Nebula Update - I ran into a problem with two clips out of five on a Sandisk 64/95 card. This clip would hang at 98% on import into FCPX, even after copying the card to a folder on my hard drive, so I converted it with Clipwrap. The QT file imported into FCPX, but the image broke up in several spots, as in the attachment. Playback in Quick Time shows the defect, which is where I got the screen grab. Interestingly, the original mts file will play in MPlayerX with no problem. In this clip, our dog, Buddha, was writhing in the grass after an encounter with a stink bug, so it appears that motion is a factor. However, another clip with very little motion shows breakup as well. Leica Summilux D, ISO 200, Standard profile, all -2.

@Alight Good thing you were using the hack. I don't think the standard GH2 would pick up the definition in your arms ;).

Shot on Moon Trial 5. Lens: Panasonic Leica 25mm F/1.4 @ F2.5, Hoya Variable ND Filter, ISO 160, Shutter 1/50. Audio: Rode NTG-1 + Tascam DR-100MKII.
Lightly graded in FCPX

I am also the main actor in both. I had a friend cam op for me after I set the exposure.

Thanks Vitaliy and driftwood.

@omnidecay. I agree with @thepalalias. If you need longer recording times with lower cards like SDHC 30Gb/s, just go with 24L, FH and H modes of the top settings. Even at those levels you still get three times the bitrates of the original stock setting that comes with GH2.

@dado023 I've done testing in this area and posted Google Docs of my tests before but I don't like dealing with Wiki mark-up. It drives me nuts. So I'm happy to provide the data to someone else if they are willing to handle the Wiki mark-up.

@omnnidecay When I need to shoot long events, I normally make image quality a secondary consideration as compared to stability when spanning. I normally use Flowmotion 2.02 if I am using slower cards (though there are several Driftwood ones that work well with the SanDisk 64GB 95MB/s). Somesettings really are designed to work well with slower cards and the descriptions often specify how to get stable spanning with them (which sometimes means shooting in 24L instead of 24H). If you cannot afford 24H spanning capable cards for an event, 24L really is fine. :)

In regards to spanning, I would suggest doing testing with less expensive 64GB SDXC cards. I have done several tests where a slower 64Gb card had better chances of spanning than a faster card of lower capacity.

Just remember, getting every last ounce of performance or bitrate out of a setting and getting reliable spanning performance at the same time are mutually exclusive. Pick the one that is most important for a given shoot and then do the best you can on the secondary priority - you will only frustrate yourself if you try to handle both equally. :)

@Azo Thanks! :)

@omnidecay By the way, I agree about the "x-factors" involved in why these do and do not work with a given card. That is part of the reason why the authors like @driftwood, @lpowell, @bkmwcd, @ralph_b, @mpgxsvcd (and so many others) have to spend so much time developing and testing the settings and why it makes more sense for most of us to pick the version of their setting tailored to our use than to try to modify it ourselves. But as mentioned before, the 64GB SdXC card mentioned earlier seems to use a different controller or something that makes a difference in spanning performance. I do not remember how great a gap their tends to be between peak and avg. bitrates in usual footage but there are ways to look at it using MediaInfo or StreamParser, for instance.

But like I was saying, I have had Flowmotion 2.02 with 24L as my fallback if I need the lowest chance of spanning errors I can get. I look forward to finding the Driftwood setting that is closest in spanning performance, soon. I just need to do more testing. :)

@thepalalias

Thank you for sharing your wealth of knowledge with us. I really appreciate your in depth easy to understand explanations. Most of the technical things that get discussed on here go completely over my head :(. I don't know anything about I frames B frames P frames etc, yet whenever you explain things you do in a manner which is very easy to understand.

Best Regards

@wicharris gotcha...who takes a 4min+ shot lol?

I did test again and no spanning on my card.

@omnidecay The larger hacks will not span unless you have the better cards.

@thepalalias, thanks.

@mirrorkisser @whiterabbit @spacewig @curtismack It is partly a matter of personal taste and what your primary goals are, of course.

For me, there is no "one-size fits all". When I am more concerned about noise, I go with the @curtismack approach (and yes, the approach still applies for the GH2 as much as it did with film but I would not claim expertise about the range). When I am more concerned about the highlights and light rendering, I am usually willing to except a bit of noise in exchange for it (more like what @mirrorkisser describes).

But in the end, it depends hugely on the subject. The number one priority in any shot that contains a human in the shot will generally be that human being's exposure. The rest kind of has to follow whatever I have to do in order to make their exposure work - maybe the shadows will get crushed in post to reduce noise, or maybe the highlights will get blown but I look at which one I have to do in order to get the skin texture I want and then I do it.

Now, if I am shooting something without a human subject, I can look at what is most interesting to me in the scene and set the exposure to emphasize that. Is there interesting geometry in the shadows that I want to bring out? Is there a softness to the lighting that I want to make sure and capture? Are their clouds or colors in the sky that I want to make sure and emphasize and preserve?

It is all about choices - often you can't get everything using the camera settings alone. You can use neutral density filters, contrast filters, etc. to make it easier or you can mess with the lighting but whether you are aiming left or right on your histogram, what @curtismack says about aiming for a particular dynamic range is true. If you can get all the information into a particular range, then the camera has a fighting chance of catching it all, otherwise you'll have to choose what you want most.

But getting back to @Driftwood settings, specifically. If you are going to preserve detail in the shadows, many of the @Driftwood intra settings can be counted on to ensure detail in the noise patterns. I like Moon 5 for high detail scenes and Sedna or one of the IntraVenus versions for lower detail scenes where the more aggressive use of bitrate makes sense. But I shoot both kinds of material with both settings - I don't normally switch around on-site while shooting unless I'm testing. :)

@CurtisMack, thanks for your reply and advice. It is an interesting balance to juggle.

@WhiteRabbit To paraphrase Ansel, it's not overexposure if you do it on purpose when you know the outcome. I haven't done the actual exposure test to determine exactly how much extra exposure you can give in soft light and still keep all the highlights. In this shot, FCPX's waveform showed mild clipping. The GH2's histogram indicated correct exposure at f/2.5 (ISO 400), and I exposed the shot at f/1.8, one full stop more. So, it appears that in soft light 2/3 of a stop more exposure than indicated would bring in those highlights. However, in more severe light, it would be necessary to lower the lighting ratio, to a maximum of (I'm guessing at this) of 1:4 to bring Buddha's black fur into the grey area. When I acquire some daylight balanced soft lighting, I plan to test this and come up with a firm exposure/fill method which is simple to apply.