Personal View site logo
Driftwood - Experimental Series 2: Low Rider, Cluster v8, V9, Intravenus II, GH3onaGH2, AN, Boom
  • 1008 Replies sorted by
  • @cupanudles Yeah thats true

  • @driftwood, et al,

    I applied Low Rider v1 for the last week and was curious if a sharper image was possible when using a Helios 58mm as the taking lenses, with an Isco anamorphic lens attached. I have always been using Intra patches, and read reference to 'sharp' in the patch, AN Cluster v7 '444 Sharp2', and gave it a try. Results were good, although I had not compared to other patches in a controlled environment. A quick test in the middle of the day, this time I also had sufficient ND's stacked, together with a C-Pol which, imo, seemed to help.

    My question is: AN Cluster v7 '444 Sharp2', does the '444 Sharp 2' aspect of this patch sharpen the image, compared to others, or is referring to matrix processing of the image? With an anamorphic lens attached, there can be somewhat of a softening of the image, imo, so while I will soon be testing alternate taking lenses, such as Takumar, Zuiko and Rokkor's, I am also exploring alternate patches to apply to the GH2. I understand there are many factors that relate to my quest for a sharper image. Any other patches recommended that may produce a sharper image when using an anamorphic lens attachment?

    Sample footage - Cluster v7 'Apocalypse Now' - 6 GOP Nebula with cbrandin/driftwood '444 Sharp2' matrix.

    Original 1080p upload file: Link

  • @vpetero You can give the original file?

  • GH2 outdoor & indoor cinematic test using Cluster_v7_DREWnet_12_15_GOP_'444_Sharp2 on SDHC Class 6 card:

  • I just give a try to Cluster X NEBULA 6 GOP (PAL), and it look really good.

  • @Shon FCX was the problem, used 5dtoRGB as suggested by @Chippy and the problem was solved.

  • Apocalypse Now 'Intravenus' v2 With cbrandin 'Smooth Cinema' Matrix vs Cluster DREWnet (12/15 GOP) v9 Boom

    Just a frame grab of a wooden head board shot using both patches (magnification at 400%) Samyang 35mm ~F/1.7 24H 1/50 ISO800 Pic Profile: Smooth -2, -2, -2, 0 Lit exactly the same during both shots

    To my eyes the DREWnet v9 has less noise but also loses some detail. This was a locked-off shot with no motion in it what-so-ever. I've no idea how they handle motion as of yet :)

    (v9 Boom is not the Smooth Cinema Matrix as it says on the pic. It's 4444)

    1492 x 807 - 156K
  • I'm not sure, noise can fool you into seeing detail. But it's all about motion as soon as we are comparing Intra to GOP based settings.

  • Maybe this has already been addressed and I just couldn't find it, but has anyone else had any problems with weird streaking on the Cluster X at 30p? It's hard to show in a screenshot (when I play a clip, it 'dances' around very blatantly), but I attached a screen shot. It's from trial 1 – is trial 2 NTSC now, or have this fixed already?

    Of course, I wouldn't be surprised if I'm doing something wrong. I just can't figure out what though. It was a manual lens with a 64g 95MBs card, all static shots. If anyone has any ideas...

    Edit: I also can add; I did not convert this through any program.

    Screen shot 2013-01-21 at 3.42.13 PM.png
    1482 x 832 - 958K
  • I'e been testing v9 'DREWnet' Cluster Boom patch and I'm absolutely blow away with the results. Close-ups are very sharp and show immense details. I'm wondering if anyone can recommend a patch that would be softer on actor's skin and more forgiving to blemishes. I'm using all legacy lenses, but it seems that every little skin pore is visible.

    I'm wondering if Cluster v8 'DREWnet' 'cbrandin Cinema Smooth is better for skin, but not sure about overall quality. So many patches can get confusing.

    Thanks to everyone involved in hacking and patching for making magic available to the rest of us.

    Many thanks

  • I was alos wondering which settings do you guys use? All -2? Nostalghic and Smooth?

  • @mastroiani try canis majoris skin soft tone patch. see canis page for details. it really handles skin tones well.

  • I give a bit harder test to Cluster X NEBULA 6 GOP Trial 2. Sandisk Extreme HD Video, Panny 14-140, lot of details, PAL. HBR freez cam after 5-10 sec. 24p worked great.

