@kellar42, does FCPx has problems chewing on all hacked footage or just spizz? I have noticed my slightly older pc with Adobe, runs faster with FM than Cluster X but that maybe cause of 3gop vs 6gop structure.

@kellar42 Spizz has intentionally a nice filmic looking grain as you noticed.

Forgot to say, these are screenshots from FCPX, not proper export frames as the program is having a bit of trouble chewing on the footage, no grading and no transcoding.

@driftwood. I loaded your Cluster X Nebula trial 4 and tested the spanning with the same test scenario as the post above. The adjustments you made did make a difference and both FSH and HBR that failed in the earlier setting, spanned with trial 4.

@cjdincer

what were your export settings? because even in 1080 it isn't looking to good. could be youtube compression, and if so it may be the worst case of compression I've seen yet.

@otcx i'm not sure if it's the "vibrant" setting or the lens, but long shots seem slightly out focus. The close up shots of the tractor backing up look really good. I'm basing the out of focus from the bark of the trees.

@rkm A+

All forums unfortunately have occasional trolls. Lol

@duartix The latest 12/15 GOP Trials are still on the other thread. 12/15 GOP next trial will be found here.

@Zaven13 Thanks for this.

@RRRR, The Nebula 720p SH mode is unstable because it records in high bitrates of 60-70MB. However, the 720p H mode has been very stable at around 40MB and image quality is very good.

Guys be fair. One see differece someone else do not. There is also question what monitor you are using. Others show what actually is in the picture others do not. And there is also lot of beginners among us. Maby tonalts too agressive comment was just accident, and if it was not then......

I think tonalt does make one good point. There's no baseline here for testing, which makes it very difficult to compare various settings. And much of the stuff uploaded here would look outstanding with any number of hacks, so it does seem a bit silly to see such a clip and hear how amazing a new patch is without the same scene shot with the same lens using the same camera settings but a different patch.

I think patch testing needs a set of guidelines so that anyone testing a patch can use those guidelines, thus eliminating many of the variables which can and do affect the subjective image quality.

For example, one such guideline might be 24H, 1/50 shutter, with the either the 20mm or maybe the 25mm lens, as they seem pretty common and offer a decently wide aperture.

And of course a set for HBR, 1080i and 720p as well.

And while it's not the most commonly used, I do think the Cinema profile should be used for all testing as it is the most linear. All the other settings either boost the curve or the colors. Cinema is the 'flatest', most neutral, and should be used for all testing at 0, -2, 0, -2.

Whatcha think Nick?

@tonalt Thats absolute nonsense. Measured tests prove there are many benefits in editing the settings to achieve better quantisation and PSNR signal to noise ratio- which combine to offer superior grading, motion, etc... over stock - and these can differ between settings.

I could produce a bluray styyle bitrate and okish matrix that is below stock settings that will look good until deeper analysis.

Cluster X is looking at all aspects using different GOPs. Summaries will arrive when trial and testing is complete.

Just some test files with Diftwood Cluster X Trial 2 settings. My sd card was too slow to HBR, so this is 24p (24p worked without any problems). There is no story behind this one just some test shoots. No grading all straight from Cam.

Panny 14-140 GH2 VK hack Diftwood settings (Cluster X Trial 2) Sandisk HD video Vibrant -2 -2 0 -2