Personal View site logo
Driftwood Quantum X Settings, Series 1: v3b Rocket - v4b Orion - v5 β Pictoris
  • 1019 Replies sorted by
  • Wow. I'm new to this and I have a huge headache. There's so much info to read and I have no time to sit and read them all, I'm more of a visual learner. Anyways I just bought a Lumix GF-2 Yesterday for the sole purpose of shooting videos and doing a little bit of photography. This is my first Camera ever, and I want to get the best quality possible. I have the 14-42mm Lens right now, and I have shot a few videos and the quality is ok but I have seen better quality footages on vimeo and youtube. For example

    This video was shot with a GF-1 20mm

    That's the quality I'm aiming for. Is there any video that shows you how to hack the GF-2? And from the info I've just given how can I achieve that sharp crisp non-blurry GH2 look on my GF-2? What hack would you guys recommend for my new camera. I'm new to this so if you can dumb it down for me. I would appreciate it. Inbox to help me out would be appreciated it as well Thanks

  • @cosimo_bullo How sharpeness works in our GH2 profiles is probably down to some further factor placed on the Quantization Matrix and its scalers (enhancing the high-frequency characteristics by +- a sort of add 'n' to 'x' factor). However, it could very well be artificial... again only testing can tell.

    Perhaps we should call this matrix, the 'DW_Log' !!! ;-)

  • @driftwood and others.

    Regarding sharpening and noise reduction .. I would have thought that anything the camera can do in 1/50 second .. my computer can do better in 2 seconds.

    Is this a sound philosphy .. or is noise/sharpening happening at some point in the record/encode .. that makes it beneficial to use in the camera?


  • @kavadni Its defo on the encode. Test and make comparisons leaving it off, and then +1 at a time... if it works for you great, if it doesn't, then fine. I am not advocating to anyone on the sharpeness matter. But we now have choice.

  • That's still 100x quicker. There will be a point of diminishing returns. What that is, I have no idea currently. I'd personally have the unsharpened version too.

  • This is a large break through @driftwood

  • Good point Nick... At this time with more testing needed, the sharpness control and it's affect on the new matrix control is yet to be determined.

    Sharpness controls dependent on frequency set and other factors, will also enhance (in a bad way..) noise levels. We can take a relatively high ISO test and watch its affect on noise at the different GH2 sharpening levels.

  • double post

  • @itscehris. You MIGHT be able to accomplish it. It's not such a difficult look to achieve. You need a soft light light source and probably a faster lens. The 14-42 is nicht so gut.

  • @itscehris You don't have to post the same video twice (can you EDIT one of the links out please). All I can say is try Orion. You decide.

  • @lukavi: I'm using the Kowa 16-D and Kowa 16-H.

  • @cosimo_bullo Ha, yes I noticed the improvement in the grain in the shadows too. It seems to be consistent too.

    @proaudio4 Its pretty difficult for me to make anything approaching a qualitive judgment on the difference in grain quality between 9b and Orion tbh. Its something I havent really built a test for yet (not hard to do though). My gut tells me however that 9b is going to have an edge over orion, which I guess is what you expect too. But the noise seems er.. somehow 'tidier' (less fizzy) its definitely not OMG! noticeably worse. I do feel there is noticeably more mid&low frequency noise apparent in the chroma channels, but its not hard to remove. Thats just a feeling btw, I wouldn't say it were a fact without more testing. I think what driftwood said above is key to how we need to think about this, "How sharpeness works in our GH2 profiles is probably down to some further factor placed on the Quantization Matrix and its scalers (enhancing the high-frequency characteristics by +- a sort of add 'n' to 'x' factor). However, it could very well be artificial... again only testing can tell."

    The encoding has been radically changed here, all bets are off, most of our previous assumptions need to be retested. Sharpening in camera maybe isn't going to get back to the detail levels we have without the matrix but I don't think thats a bad thing myself. My personal experience is that with the in camera sharpening you can get a good enough detail.

    The image out of orion was too soft for some of my lenses, making post work a bit more of a pain (for the specific work I'm doing that is, which is putting short video sequences into a 3D CG environment). Also contrast in camera I feel can have as much, if not more, of a positive effect than tweaking sharpness in camera if your finding image softness a problem. But yeah, you may lose latitude for CC work etc.. Using the two controls together is working out fine for what I need right now. This is all related to what I need though. Its still going to be a lens, shot, what you want influenced decision like always. But, try altering the settings, I understand entirely your misgivings about the in camera sharpening, its not that bad with this matrix, I've no idea why though. Hell I'm a post monkey, sharpening and altering contrast in camera is something that I just don't do.. normally. But if its giving me a better starting point for going in to post, which it is, then I will. I wish I had more time to test today, but the tests I've managed so far, particularly with the smooth profile, are looking really positive. I think I'm getting the measure of it, in terms that the changes I make are producing the results I'd expect from them.

