Personal View site logo
GH4 4K Panasonic video camera, official topic
  • 3230 Replies sorted by
  • @driftwood if you are able to set the zebra also to 70% like in the vx2k.

  • deleted comment, fake video was posted.

  • @Tron Spot on! I was thinking.. yet another tech spech video, but that one got my attention. 10bit 4K via HDMI was a no go until now from what I've been reading. I guess 4K hdmi recorders won't come for cheap at first, but who knows what Atomos will be looking at next. Looking forward to NAB.

  • @evero 99% sure Blackmagic can take the back end of the 4K camera, stuff it in a box and charge $1000-$1500 for it, so we may see something come out that is less than the YAGH-a-meister.

  • Rocks Video was not GH4 but BMPCC Hoax.

  • The reason I was asking about downscaling before keying, is that I read somewhere that when you scale down, the color sampling is for some reason not scaled down as it is already downscaled in 4:2:0 - I don't know if that is true or not, but several people reported better keys when scaling down 1080p to 720p in 4:2:2 on the GH13. My tests with the GH13 was inconclusive, both using the 4:2:0 and 4:2:2 modes in te camera itself.

    But @driftwood what I would love is just to see a keying example with the footage from the camera out of the "box" (not the YAGH...) Just a simple shot infront of a green screen and 1 click keylight example to see if it is any better than the GH's. Preferably in both good, adequate, bad and horrible conditions :) But anyting would suffice.

    An extreme low-light example and also a challenging high contrast situation would also be cool to see how it handles.

  • in the gh4 zacuto video: Look at how smoking silently pissed the Panasonic guy is when zacuto dick starts taking about his servo zoom-which will, knowing zacuto's absurd markup probably cost several thousand dollars.

    And wtf is he babbling about "if you have a 15 man crew, then you can mess around with primes". Focus and zoom with your feet.

  • @jamesgh2 That vid was a raw test shot on the pocket cinema camera, posted last year.

  • @chauncy say what you want, but keep your foul language to yourself.

  • @driftwood - sorry, forgot to mention FPN - keep getting bit by my GH2 and some reassurance that GH4 is half decent in low light would be fantastic. Am assuming there's no iso bug either..

  • @chauncy he was so pissed. I really liked the interview overall though. A lot of questions that many people had were answered. And that comment about prime lenses was an absolute joke. I know a pair of guys that shoot weddings together using only primes.

  • @Mistas & @AdamT

    "I would stabilize the 4K footage so you don't lose resolution when the footage is cropped. Then downsample the cropped footage to 1080p;"

    Stabilizing is extremely processor intensive. To add insult to injury, it won't scale with multi-core processors.

    I would approach stabilization it in a different way. I'd first downscale the footage to something like 480p (4.5x smaller than 4K) and apply stabilizing to that. This should be ~20x faster to stabilize than 4K, but never mind the resolution, because you won't be using this footage. After you do this, you'll end up with a cropped/resizing factor to completely remove the borders at 480p.

    Let's imagine that Mercalli/Premiere(WarpStabilizer) ends up with a 110% scaling (which is a bit above typical shake) to remove the black borders. Now you can easily compute the final rescaling factor to get stabilized FullHD from 4K = 50%(=4K/1080p)*110%(=crop factor) = 55%.

    So this means that you can downscale first to 1188p, stabilize, and still get 1080p when the stabilizer crops 10% out to 1080p to remove the borders, without the need to do any upscaling nor processing unneeded data.

    In the end, it will typically be 3x faster and will preserve the same exact quality as if you stabilized 4K and cropped after. ;)

  • @duartix great suggestion!

  • Aerial Shot :

  • Looking at some of the faster pans in the pro aerial cinema video, the GH4 rolling shutter seems like it will not be much of an issue (for me...)

  • Whoa.....I have to say....I liked those whips and pans.

  • @jamesgh2 pretty sure that video with the rocks is a pocket cam video ive seen before , at least some of it ... zion something or other...

  • @jakepowell

    Ok I removed the post thanks!

  • @duartix - can I ask which NLE will do that? Thanks

  • @duartix

    The real essence of my question is will the quality of stabilization be better at 4k... Does more pixels = more info for software to analyze??? I realize it would take much longer and may not even be practical, it was more out of curiosity.

  • i think i've seen this video before. Can someone confirm me if thats only the gh3 ?

  • @amateur I'm not seeing any comparison between the two cameras in this video... I had to turn it off because of the annoying soundtrack... but this could have been shot with the GM1: not that that's a bad thing...

    Edit: I went back and played the 'end credits': the entire video was shot with a GH3!

  • @driftwood

    Can you do GH2 moon7 vs GH4 200mbps 1080p video? That would be interesting as a benchmark.

  • @mrbill : The Warp Stabilizer was introduced as a filter in After Effects 5.5 and Premiere CS6. From my experience it's probably the best one around, even though sometimes it goes nuts especially with flashing lights (live concerts). When it does go wild, I sometimes switch to a VirtualDub plugin called Deshaker, which isn't as good, but it gives you absolute control and editing access to the results.

    @Mistas : The question is... will you spot a sub-pixel shake? Because that's what you get after you downscale. And some deshakers will also analyse footage at sub-pixel level. There is nothing like testing it. And sometimes (like in Deshaker) the more resolution, the bigger the chance for repeated patterns to throw off motion estimation and thus the stabilization. I can tell you that most of the times I use Deshaker in half resolution because it's more reliable and I can't tell the difference .

    But let's not digress any more. Further discussion on this subject should be diverted to this place: