Currently running Driftwood Quantum X (v4b Orion) now and again I'm getting terrible interlacing lines in HBR mode and I don't know why. I can't seem to replicate them, they just appear in video files now and again. Could anyone tell me why I'm getting these lines and possibly how to avoid them?

I'm doing a pretty important shoot tomorrow and I'd like to know I'm using the best possible hack.

@driftwood Best wishes and health to your daughter.

@molloy1011 Thank you! You're bang on. I told myself it was in the file as all other clips played fine in VLC but once imported into Premiere the video plays fine. Thanks for the quick response!

@driftwood There will be an update for the pictoris patch? a dark matter patch? it wood be nice

@terry2 ooh, god no I wouldn't agree, to get the look of film stock would require being able to have a lot of control over the film profiles more than altering the matrix. As would a better colourspace than 4:2:0 obviously. Promoting the cameras output files to 4:2:2 or 4:4:4 does help considerably with processing in post (though why some ppl are transcoding it into a 1.8 gamma space is beyond my ken. It would make more sense to try and pump it into a linear space and then you can get closer creating the log curve that you want), but it's still not really 'it'. It will still fall apart when really pushed in post. The dynamic range just isn't there to really take advantage of that kind of approach, and isn't likely to be. I have seen nothing that indicates to me that the latitude has increased with these new settings, it is just encoded differently/better. Things may shift about a fair bit, but theres no new 'things'.

The dark matter matrix creates a unique look, speaking for myself I prefer the previous matrix tbh. Its a very good look that mitigates some old problems, and as far as it goes with the dark matter matrix I prefer v1 over v2 or v3, but thats a personal taste thing. These new matrices of driftwoods make the output look quite a lot different to a GH2 without them, all I can say without seeing tests (particularly colour related tests) is that they're different. Its a difference I like, and its very cool experimenting with the camera again and seeing a whole new area available to us for creating specific atmospheres/looks/mojo, whatever. If it looks like film then say its a film look. Some of the stills driftwood posted from the beach at Brighton (particularly the boats) did make my twitchy film stock senses tingle and grin. Anyway, why chase the look of film stock at all, why not create something fresh with completely different responses ? We are, for the most part, digital film makers after all, we should be putting up our own flags.

@driftwood Best wishes, hope all is okay.

@Stray

As would a better colourspace than 4:2:0 obviously.

I think the biggest problem is that it’s 8-bit, rather than 4:2:0.

Since the above comparisons cover a (rather unruly) 16-17 patches, I would like enough feedback to narrow down my next comparison to 4 patches.

This should make it easier to do a more tightly controlled and scientific comparison.

@Driftwood all my best wishes for a prompt recovery.

@Mr_Moore I agree, 10 bit would be almost more important than 4:2:2.

@Stray Because the idea is to have a camera who produce the flattest footage as possible (log style) to play it around and push it later in Resolve. The idea is using the gh2 like as a "super16" camera to shoot music clips. I mean, Philip Bloom test showed the gh2 outperforming the fs100 and to compete with the f3.

@leejb4 Your Lens is to slow (5.3); you need to work with faster glass like 1.7 or 1.4 aperture. Just in case, here's a better understanding of aperture: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aperture

ISO: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_sensitivity#Digital

shutter: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shutter_speed

Hopefully that helps?

Salud

@leejb4 also, learn those 3 things well (that I listed above), watch online tutorials; go out and shoot and experience with the GH2 (un-hacked) before you start with the new settings in this thread. And have fun!

EDIT: When I started typing the above responses had not been posted yet.

@leejb4 Unfortunately, there's only so much that can be done without a "fast lens". Essentially, all you can do in your situation (without breaking the 180-degree shutter rule) is to up the ISO.

In my experience, ISO 1250 (not ISO 800) is a better bet in that situation if you are shooting color. If you are shooting black and white, you can scale the ISO all the way up to 10,000 or 12,800 if you like a grainier look.

Keep in mind that every 1 stop of aperture is equal to 1 stop of ISO in terms of light gathering.

So (to oversimplify a fair amount) in terms of the brightness of the scene you would find:

Shooting with aperture f/1.4 shutter 1/50 at ISO 800 gets the scene as bright as shooting with aperture f/5.6 shutter 1/50 at ISO 12,800!

In other words if you got an f/1.4 lens, you could get a little less than 16 times as much light at the same ISO setting. I couldn't get an exact value for f/5.2 or f/5.3 since that's a quarter stop increment and GH2 ISO are listed in 1/3 stops.

@leejb4

I suspect what you think is a decently lit room is perhaps just a room at home with the house lights on? Or even a room in daytime on a fairly bright day? I may be wrong, but if that is the case at f5.3 and ISO 800 things are gonna look pretty underexposed. You can try dropping the shutter to 1/25 to catch some more light, but it's not ideal and should be limited to when you don't have much movement in your scene. Other than that you can get a faster lens or add light to the scene.

All the best

@leejb4 get an fd adapter and find some canon fd lenses, you can get a 50mm 1.8 for $50. That will be a good way to brighten it up for cheap!