@PerryWilson great test by the way. They all look great IMO, but for some reason 176mb/s GOP1 v3 looks so organic to me I tried it out on my GH2 both day time & night time the still grabs that I'm viewing on my computer really looks like stills. That's just my opinion, but keep them coming.

@proaudio4 your right driftwoods 176 GOP1 v3 is insane tried it out and I was blown away, each frame is really like a picture. There is something about I-Frame motion and visually it's soo RED like, more like a real motion picture camera. For now that will be my go to patch, got a music video shoot next week that's what I'll be using..

@proaudio4

Now I'm asking for a patch! Where's driftwood's 176M GOP1 v3?

Look carefully - that GOP6 is for 720P 60. 1080i50 and 1080p24 GOP Size=3.

There is indeed a patch vault where you can find 132M GOP3 and others.

http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/comment/16603#Comment_16603

@sohus Yep, the cbrandin 66M and 44M are stable, as is his new max variation 66M patch. However, I did spend a lot of time, as have others, with Driftwoods 132M GOP3 and it is very stable. I haven't spent any amount of time at all shooting with/testing the 176M GOP1, and I don't think I'm likely too for a while yet (it is after all still being tweaked by Driftwood). But thats me, YMMV. Your best bet is to take the time shooting with all the stable patches, and also try to shoot scenes similar to your upcoming shoots. Check the footage out, particularly in post if you imagine you'll be doing at least some post work after the shoot. Then decide. Its impossible to make hard and fast recommendations as to what patch to use, we all have different eyes and different styles and workflows. I would be concerned about taking the 176M GOP1 out to a shoot as your only option, I think that would be madness at the moment, and I think Driftwood would agree. However maybe there are people here who have really shot with it, properly, who can vouch for it.

Edit : I've also been shooting with bkmcwds 66M GOP6 for some shots, but I mostly use the cbrandin 66M max variation patch with the AQ set to 3 at the moment. I do have an 88M GOP12 AQ2, but recent discoveries have raised concerns in me with it, so I'm going to look at it again properly tomorrow. It did pass all the usual tests, and real world shooting looked good, but still,.. I plan to look at it again. If only to see if it can be squeaked up to AQ3. If I wanted a GOP3 I'd always reach for the 132M at the moment.

@Stray

With regards to your last posts, what setting do you recommend? @cbrandin 66M?

I just want to settle for the best stable version without issues for some upcoming shoots. If I interpret your post in the right way, the lower bitrate low GOP settings are not recommended by you because of stability and stream issues. What about @Driftwood's GOP3 132M and GOP1 176M? Your insight is appreciated, I love your well documented posts.

I print my charts. Make sure to print at your printers highest DPI.
Check and compare static shots on the chart.

Also, for a second test, pan across the chart.
I have a motorized base where I can fix the speed control.
This way I can compare how well each setting has with motion.
Since the pan speed is fixed between different tests, it works great for
comparing motion.

Hey - just want to let you know that your settings are great.
So much better than the original GH2.
I was shocked at first when all my footage started stuttering - but that was because i played it from the GH2 and not from my HDD.
Will upload some footage in the near future ;)
Keep up the great work

What do you guys do as a stress test? Please let me know so I can test the patches accordingly.

download the original, because I dont have a pro account I can only do one HD a week...

@bkmcwd "If a model answer comes out, please let me know! " Don't worry I will if I find it, its a shame that its patchy. I think it might be worth restarting with a 66M GOP3 with an AQ of 0 just to try and get a stable GOP3 at that bit rate using only framelimit and top/bottom. Don't lift top/bottom much higher than 3x (if at all) as that has a strong effect on the bitrate. Also I'd say fix the FB1 (x1) and FB2 (x3) and not alter them until there is a stable AQ0 version (if there isn't then we're wasting our time entirely I think, haha, I should have tried that first) . Have you seen how low the framelimit is on Driftwoods 176M intra ? Its an idea but probably no need to go that low. Then I guess bring up the AQ in stages and alter the FB2 down maybe, and the frame limit. I don't think its worth altering the top/bottom to get stability as it just ramps the bitrate right up along with frame size.

I can't do anymore today, but will have another stab at it all tomorrow.

Just for information. This patch is not usable.

I'm working with a 66M AQ2 GOP3 setting at the moment, I accidentally created a patch with an FB2 thats very large. Anyway the graphs are interesting I think, in that it takes a long time to settle down, but when it does it looks perfect, (too perfect, frighteningly low size B-frames for even a static shot). Untill... something odd happened later on, and no the camera wasn't nudged. Playback of that later section looks like a small ripple effect accross the lines.

Edit : sorry uploaded the wrong patch, the actual patch was the same but the FB2 was 3936092.