@GuilleKloetzer Do a search for "ISO bug". Sounds like that may have something to do with your noise issue @ ISO 160.

F16 @ 1/200th? You didn't have a ND?

Yes, I see it - very bad compression noise in dark gray areas and a shimmering on the distant rocks. I never tested spanmybitchup, but this looks like a patch problem. I would suggest trying a different patch.

@LPowell Will a decent on cam monitor or aftermarket VF indicate this issue? Or do you need to review the recorded footage to spot it?

Hi, thanks to everybody for the replies. In order of appearance: pundit, I didn´t find anything on the ISO bug topic related with ISO 160, have you? I had a ND, but choose to shoot with shutter since the subject was sitting and the shutter would´t be very noticeable avoiding the filter meant less glass so resolution should be better. Peternap, look at it on a monitor at full screen, look on the ground at the grey and black areas, look at the throusers of the interviewed. Ralph_B, thanks for that. LPowell Many thanks for taking your time for analyzing this in detail. What you found renders this patch unusable in my opinion. I´ve tested it in many different situations before using it on a professional shooting, but I think most times It´s impossible to anticipate and test exactly how the frame will be until you are there. So I will just never use this patch again. I will investigate on this forum which patch can span safely, any suggestions? Brianluce, maybe you can spot this on a onboard monitor, what you need is size. In the tiny monitor on the GH2 it´s impossible for me to spot it. If you want to test it maybe you can load the MTS file on a SD card at the stream bin, and then play it on the GH2. Thanks everybody again for making this forum great!

Another thing to consider is; higher apertures = more diffraction = less detail and more noise. (this issue has been well covered elsewhere in the forum!) The difference between say f5.6 (ND'd) and f16 at the same iso is substantial. For IQ reasons it does not generally make any sense to go above f5.6 - f8 depending on lens and desired edge sharpness when shooting with a m43 sensor.

Didn't check the clip but I saw the above settings. Gop1 / high bitrates, IMO is primarily for 24p and cards that perform very well with the gh2. (good: 30mb/s sandisk, best: 95mb/s 64gb sandisk)

I personally avoid the HBR mode; for documentation type works 50i is smoother to convert and when I want maximum IQ then I also want control over (most) lights - to avoid any potential flickering...

HBR is not really true 25p, it is 25p in an interlaced wrapper, it also shares some settings with 50i and 720p50 If I'm not mistaken and hence the only benefit you get from 50i seems to be that you avoid the potential movement artifacts involved with shooting interlaced. So far I've had little use for it in the form it is implemented. (I take you too live in PAL country) 24p shares no settings, has the most advanced hack settings and is the way to go for maximum IQ.

Keep in mind that "High Bitrate Mode" is a term coined by Panasonic (in relation to factory settings) and has no bearing whatsoever for IQ when it comes to hack settings.

I'm sure LPowell is right in his assessment, but it's good to keep in mind that you will increase noise and lower detail by using high apertures..

Yes, you are interpreting me correctly I think.. The only time you need to watch out about 24p is when you are shooting with artificial light, light that you cannot control. Some lights create flicker problems. In which case you might want to use 50i or HBR instead. Often you see these problems instantly, but they can also occur less noticeably if there is a bad light source that affects only part of the picture. (You need a monitor or zoom preview function to actually see what happens then).

Converting 24p to a delivery format of 25p isn't ideal of course but you won't loose much IQ. If the conversion is done badly you might have some movement / frame interpolation issues (footage doesn't look smooth) but I reckon most popular (pro) software used right now does a pretty good job with this - so I would not worry too much about it.

Converting 24p to 25p by speedup looks much better than any interpolation. It has been done for about 60 years on TV in Europe when broadcasting movies!

If you mind the pitch shift (you really need musician's ears to hear it) all modern sound software can take care of that.

Hi nomad, sorry but I don´t understand what you suggest. As far as I know speeding up a timeline and then exporting with the timeline settings on Premiere or Final Cut, won´t convert the frame rate of the resulting file, it will just be played at 24fps but look faster as it will last less time and some frames/lines/information will be discarded. You have to export and transcode anyway to from 24fps to 25fps, moreover I think fps is not the only difference between pal and ntsc, at least in SD number of lines and color interpretation is different too.

@GuilleKloetzer As RRRR points out, HBR 25p is encoded in an interlaced fomat, using the same file format as FSH mode. However, HBR is scanned at a true 25p progressive frame rate, rather than the inerlaced 50i field rate of FSH mode. And in Flow Motion v2 and other patches, it records at bitrates up to 100Mbps, which can legitimately be described as "HBR".

@feha The reason HBR strobes more than FSH is because HBR is scanned at a progessive 25p frame rate. FSH's interlaced 50 fields per sec is inherently more fluid, so long as the interlace artifacts remain unnoticeable.

ok, thanks Chainsaw, I ´ll try that and compare results between 25p at HBR and 24p cinema mode. And thanks LPowell too for that information. I hope to have time to do those tests this week, I will also try Flow Motion side by side with spanmybitchup and maybe some other patch on the same spot I had the troubles with noise that started this thread. I´ll post the results as soon as I have them. Thank you!

Hello,

Try replicating the problem, and then shoot the same scene with the stock firmware. It isn't perfect, but I believe you will get less noise than any patch will deliver.

I know you said that you couldn't replicate the problem on location, but I have setup tests in my studio to replicate every condition imaginable.

It might take a little time, but it could save you some embarrassment, or even a client... I think it might be worth it.

JMHO and a good test for the records.