooting 25p gives you slightly lower bit rate files ... you would most likely use this for commercials, pop videos and projects for TV transmission where you need 25p(especially in Europe) but you dont need 150mb's files.

[alexander]

autodesk smoke is almost in the same price range as the whole package adobe production premium wich also is concidered professional... it just needs alot of plugins as we all know... add the price of the blugins and there u go

Just saing ive seen daylight footage on hacked gh2 that was worse then not hacked... And I think increasing the bitrate 8 times does not scale linear to quality gain... where there are pro codec out there that actually do.

[andy lee]

It is all subjective and depends on how good your DOP is .
the hacked GH2 in the right hands with a creative mind is simply stunning and capable of great results in my view -
Its not about number crunching its about how good the image looks as a whole for the job you are doing.
I'm very happy with the GH2 with the hack on it , it holds out great on set and in a work enviroment.
I use it with the Tecnoir Cinema Rig that makes it a great stable professional platform to work from.

[Axel]

My BIG second question: Can someone please tell me if the following is common in final cut x:

When I pause a rendered video in Final Cut the still image becomes incredibly clear but when it plays the video actually looses the sharpness. I thought video still frames are usually slightly blurry and the video is sharp. Is there a way to retain the still frame sharpness throughout the video?
Ray

You say a rendered video. A common behavior in FCP is the preview that favors real time over quality. Classic FCP had an option dynamic real time, which meant it played back everything in real time and full quality that fit the sequence settings or could easily be computed on the fly. This option also allowed you to make a difference between frame rate accuracy (showing every frame but reducing the resolution if realtime was becoming difficult) and full image quality (which meant skipping frames/doubling frames at full resolution). With whatever tricks the real time was forced, there was one promise from the older days, when without Matrox or the like there where no effects in real time: Full quality was shown at playback pause.

A good editor always preferred frame accuracy over full quality, because editing has more to do with timing than with polishing, and he could always render if in doubt. Since ProRes (and Mercury Engine in Adobe and Edius Storm asf.) one wasn't longer spoilt for choice.

FCP X only has two options in preferences for playback: High quality and highest performance (translated from german, you will recognize). Now if you chose optimized media (ProRes 422) and not proxy (low datarate, slightly reducing quality especially during motion playback), and if you rendered all effects, you won't have to expect anything but full quality at every moment if quality or performance are checked (unless your system is sooo weak, that FC has to reduce the quality, but this is not very probable). If you checked none of the boxes (optimized or proxy), you work with the original AVCHD media, and this could very well slow down your system and lead to the effect described.

[asergi]

My BIG second question: Can someone please tell me if the following is common in final cut x:

When I pause a rendered video in Final Cut the still image becomes incredibly clear but when it plays the video actually looses the sharpness. I thought video still frames are usually slightly blurry and the video is sharp. Is there a way to retain the still frame sharpness throughout the video?

Ray

I haven't used FCPX yet, but in FCP 7 and back, this is normal for non-rendered footage. Depending on your settings, FCP tries its best to play footage in realtime. If the footage in the timeline isn't in the same format as timeline settings then FCP will drop image info (i.e. framerate, resolution, etc) so that it can play in realtime. When you're paused, FCP shows you a full rendered frame. I'm pretty sure you shouldn't see the problem you're describing in footage that has been rendered.

[galenb]

Just saing ive seen daylight footage on hacked gh2 that was worse then not hacked... And I think increasing the bitrate 8 times does not scale linear to quality gain... where there are pro codec out there that actually do.

Interesting. I've been looking at tons of footage on the net and even on Vimeo and Youtube, I can clearly see the difference. The hacked footage is always far more clear, detailed and clean compared to just about any camera it was matched up with. I was shocked looking at footage that compared it to a 5DIII recently. Have you seen the youtube footage that compares it to an RED Epic? Granted it wasn't a fair comparison due to the fact that we could only see footage at 1080p. But still! Even with the RED scaled down to 1080p (which theoretically should have given a huge advantage), the GH2 still managed to look just as sharp and clear. I'm not saying the GH2 is better than a RED but if all you are ever going for is 1080p then it's a pretty damn good second choice. ;-)

@Raybriant, So you're saying that you're looking at the two different shots, hacked and un-hacked and you are seeing no difference in quality? That's odd. So I'm a total Newbie at shooting and editing video but I have been working in CGI and FX production for almost 20 years now. My advice is to look at your pipe line: 1.) make sure your camera is set right to achieve the best possible quality. 2.) check that if you are transcoding, you are not throwing away all the detail in the process. 3.) In your editing software, check to make sure you are viewing it at the highest quality that it can produce. Sometimes, this may not be possible and you will only see the results once your sequence is rendered. Finally 3.) check to see that when you render out your project that you aren't compressing out all the detail in the final stage.
So just make sure you aren't shooting yourself in the foot at some stage along the process. :-) I know I've done similar things too where I thought I was viewing the full resolution in AfterEffects (because I was zoomed in %100 right?!) But forgot that I had left the view quality setting down at half rez! (dork!) That's caused a few unnecessary freak outs over the years. ;-)

[alexander]

I am not saing there is no difference. My whole point is that an unhacked GH2 is good enough! That an unhacked GH2 is much better then any APS-C Canon! But then compare hacked GH2 with 180mbps vs a 25mbps FS100............ ...... .... u will see that all of the sudden 24mbps in avchd seems enough!

[raybriant]

@Axel - @asergi You both were correct. My setting inside of FCX was set to "better perfomance" on playback. I switched to "High Quality" and see a big difference. THANK YOU.

@galenb - Thanks for the information. I agree with you that I need to make sure my settings are set for the highest possible recording. This is where I am at a great disadvantage. I don't have a photography background so trying to get the best possible video using a DSLR is a little tricky for me. I am used to simply setting a correct white balance, choosing the best setting on the camcorder and pressing record. That is why I was asking about the best settings (-2.-2.-2.-2, Nostalgic, aperature and shutter speed etc...) My enviroment will most likely be outdoors in the bright South Florida sun.

@kirk - thanks for the link and the info.