Where Intra-frame encoding can make a noticeable difference is in tracking rapid object motion at fast shutter speeds. As the AVC-Intra codec demonstrates, however, very high bitrates are required to maintain high image quality - 100Mbps should be considered the minimum required bitrate at 1080p resolution. Ideally, you'd want more than 200Mbps in an intra-only AVC encoder to produce an image quality comparable to that of a B-frame-enabled 50Mbps AVCHD encoder.

Just tried with the newest ptools v3.61d (190711)
just set the
Encoder setting 1 1080i/p to 2
and
1080i50 and 1080p24 GOP size to 1
then you will get a only I frames 24p video

*EDIT*
after some test i found that the codec is breaking,
maybe need some more test...

With GH2 having 200Mbps bitrate potential, it seems a step backward to bash B frames.

@Mark_the_Harp
Yes, it looks great. I love this patch but unfortunately it is not possible to use it for daylight outdoor shooting with many details. At this case it makes 80-95mbps average and 130-160mbps peak bitrate, and not enough speed of class 10 card. It would be great if i could use some external recorder, but it is not possible with gh13. Or possible? What about gh13 HDMI future? Or HDMI is not good interface for huge bitrate video out?

@bannedindv

Yea, I don't know why people started saying we were flaming... we just started talking about b-frames and how some of us don't like the motion they can create. I did say "death to b-frames!" but that was pretty much just a joke/sarcasm.

But yea, all I-frame ecoding would be amazing! ...even if the bit-rate is lower than with the inter-frames.

BTW, kae has mentioned that GOP 1 setting doesn't work... but multiples of three seem to. Has anyone tried a value of GOP 0? Maybe? I would try it myself, but WineBottler is not working. It's missing all the Winetricks. I guess it's a bug in snowleapord. I'll just have to run a copy of windows with bootcamp I guess.

Yes VK you are right, I was just purely illustrating for others the visual effect that the original poster was referring to.

@telkitachki Your video looks really nice!

I think it's all a matter of personal preference. There's no way I'll accept an argument from anyone about GOP length on the GH13 or GH2. Shorter AVCHD GOPs look much more filmic to ME when shooting moving images, period. I've shot with all GOP lengths and 3 for the GH13 and now the GH2 is what I prefer. It's entirely subjective though. When I show GH1/2 tests to my younger friends they don't feel that way, so no right or wrong here. It's an image quality vs. perceived temporal quality debate. I totally get that shorter GOP in a given data rate means less image quality. My hope is that when Vitaliy's new patch allows us to double the average 24p bit rate, my current 3 GOP setting will hold up. The temporal feel of the action is more important to me than image quality but I totally get most folks may feel the opposite. I've been working on feature films for 30 years so I have a built-in, old school bias that may be totally inappropriate in today's digital world. What's nice about the Gh1/2 is that it allows us to shoot any kind of look we want in extremely high quality - temporal or visual.

Here we call it the Soap Opera effect.

On a 120 Hz TV with the motion interpolation turned on, this means that 4 out of every 5 frames displayed on the TV were artificially filled in by the video processor, not native to the source. That creates the "soap opera effect" -- making something originally shot on a 35/70mm film camera look like it was created on a cheap camcorder. It might smooth out the panning shots, but it also washes out a lot of the fine detail and completely changes the look and feel of a movie.

The perspective that most professional reviewers come from is that theatrical presentation is the reference standard. And that's also the reference that movie directors and cinematographers come from as well. Everything in the production and post production chain is optimized around what the movie looks like in the theater. And in most cases, that holds true for the home video versions as well.

@edun It's not visible in the sense that macro-blocking is... it's more like parts of the image aren't changing from frame to frame. For example, if there are building's in the background of some shots, it looks like they stay still and just "shift" around from frame to frame instead of refreshing as a new image... or like parts of the image are getting "cut-out" and repositioned. In cinematography terms, it's almost like part of the image is shot at the traditional 1/50 shutter, while the rest is a lower shutter speed, like 1/30.

@telkitachki The motion of your GOP1 looks nice! More like real digital cinema motion, than an inter-frame stream. Hoping to do this with the GH2! I'll play around with this once I get Windows (or figure out Winebottler) on my Mac...

At, VK's request I'll start a new thread... I don't want to de-rail this one anymore.

@edun
You're mixing me up with who I'm quoting. I agree with you. LOL!

@dkitsov "You know, if it was true what you said, you would see the same issues with the Blu-ray disk movie releases. "
Good point, I certainly don't see an issue there.

@bwhitz "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. "

I see nothing that makes the Canon more filmic, especially claiming its due to higher compression. LOL! It's just the opposite.

I'm certainly not interested in hearing about Canon 7D in this topic.

@bwhitz
This is why I asked you to read books.
Just try to use MJPEG keeping the same bitrate and then compare it with "so bad" large GOP AVCHD :-)