'Apocalypse Now' Experimental Series 1 Thread - BOOM, Intravenus - cbrandin/driftwood AN Soft/Cinema

driftwood

@Zaven13 Both PAL and NTSC HBR/720p? Ill take a look at NTSC as it probaby did require a tad more adjustment even though it passed death charts at certain ISOs.

Zaven13

@driftwood. I tried Boom 2 quickly using Panny 14-140mm and Sandisk 64GB 95/mbs. 24P looks great as usual. The rest of the modes are failing with write errors after 4-5 seconds. Their quality and bitrates are high but unfortunately they fail.

exilenorth

@driftwood, Boom V1 is pretty tough patch, meaning in U.S. english it is fuckin great. So...Boom v2 ummm, can it get much better, we shall see. I am assuming that one day soon all will meet a limit and the wizards will focus elsewhere... that must be coming. Enjoy the rest of your vacation. Thanks

driftwood

Here's another version of Boom - Version 2 candidate - open test for AN testers (which I have used out in Chile). Again another experimental setting. Here's the link:-

Download Boom v2

What's changed from Boom v1?

Ive been looking at ways of maintaining a high Frame limit whilst using GOP Related weighting to adjust the bandwidth strength of I frames in 24p All-Intra to achieve the same overall use of bitrate (147M max). Now its upto you to decide if its better or worse.
Adjusting GOP weighting for HBR/1080i and 720p modes together with maximising frame limits to achieve higher i frames in HBR and 720p modes under static conditions whilst newly including the 4444 flat matrix for these modes.

Once again I suggest these work well on facial shots - skin tones, mid shots etc... Wide shots mean any shadow detail may we be addressed by considerably change in Q. Overall we're trying to achieve a similar look to the Boom version 1 24p mode whilst going about it in a slighty different way.

Notably, HBR/1080i and 720p now consume around another 10mbps more datarate than version 1.

Let me know what you think. If testers like it I'll stick it up on page one.

thepalalias

@Mirrorkisser It worked for me in the few wider shots I tried. If you are shooting wide, just don't use a very high detail setting, especially with electronic M43 lenses - and if you are shooting wide open in the wide shot, you'll likely have an easier time.

So feel free to test it with wide shots - just don't use it for any critical wide shots at this point. There are many more reliable options for that right now. :)

Mirrorkisser

@thepalalias @rajamalik: it seems its not for wider shots just like BOOM! Which would be too bad though...

thepalalias

@rajamalik Ah, I wrote back to your message before I read your post here. This IV is still based on the 444 series - it explains that in the description. :)

@monsterbox I liked the sub-titles and the editing and shots went well with the music.

The GH2 is a great to work with. The portability, range of lenses and resolution is pretty amazing for the price. It loses out big time to the RED and Alexa options in terms of dynamic range, etc. (and to the RED if you need 4K), but it is also in an entirely different price bracket (and still supports a wider variety of lenses). And if you are outputing to 1080P or lower, the resolution really keeps up with what a lot of people need.

It will be interesting to see how the market responds as a larger number of BMDCCs get into the wild but the GH2 retains the best video quality (in regards to resolution and on-board recording) of any hybrid (stills and video) option under $4,000 at this point.

Monsterbox

@driftwood - I'm usually shooting on the Red or the Alexa... I've been testing a lot of these hacked settings over the last couple of weeks, and I can now say with confidence it really looks incredible. Great job, it's a lot of fun testing these hacks! I made a little video for the film we are doing soon.

xalukard · Screen Shot 2012-10-02 at 12.21.25 AM.png

Thanks cbrandin, driftwood & bkmcwd :) some frame grabs from my project.

