Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Please, support PV!
It allows to keep PV going, with more focus towards AI, but keeping be one of the few truly independent places.
Intraframe vs Interframe compression flame
  • 32 Replies sorted by
  • Sorry if I'm de-railing the thread, but all the books in the world wont change what I'm seeing. I'm not engineer, I'm a visual dp/director guy... I'm just trying to explain what I'm seeing with inter-frame vs intra-frame compression. I understand them from a technical perspective, but from an artists eye, they don't look right.
  • @bwhitz
    Please make some topic in Offtopic category if you want to discuss how bad are B frames.
    But try read any book about video compression first, ok? Otherwise it looks stupid.
    You can find some references in http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/366/avchd-quantization-process
  • @Vitaliy How? Motion compensation/vectors have a distinct look to them. Ian_T and I both have noticed it. I may have explained it wrong, because I'm not a technical expert, but the GOP length does effect the overall look of the motion. You can see it clearly with the AF-100... the internal AVCHD, has a very video-like motion to it, but with an external recorder, and intra-frame recording, the motion is much more film-like and pleasing.

    Also, you can see this effect with the GH2... use the burst mode to capture a 40fps sequence, then assemble it as a video and compare it to the AVCHD motion. It's very different, because there's no motion vectoring going on.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter_frame
  • @bwhitz
    I am deeply sorry, but that you are telling about compression and B frames sounds like bullshit.
  • @Ian_T No, we're talking about ways to improve upon the 24p mode to make it look more filmic. Film motion is more like the rapid succession of still frames. b-frame's and longer GOP's create a fluid interpolation or blending effect that causes the motion to look more "video-y". B-frames basically just save the changes in motion from the previous frame, the rest of the frame just kind of slides around. It's a great idea and helps to cut down on the size of the video, but it's not the most desirable looking motion for narrative work.

    Here's a better explanation... look at the "illustrated example". This is what we're trying to avoid.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_compensation

    Complete intra-frame compression (or as close as possible) is the best for acquisition.
  • If you guys are complaining about the 50/60p images looking too fluid...then..um...that's exactly what we want isn't it?
  • @kae Thank you for bringing this up! Everyone seems to talk about how much more "efficient" b-frames are, but they completely destroy the film look! I hate them! It makes the video look as if it's sliding around instead of a sequence of independent images... I would much rather have a lower bit-rate if the GOP can be eliminated for good. Is that even possible though? Or is the GH2's AVCHD encoder hard-coded to always write GOP's? At least removing the stupid B-frames would be nice... efficiency isn't everything. Death to B-frames!

    I'd love to help out with the testing, but I cannot find anything like Streamparser for OSX... I'll probably just have to get windows on one of my drive partitions or something.

    Also, is it possible to run Canon 7D/5D footage through streamparser? I have a feeling that the "inadequate" codec everyone complains about in the Canon DSLRs is exactly the reason they look so filmic. I'm guessing the GOP is very low, around a 3-4, and b-frames are probably absent.