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.
Official GH2 "Stalin" hack development topic
  • 939 Replies sorted by
  • danyyyeldanyyyel
    i don't see anyone commenting on KrisCanonizado video. is it not the first time we get a high 1080 p avchd successful hack.
  • sparedogsparedog
    @fatpig - i love typing your name lol. no, you can certainly cut 420 originated footage into pretty much any current broadcast channel's show, again in moderation and dependent on the footage - if you can say to the channel that this particular footage doesnt exist in 422 and is needed for the show's content. and yes, the final program's delivery is 4:4:4, for example half inch d5 hd or 4:2:2 HDCAM SR, but not 4:2:0 for any major channels that i know of.

    but getty is future proofing, so they require a little above the current minimum specs so that they dont lose some of their assets when the minimum broadcast specs are pushed up. they have thousands of hours of incredible footage on sd and 16mm, so they know that it's an endless cycle of replacing old with new, but they just want to postpone it a little.
  • MimirsanMimirsan
    Stay on topic guys c'mon! Make a 4.2.2 delivery etc thread

    Great news about simple patches section VK....dumbasses like me will benefit this haha
  • fatpigfatpig
    @sparedog:
    fascinating! i did not know this. but IF you deliver 24p, its gotta be 4:2:2 minimum?
  • sparedogsparedog
    @fatpig - everything is pretty much transcoded nowadays to match the project's frame rate, so it's pretty much not an issue. in broadcast docs if you have great footage in pal, and you are delivering for nat geo or discovery, i think up to 20 percent (it really depends on the channel, and sometimes the commissioning editor) can be non native format. we deliver to history channel's hd in 24p, but alot of the archive used originated in 29.97/59.94 or 25/50

    bear in mind that i am talking about stock/archive and not main shot footage, which would be shot in the delivery format. so in coporate, if you need a sequence of coral reefs to say that your company is/is not destroying them, it is only a tiny percentage of your edit.
  • fatpigfatpig
    @adventsam: of course, where no information is there, transcoding wont make it appear.

    @sparedog: okay i understand, but i was always of the opinion that the 30p that mjpeg gives us makes it completely unusable for corporate things. is this just for PAL land, and you guys actually can make use of it?
  • sparedogsparedog
    @fatpig - because alot of clients still dont need hd. think about internet, alot of television channels, and corporate videos. alot of corporate videos are made for presentations, trade shows, internal communication, so they dont need 1080, they can be 480 or even as low as 240 if its web based and still get the corporate message across.
    advertising commercials are immediate, they dont need to be future proofed like a documentary or televison program would be, as they have a very limited lifespan. so if the commercial is intended for sd television, there is no reason to pay extra for hd version of the footage when 480 will do.
    720 is actually considered pretty damn good in the broadcast world, only a few tv programs are made in 1080. think of alot of the stuff being made in africa, russia, middle east, india, it's still being made in sd

    @adventsam - i admit, my needs are niche. in underwater video the colors are often very screwed up, so need a huge amount of pushing. the transcoding doesn't seem to help this, i cant claim to know the reason why. really my best results would be from RAW, but for 400 dollars i can get 720 4:2:2 100mbit from a tiny footprint.
  • adventsamadventsam
    Why dont you transcode to 422, job done!
  • fatpigfatpig
    @sparedog:
    what i dont get: getty Images wont accept 1080p 4:2:0, but are satisfied with 720p 4:2:2 ?
  • KrisCanonizadoKrisCanonizado
    found 1080p 70mbps footage.

    settings are:

    Version Increment = checked

    Patches for End Users - AVCHD Movie Mode - AVCHD Compression - Video Bitrate 24H = checked & set to 70000000

    Patches for Testers - AVCHD Movie Mode - AVCHD Compression - Video Bitrate 24H ADD = checked & set to 70000000

    Patches for Testers - AVCHD Movie Mode - AVCHD Compression - Overall Bitrate = checked & set to 70000000

    Patches for Testers - AVCHD Movie Mode - AVCHD Compression - Overall Bitrate 2 = checked & set to 70000000

    Patches for Testers - AVCHD Movie Mode - AVCHD Research - Video Buffer = checked & set to 0x3600000

    Patches for Testers - AVCHD Movie Mode - AVCHD Research - Video Buffer 24p = checked & set to 0x3600000

    NOTE: 24p still uses a variable bitrate, so only certain shots actually exceed the typical bitrate up to 70mbps. Still playing with encoder settings to force a higher constant rate (if this is even possible).

