Best comment ever: "Stop posting strange things."

Hello post! Here is my test. Shot and edited in 2K, rendered in 1080p. I played with levels a bit.

In other words, it may eat the GH3's lunch. For now.

Yeah, just as long as it's not raining. :)

@vicx The GH1 MJPEG encoder could be patched to record in 4:2:2 color, but the GH2 will work properly only in 4:2:0 color depth. Both MJPEG and AVCHD are VBR encoders and will naturally reduce their bitrates when underexposed, since there is less light in dimly lit scenes to record. What's important, however, is not the bitrate, but how finely the MJPEG and AVCHD frames are quantized and encoded.

With the MJPEG patch in Flow Motion v2, I was able to maintain bitrates close to 100Mbps at very dim exposures. As illumination dims, the encoder uses finer quantizing factors, until it reaches quality levels comparable to Photoshop JPEG images saved at maximum quality.

The AVCHD patch in Flow Motion v2 is designed to maintain consistent motion picture quality over a wide range of exposure levels. Since it is a short-GOP, B-frame encoder, it does not need as much bitrate to maintain maximum image quality at low light levels as the MJPEG all-Intra encoder.

Typically, both MJPEG and AVCHD encoders will operate near 100Mbps peak in well-exposed scenes. As exposure levels dim, the AVCHD encoder's bitrate will drop while it maintains consistent quality levels. The MJPEG encoder's bitrate will remain high, as it will actually increase its image quality at dimmer exposure levels.

@Neverprod

Stop posting strange things.

@LPowell When I first got my GH2 4 months ago the first thing I looked at was MJPEG in low light and in all truth I liked its relative performance compared to the other patch I was using at the time which was I think was Sanity. I have been on an obsessive learning curve since then so I have abetter idea about what I'm looking at. One of the things I continue to notice across all AVCHD patches is the starvation of data in low luma situations. Is this also a property of MJPEG. Does JPEG apply a perceptual compression technique related to luminance? Is the MJPEG constant quality or is it CBR.

Was it also resolved whether the MJPEG was 4:2:2 sampled or 4:2:0.

I can see from the Flat 4 thread that there is a hunger for specialist patches even with their limitations. So what sort of subject matter favours MJPEG over AVCHD at the same bitrates?

@lpowell Just out of interest is there any point pushing the resolution higher than that ?

I'm talking nonsense, ignore me, sorry.

We've been through this with mjpeg allowing arbitrary resolutions, and IIRC noone was really convinced that it was actually using the resolution of the sensor as per the settings you gave. It seemed much more likely that the camera was performing scaling to the requested resolution. Also upscaling AVCHD gave better results than getting the camera to record mjpeg at a 2K resolution is my memory of this debacle.

Anyway, that screenshot comparison of your mouse on the table with an out of focus background is completely useless for any kind of good comparison (except maybe a lowlight performance comparison, which again there has been much talk/comparison here between mjpeg and AVCHD too) go out in the daylight and shoot something with a lot of detail, an awful lot (like trees, or bushes) with the same lens in AVCHD 1080p and then with your 2.5K setting. Then it will be easier to judge, and would be worth doing, cos my memory of this discussion on mjpeg and its resolution possibilites is that it remained unresolved. And as @TommiH said, the aspect ratio needs fixing. One thing I know people do do with the mjpeg settings is use them to shoot with anamorphic lenses so as to get the right resolution/ratio needed to unsqueeze the resulting footage.

@TommiH

Did you really look both picture scene ?

Clearly not a upscale, if it was a upscale of the 720P/1080p i will not catch more stuff on my scene (look who many stuff you can see on 2.5K and on the 1080p) and it's exactly the same recording position moment ! in here we clearly (repeat again) use the sensor possibilities to take all the scene and not a simple software upscaler.

If i will can use the limit of the sensor, i will can take more stuff on my scene than the 2.5K

It's actually really giving me a true 2.5K resolution even a little bit more than the BMCC resolution.

That's why is was impressed to see a 2.5K at 30p working stable on the GH2, i didn't expected that much from the hardware of the GH2.

Now if i try to reach the 3K , i have too much instability that maybe can be fixed

@TommiH

Now you still think that is a upscaling, seriously don't think i'm dumb thanks i know exactly what i'm saying

Again be more respectfull to other next time and not only me

Just post a screenshot from some detailed scenery/leaves shot in your 2.5k mjpeg vs shot on regular avchd in 24H - then we can see what you mean.

@all: there is a 2k mode in driftwoods patches. does anyone know which benefits it is supposed to have?

Second result about a better resolution I try different know and unknown resolution that is related to the 2:39/1:78 etc... For now i find that the best height for the GH2 is 1366 after that, i can see some problem (maybe can be fixed) About the width i'm not sure yet but from my investigation, i find that the GH2 accept easily the 2560 size (2560x1366 with a display ratio of 1:85)

Fast test of 10seec

Video ID : 1 Format : JPEG Codec ID : jpeg Duration : 9s 500ms Bit rate mode : Variable Bit rate : 119 Mbps Width : 2 560 pixels Height : 1 366 pixels Display aspect ratio : 1.85:1 Frame rate mode : Constant Frame rate : 30.000 fps Compression mode : Lossy Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 1.130 Stream size : 134 MiB (94%)

@TommiH

Maybe you would need to calm down ? if you are not interested for talking about, you can go play your troll somewhere else ?