"The End" - Patch for GH2 Hack

Manicd

Well there are plenty of other 24p/HBR patches that I still have to compare. So maybe a new 24p table is not worth it right now.

Edit: Nevermind I thought you mean you had to make new matrix.

apefos

avoid these patches, wrong settings, see better patches in post below.

apefos

Maybe this is due to I did not change the 24p GOP Tables.

Manicd

Wow that's a lot of settings.

I just tried END NR3 144. Something wrong, most of flat area is now mud. It seems actual recorded bitrate is lower than NR3 gop3. I'll try some of the others tomorrow to see if any better or same effect.

@apefos Do you have no interest for yourself with 24p or do you just not have fastest card? I would be willing to send a card if you need one for testing 24p/HBR.

apefos

avoid these patches, wrong settings, see better patches in post below.

Manicd

Also The End NR3 looks best of the 6.

Manicd

I'm still reading and sorting through other people's patches to compare in 24p. @icp has shown on page1 that Valkyrie might have advantage over Moon.

apefos

Ok, guys, give me some time and I will change the ini files for 24p GOP 1 and extreme high datarates. I will do correct maths, but I will not do tests in my camera, it will be experimental. 720p cannot change anything.

Manicd

Either way your 720p is great. So not all is lost for those who want highest image quality in 60p. And at 24p Climax does look great at full screen. If I uploaded to youtube, without upscaling to 4k to save more detail, you would think Climax/Epilog/End is superior to Moon. The image is very clean. I look forward to see what 6 levels can do for the small detail/mud issue.

Manicd

I use incandescent setting for wb, which is probably around 2800k?. I'll try manual 3100k for The End 6 level testing.

apefos

There is something important to consider: the patches I develop try to get the best image under a datarate and gop which can keep camera stable. The other developers push datarate and gop more than the camera can handle stable. Due to this other patches can show better results in some image areas, but these patches from other developers can stop recording or freeze the camera. My goal is to get the best possible and keep stability at same time, no stop recording, no camera freeze.

Moon is 150Mbps GOP1 in 24p

The End stable version and it's derivations is 96Mbps GOP3 in 24p

The End high version and it's derivations is 104Mbps GOP3 in 24p

you need to choose: Moon for less mud in flat areas or The End and it's derivations for more stability without stop recording or camera freeze.

I will not increase datarate or lower the gop, I did attempts on this before and the camera hardware cannot handle this stable.

Try to see the image in playback or slowmotion in a confortable distance from screen as your audience will see. Or take the risk using unstable patches which can frezze or stop recording and lose the shoot... Pick your poison.

apefos

This is "The End" patch with 6 (six) levels of NR (noise reduction) in stable and high datarate options.

The NR6 is the default The End patch with highest denoise.

The others (from NR1 to NR5) have lower denoise amount.

Denoise increases from NR1 (lowest denoise) to NR6 (highest denoise).

Probably one of these will have a best balance between denoise vs. mud/macroblocking. I mean good denoise avoiding mud and macroblocking.

It is recomended to do tests with manual white balance in 3100k in isos 320 and 2000 to perceive subtle differences.

Manicd

The good news is yesterday I tested 720p epilog vs moont8. Epilop has much better 720p. Moon has lots of artifacting, Epilog is clearer. I will assume 720p is good in the other patches as well.

Today I tested catharsis, climax, and epilog in 24p. Climax has the most detail of those, although still shows loss of detail in flat areas when compared to Moon. Catharsis even though it has no fallback, it is showing more loss of detail.

Here is example of 24p Moon vs Climax showing flat area example. 640 iso, 40shutter. Each link has four frame shots you can click through.

http://imgbox.com/MY7qdAys

http://imgbox.com/xlueFxjg

BurnetRhoades

That's how I found the filter 85B which is definitely orange (warm), not cold. I've never used color filters.

My guess for the confusion over the filter might be different manufacturers using different descriptions of the same thing. It is a warm colored filter but it's designed for shooting in cooler colored light. This would be the filter used on all manner of film cameras so that tungsten balanced stock could be used in daylight settings. I've not looked at the exact equivalency but you can likely make your own in a pinch with some CTO, either a single density that matches the 85 or layers of different density.