    I think its also worth revisiting that godawful in camera noise reduction too, will give that a workout tomorrow. I think it may be even more of a 'no. don't touch that' than it was before now, as it seemed to create a look akin to a gaussian blur, but you never know, things can surprise you.

  • @itscehris. you have to understand this image. The least important thing in this shot is not the camera. It is the lighting, the make-up the model etc. If you just hack your camera and have no proper lighting set-up you will never get such a look.

  • I forgot you will have to have some post processing knowledge also.

  • Thank you very much for the responses

  • @ricker i'd really like to see a good example of 9b beeing superior to orion. could you post one? i just set up a very short and unscientific test at home and i have a hard time discerning any difference between the two.

    the "dead pixel line" as you call it is probably this the goddamn effin plague of this otherwise brilliant camera that cant be cured.

  • I'd also like to see the difference between Sage's V9b and Orion V4b. In 1080/24 Sage said they are identical, same thing, no changes.

    What he did change was the 720/60, and you can see the difference there.

    As far as I'm concerned, Orion surpassed V9b. I can't figure out why, how, what, but I pixel peep harder than anyone I know.

    I stay away from smooth and shoot Standard or Cinema, even after testing and messing around with sharpness I preferred sticking to -2. I do not shoot with Panasonic glass, though. Mostly PL sets or Canon EFs.

    However, I'd like to try a contrast adjustment to see how that fairs. Running everything through 5DtoRGB it's almost scary flat, too flat for 4:2:0. We'll see.

  • Looking forward to your results @kholi. Post some here!

  • @videohq @danyyyel I have already have that knowledge of color correction/grading, lens I'm doing research on some good lens to compliment the GF-2. My only concern was what the Hacks can provide for me. What I have learned so far was that the hacks can provide a higher Mbps? Meaning the higher the Mbps, the better the quality correct me if I'm wrong. And that's what I'm aiming for.

    So far shooting with the 14-42mm The quality of the video is not bad. Plus I'd like to practice Slow motion and Time lapse.

    I really do apologize if this the wrong thread to ask these questions

  • Agree with Stray that "all" the controls for image settings (color, sharpness, contrast, noise reduction) have dramatic effects on the end picture quality when using Quantum X Orion b.

    This is great news because we now have a patch that gives us the control.

    IMO I think people should leave the settings at 0 and run tests before dropping down to -1 or -2 (or boosting if desired).

    Second thing I am noticing is how much "different" all my lenses look. I believe that older hacks (and panny original settings) had a baked in sharpness that made lenses look similar, perhaps even giving what I call fake resolution. I have a large 46inch TV that I am playing back footage on and Orion looks great to me. Really does. Micro detail is still there when I use the Zeiss 100mm F2.0 macro lens (nikon mount). But the out of focus areas just seem to roll off so smooth and natural. Again I love it!

    But to sum up what Stray is getting at - #1 work with the settings, and #2 test all your lenses - imo a crap lens will look more like a crap lens with Orion. Also the "differences" between lenses I own seem magnified (perhaps my imagination but we will see what others think) so using "matched" lenses (Zeiss CP primes - many Oly lenses are similar in color etc) might have a big advantage when shooting with Orion.

    Ill post samples tonight...


  • @troyjason

    This is more the reason why I suggest people revisit film modes in general. Cinema is tying out for Standard to me, and that's pretty crazy considering.


    For sure, I've only got V9b stuff right now but Orion fun's coming super soon. Gotta go and test some glass. :D

  • Conclusion:

    We are back at point 0. The rules have changed. We have to start testing everything again (and keep in mind what we have learned so far). Big thumbs up to @Driftwood @Cbrandin @Vitaliy_Kiselev for their amazing work. The party is just getting started. If we continue like this, the GH2 has a very bright future ahead.

    What we need now is some test reels that toggle through all the settings (filmmodes, sharpening, contrast, noise reduction, saturation) and their combinations to see how that influences Orion.

    @stray Good to have you back. You always seem to pop-up at the right time with your spot-on analysis.

  • kholi and sohus - yup you are both 100% correct - I should have added that we should "start" with testing film modes, then work with settings inside each one. The differences I see are dramatic - and FUN!

  • A little off topic, but I found v1 really impressive both in terms of image quality and file size:

    Any Rocket or Orion users have tried both?

  • Upcoming Quantum X Pictoris....

    I am starting to get a little confused. This is supposedly geared towards great spanning. Isn't that what "SpanMyBitch" was created for? Will "Pictoris" be below or above "SpanMyBitch" in terms of quality?

    Thanks in advance for helping me understand. The patches you're creating for us all are simply amazing! We can't thank you enough @Driftwood - and of course @Vitaliy!

This topic is closed.
← All Discussions