  • using the drewnet cluster v9 and all i can say is wow.... its perfect for what i was looking for and the results are amazing. i use old school canon glass and the video look delicious. great noise performance, stable, i film for 2 hours straight with no breaks, skin looks amazing, really cinematic in look.

  • @rajamalik thanks. I might try that. Although I think that patch has huge datarates? Ideally, I'd love to stick to just one patch and use it for everything - wide, close-up, etc. Cluster V9 Boom seems just that with manageable data rates.

    Does anyone know how V9 compares to Cluster V8?


  • I tried both the nebula cluster v7 6gop sharp2, which compared with the previous hacks I thought it best, both the cluster X in trial 2. The newcomer did not seem much better, but perhaps this judgment is dictated by the fact that the files are less manageable on my pc, but with the sharp cluster v7 2, there are no problems. I'll keep this.

  • I did some further testing of Cluster X Nebula 6GOP with 14-140 lens in EXTC mode using Sandisk 32GB 30 MB and all modes recorded with no problems except SH which was expected. Quality looks great.

  • I had been using the Aquamotion v2 for the last year and love it. Wanted to try something new so installed - Driftwood Cluster v7 ‘Apocalyspe Now’ – 6 GOP Nebula ’444. It looked fine before transcoding and also after 5DtoRGB transcoding into ProRes 422 when playing the files with Movist. But when clips are brought down into the time line of FCPX they look degraded with all sorts of noise and sizzle on the rocks and trees and buildings. Doing any color/grading makes it even worse. I am wondering how important bringing the whole "private" folder over from the card to a folder is because I just brought the MTS files over separately. Or, is this just a FCPX issue? Can't see why though cause it is using ProRes clips as before with Aquamotion. Camera settings were -2-2-2 smooth, 1/50 sec., Olympus 2.0 12mm lens with ND filter. Subjects were a small river and a building. Any help would be appreciated. I am almost ready to reinstall Aquamotion!

  • I have done some further tests - seems like I have the same problems in FCPX even with the Aquamotion v2 clips with regards to similar subjects - having lots of trees/foliage, rocks and certain buildings - basically moire issues if I try to label them. I just need to get out and shoot some more subjects with the Apocalyspe Now before I dismiss it as being inferior to Aquamotion and of course I am still wondering if any of this is a FCPX issue? Even the slightest bit of color correction creates the most nasty stuff with these subjects. With closer examination, the clips of this subject matter put down in the timeline without any manipulation at all will look the same as the clip up in the Event Library but they cannot handle any grading whatsoever - even the slightest color correction will create severe degrading of the image! Also wondering if any of this is related to using the Olympus 12mm f2.0 wide angle lens as this is a new toy for me - with that lens perhaps these moire issues are more extreme when shooting trees, rocks and buildings?

  • @crowbar, Although I don't use FCPX I can tell you one thing- It ain't Mr Driftwood's patches. Just look around threads to see different complex scenes shot beautifully with them patches. I have however read that FCPX does have some issues like the one you are describing.

  • OK man well I keep learning here as I go. I am a newbie here so patience please - maybe others like me will find my experience valuable - I exported out an edit of the above mentioned clips and once outside of FCPX it looks so much better - all the crap is gone! So this whole issue seems to be a problem with the playback engine of FCPX. I am destined to learn Adobe software! Another observation is that when I played (with Movist) and compared the pure MTS files with the 5DtoRGB transcoded ProRes 422 files, I could see clearly that the MTS files were superior - makes me think I should use transcode to 422HQ until I learn Premiere and can just drop MTS right in. I just joined Vimeo and will upload an edit of this footage and then post the link here for any feedback on these issues when it is ready. Also wondering if there is any consensus on which high bit rate patch would work best as an all around best choice for Panny and Oly glass -are people happier with the newer Cinema Smooth versions than the earlier Apocalypse Now versions?

  • I know the patches are all designed with the 95mbps cards in mind, but does anyone have experience of using these newer patches with the 45mbps card? I swear by Cluster v6, but I loaded up v9 the other day and experienced constant crashes and insufficient write speed errors. Are any of these new patches reliable with the 45mbps cards, or is v6 the best there is?

  • v6 for 45mbps cards. Those cards always prove troublesome with higher bitrate settings.

  • Short test with intravenus II, really cool patch.