Rumor has it Adam Greenberg mistakenly shot a roll of tungsten stock without the filter on Terminator 2 and Cameron liked the look so much the rest of the film was matched to this look. Even if that's not true, the Michael Douglas section of Stephen Soderberg's Traffic was intentionally shot this way for how cold it makes the footage, to place his narrative at opposition to the Tijuana arc with Benicio Del Toro, which was shot with a heavy tobacco filter.

apefos

five fallback options for people choose how the patch will handle the noise.

lower fallback is better for low iso texture

higher fallback can handle high iso noise better avoiding artifacts

denoise fallback helps to clean gross noise

patches (stable or high datarate versions included):

catharsis = no fallback, same as main matrix

climax = fallback low increase

denouement = fallback mid increase

epilog = fallback high increase

the end = fallback denoise

do your tests

producer

apefos wrote: "google it, ebay it... these are filters from the film photo era."

That's how I found the filter 85B which is definitely orange (warm), not cold. I've never used color filters.

I thought you use the combination of the filters you mentioned, that's why I asked you for a video test with them if possible for you.

apefos

Did you compare the stable version vs. the high datarate version to perceive differences in mud and macroblocking? in both epilog and the end?

apefos

An interesting question: in real world shoots, which patch looks good when viewing from a confortable distance from the screen, at 100% size? (the default playback experience, as people says: lay back anbd enjoy the movie)

apefos

@producer google it, ebay it... these are filters from the film photo era.

stil images comparison must pay attention to which frame are selected. there are I, P and B frames. if you select an I frame from patch x and a B frame from patch y, the patch x will looks better because the compression on I frames are less than B frames. a video comparison uploading 5 seconds original mts files will always be better.

do not use auto wb or auto exposure on tests, use artificial ligth, close windows, to avoid light changes, use tripod.

producer

@apefos: I'm interested in your formula about the combination of filters, but some things make me confused.

I see the filter 85B is orange, makes the picture much warmer, while you say it turns 5500K into 3200k. Maybe it's a matter of different brands. Google shows 85B as warm filter, but Kodak 85B filter is cold, etc.

Would you take a photos of the filters you mentioned?

Also, it would be great if you make some video test applying every filter one-by-one, so that I can see the difference after every next filter until the final result.

Thank you in advance!

apefos

just a tip: if you want a clean image, the end patch can be better option. denoise in camera does not introduce trembing from denoise softwares and saves time, this can be perfect for web which is low datarate in the final upload and the videos will be seen in screens from 5 inch to 60 inch in good distance enouch to not increase mud or macroblock perception. epilog can show noise that you want to remove in post, more time, introducing trembling in gross denoised areas. do an analisys what is more ok to your daily workflow... what is better for web, what is better for the big screen. maybe you will want to leave the noise from epilog because it can look good in the big screen, so no denoise in post, all subjective choices.

apefos

@icp pay attention, better do the tests under artificial light... I can see light changes comparing the 4 patches in iso 640 and this can make difference in results. the end is much darker than valkirie, darker enough to show a worst image.

try to do the test in a condition nothing changes... tripod, closed windows, or night time, artificial light in same position, same settings on camera...

icp

@Manicd the room had a window, light was coming from the left of the picture but never direct sunlight. It was shot one after the other, the light didn't change.

What you see in the front wood of the record player it's noise (it can be seen in the video footage). In The End is worst than in Valkyrie & Moon.

I was also very pleased with the image colours straight from the camera in The End, but yes, the artifacts are visible.

@apefos I'll try the Epilog patch! Thanks!

apefos

this is not project blue light (I already read about it). the solution I found does not need color correction in post, it delivers good colors straight from camera.

3100k is the native sweet spot from the sensor, no matter the patch. It is the point which the sensor outputs less noise.

set manual white balance to 3100k and do this:

filter 85B for daylight = turns 5500K into 3200k or 5400k into 3100k

filter FL-DAY for fluorescent light = removes the green from fluorescent light

filter 1A = can be an add on to the FL-DAY, the two togheter to warm the image a little bit.

pay attention, some fluorescent light is near 5200k, so maybe the 85B can be better, or the 85 or 85A which are less strong.

you need to try.

BurnetRhoades

Keep white balance in 3100K, it shows less chroma noise. Above will introduce red/magenta noise, below will introduce blue noise.

This is very close to tungsten. Drewnet showed, and multiple other parties confirmed, higher white balance settings are bad news on the GH2 and it's better to either filter when shooting daylight (Project Blue Light) or correct out the blue in post. I've been shooting with my GH2 never leaving tungsten since. Perhaps you discovered the GH2's true, native color temp or is this just specific to your patch, do you think?

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

Tags in Topic

Top Posters