    I am also using a class 10 card with 30mbps write speed, this may effect how high the bitrate and buffer can be.

  • mistanmistan
    Great news!
    Be still my beating heart...
  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev
    Early next week, I think.
  • Angry_CAngry_C
    @Vitaliy:

    Many thanks for your great work!

    Can you roughly estimate when PTool 3.61d is finished?
  • ehmeddieehmeddie
    gracias por tu esfuerzo vitaliy, la lumix gh2 se llama ahora lumix ghv en tu honor!! "V- VITALIY"


    thanks for your effort vitaliy The lumix lumix GH2 GHV is now called in your honor!! "V-Vitaliy"

    (GOOGLE TRADUCTOR)
  • proaudio4proaudio4
    Thank you!
  • B3GuyB3Guy
    Thanks, VK!
  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev
    I am working on PTool, all is going normally.
    Main target now is improved usability for casual users, so all they'll need to do is use one simple patch for each thing.
    This requires some changes.
    Plus some parts will be totally new, like correct (almost :-) ) remaining time display for ACVHD modes.
  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev
    Please move all 25p related talks to specially made topic:
    http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/391/25p-official-topic-aka-dont-cry-for-me-argentina
  • madactmadact
    [[[ On the question of the need for 25p, I'm curious - is the problem of syncing to lamp flicker for mains-driven lamps no longer relevant? ]]]
  • sparedogsparedog
    @mpgxsvcd - no you are right, i cannot see a visible difference between 422 & 420 in anything i have ever shot or tested, rushes wise. as far as i know it is more of a safety margin with the stock houses incase the footage needs to be pushed quite far in the color grading. it does really help in that department. everything is graded before submitting, so if a client wants to regrade it, the 422 holds up much better.

    but for day to day non-broadcast i wouldnt worry about it for footage i shot if i knew i had no future market for it. i cant imagine anyone is going to visually (without scopes) look at footage with even a small amount of grading and say, that's 420 or 422.

    but the hack has done more for the cameras than just made them awesome prosumer tools. with the hack, they are also serious tools for high end professional projects and that should not be over looked, as it is extremely useful and cool.
  • _gl_gl
    @Ian_T, I've replied in a PM so we can keep the thread clean.
  • Ian_TIan_T
    @_gl
    Not trying to beat this dead horse any more...but in my prior life I was an audio guy for a number of years and currently write/compose/produce my own music outside of my regular space systems engineering job. When we ran our own studios one of our tasks was to do re-mixing of previously released material. Time compression was used successfully on 99% of the tracks with no hiccups. That was then...this is now.. and the technology is a great deal better and more readily available now.

    But I do understand the need for 25p in PAL country... no one is arguing that. My original point was that...there are alternatives today that work well.

    Note: I've never done this with movies myself. But if I did I wouldn't necessarily compress it all in one fail swoop. You can break that puppy down in several segments and stitch them all together (just a thought).
  • proaudio4proaudio4
    @mpgxsvcd

    You're right that it's not obvious, but for keying it certainly helps.
  • mpgxsvcdmpgxsvcd
    @sparedog

    Is it more of a "They only accept video with these specs" kind of thing or is there an actual visible difference. I have never been able to see any visible difference at all. Does anyone have any side by side screen shots that show the difference. I would believe it if I saw it but I have never seen the difference myself.
  • sparedogsparedog
    @proaudio4 - i dont think the verdict is out yet on that one. only time will tell.
    any thoughts on the percentage likelyhood of this, vitaliy?
Add a Comment