Apocalypse Now 444 SOFT

rajamalik

@driftwood is this intravenus cinema 444?? or just intravenus v1?? can i use it for all kind of shots wide mid and close??

artiswar

@matt_gh2 - Thanks! That's what we're aiming for! Currently cut an 8 minute version for a local short festival but the 12 minuter is going to be the one everybody sees. I'll be sure to post it up here. An homage to Karusmaki and Malick in a way.

matt_gh2

@artiswar Nice shot. Looks like you have some dramatic intensity here with this character. Curious to see film when it's done. Please share and post if, and when, you're able.

artiswar · Screen Shot 2012-10-01 at 3.36.26 PM.png

@driftwood - Boom! held up great in DaVinci

phazedreality818

this is a short video i did yesterday. mind you, i am a complete noob when it comes to settings and such. had the gh2 for only a week and loaded the an drewnet soft firmware in it. the results came out great even with my lack of skills.

youtube does take a ton of quality out of the video though :/

thepalalias

@Mirrorkisser Perhaps prefer a small hint of noise in the picture? :) Thanks for all the help with filling in the data from the 60P testing!

Mirrorkisser

@thepalalias: cheers for the info, will look into it!

It appears that for noise reduction the simulated isos (160,320 etc) are best. Lpowell is right, the 2nd row are the native isos. So according to the two links, your best of shooting at iso 160, you have the biggest dynamic range and still as little noise as possible (provided you outplay the iso bug)

Cant tell why though, 320 sometimes appeals more to my eye...

zsound

Any news about the cinema preset? thanks

thepalalias

@Mirrorkisser Not sure which one you were referring to, but guys like Martin Zahuta advocated it because it seemed the negative gain (ISO 200 brought down to 160) meant less noise showed up on cameras like the 60D. The idea was to use a third stop below whatever the native ISOs were (so if the native ISO had been 1250 then you would have used ISO 1,000, etc.)

http://www.petapixel.com/2011/05/02/use-iso-numbers-that-are-multiples-of-160-when-shooting-dslr-video/

So it wasn't so much the numbers themselves, just the third stop relationship below the native ISOs.

However, I consider myself very ignorant on the topic so you are much better reading up on your own. :)

Mirrorkisser

@lpowell: cheers for the info. Too bad 320 is not in the list, because many shoot with it. Someone here in the forum who works as DP once explained the benefit of the iso values 160, 320 etc. Those can be found on any camera. If the booze has not totally gotten my memory, i think he was even referring to an iso rule, similar to the 180degree shutter role. I will look if i find it again. Although what lpowell says makes perfectly sense, too. So you rarely shoot above 200 iso? Thats your natural setting? Cheers

LPowell

@Mirrorkisser I suspect it's the second row that are the "native" ISO levels, the standard 200, 400, 800... sequence. One telling clue is that the sensor's DR hits its max at ISO 200, and isn't any better at ISO 160. That suggests that ISO 160 is a digitally scaled down derivative of ISO 200. Here's a link to the GH2's sensor test results:

http://www.sensorgen.info/PanasonicDMC_GH2.html

Mirrorkisser

@jesh, as far as i recall there was a reason why the native ones, aka the ones of the first row should be used. Maybe someone with more pedigree can help out?

Jesh

@MirrorKisser yes I have known about the fix, but every time the camera is turned off it has to be done again, and In case I space out, and dont switch to the second row first, I think a lot of people are just using those 2nd row ISO's because no matter how forgetful you are, they will always have consistent results. I am thinking I will just use the 2nd row for now and perhaps the gh3 will be around in a few months and bug free so I can use the native ones :D

Sangye

@vicx I was also very pleasantly surprised when I got home and reviewed the footage. It was one of those shoots where everything just went perfectly right.

In the pre-sunrise shots, I mostly used ISO 640, and occasionally 1,250. After that I stayed at ISO 320. I couldn't say for certain what ISO those two frame grabs you analyzed were, but I'd guess the tractor was 1,250 and the grapes were 640. The tractor was on the 25mm, set to f/1.2 I believe. The grapes were on the 55mm at f/2. Both were at shutter speed 1/40. It wasn't quite as dark as you may think. The tractor shot was within minutes of sunrise and there was already quite a bit of atmospheric light, and the full moon was also still illuminating everything.

Shon

@MovieArmada Make the same comparison, only 720p, you can see how thin the line jump, increasing 300%, except cluster7 sharp2, there will not jump the line.

MovieArmada

@Mirrorkisser check the Vimeo version, try to download the file and watch it on your computer. Either way vimeo is compressed at 5mb/s also. Maybe i'll try to export a higher res file and upload it somewhere.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

Tags in Topic

Top Posters