sanveer

[quote name='Axel' timestamp='1351540831' post='20553'] @sanveer Upscaling is what a 4k DLP does with normal 2k films. And guess what? The difference is hard to see, although the resolution of, er, [i]true[/i] 4k means four times that of 2k. 'Overly detailed images kill it, for me.' This is no longer about detail. It is about no longer [i]seeing resolution[/i]. And a very well defined image looks more organic, not desperately sharp. 'There is a certain charm in soft dreamy images.' In comparison to the [i]unsharp mask[/i] blockyness with which the details crumble into focus with the DSLRs. You really should go and see the film. In 4k. [/quote] I don't know if India has any 4k screens. I guess, since Reliance is in business (they picked up Dreamworks), so, maybe, in another few months, 4k resolutions theatres will start popping up, suddenly. I guess, if you're going to keep 4k soft and dreamy, like film, then, you're just increasing the size of the projection, ala IMAX. [quote name='andy lee' timestamp='1351553824' post='20558'] I'd like to see GH2 upscaled to 4k and projected!! we should do a test..... [/quote] Dude, would LOVE to see, this one. GH2 @ 4k. It should be shot SUPER SHARP, but, the colors should be a little pale (maybe with some purebred Leica lens) and then softened in upscaling. wow

[quote name='Germy1979' timestamp='1351583230' post='20589'] I think they're just sticking to how awesome their Alexa is now.. Skyfall was uprez'd to 4k from arriraw. I figure that's their angle, lol.. "Shhhhiiiiiit bra!! We don't need 4k! .... Our TWO-k is still better.... Aint nobody watchin' 4k anyway!... Hugo bitchiz!" [/quote] That would be even more embarrassing. If the 2.8k on the Alexa beats the 4k on everyone else ... :P

Great cameras. I always guessed Sony has many advantages over the competition (it manufactures sensors, TVs, Blue Ray, LCD Screen, Tablets, etc etc, basically everything, plus Columbia Tristar Pictures). Though, maybe the F5 and F55, will eat as much into the F700 and F65 territory, a they will, into the EPICs and Alexas. I am guessing that, Arri will be out with a 4k Camera, before the end of the year (maybe they will just put some shit, into a fancy looking housing/ casing, and say its a brilliant 4k camera, with 15 bits of Dynamic Range, and can shoot 240fps @ 4k RAW, and then tell their engineers, to get going, at a war footing. :D Since none will be allowed to review the camera, none would really be able to call the bluff.)

Interesting. Well, if Canon, with the 5D Mark ii, can consistently give us 590 lines of resolution, instead of 1080, why can't Arri call 2.8k RAW a 4k video. I quite frankly doubt the actual resolution that comes out of the 4k cameras, especially in terms of the work than can be done in post. RED Claims a dynamic range of upto 16 stops (I wonder if its even possible), and yet, in most tests, the Alexa (which has a dynamic range of 13 stops) beats it by around 2 stops. Overly detailed images kill it, for me. Films can't look like documentaries. There is a certain charm in soft dreamy images. Even the IMAX images aren't so detailed, that you notice apple flies sitting on fruits, in garden shots. Also, the projection size is enormous, so the image is still cinematic, and not too sharp. One of the things that ruined the select preview for the Hobbit, was the 48fps. Now I believe, James Cameron is taking it to 60fps. Its just making films look too detailed. 4k may be ok, for 2k sized screens, for projecting 3D films, perhaps. Maybe, all of us GH2 owners, should upscale the GH2 to 4k. THAT would be something. :P

people, Please ignore tommy here. Its Vitaly masquerading as the tomcat. i would not hold any grudges against him. he is still, genuinely trying to create a get 4-4-4 out of the 8 bit 4-2-0, that is coming out of the GH2. and, he's not whining. he's genuinely upset ... :P

I am curious. Did you playback the 45 min clip, in-camera (or atleast a portion of it), before transferring it? I am assuming, that: 1. Either the clip was never saved, in the first place (or a very small portion of it was recorded), before it stopped, on its on. 2. While transcoding, through the various software you used, you either changed it into different programs, ruining the final video, somehow, or into a form, which your video player, does not recognise. hmmm ...

Did u unplug your camera after ALL the files were transferred? I am not sure, what exactly, the problem is.

[quote name='FilmMan' timestamp='1351348760' post='20438'] One thing I noticed about RED. They respond to competition. Last year with the C300 arrival, Red responds with the Scarlet. This year, they are repricing due to the new Sony F, and Canon C500. They reacte and don't wait to see what happens. Excellent business practice. I've been saying this for quite sometime. Any company that prices aggressively with top notch specs could take the lion share or establish a firm beach head. Once you have the masses using your product, residual income will come from accessories, upgrades, etc. Why lose a sale? Of course, pricing has to fit the economics. Look how fast the battle tested Scarlets sold out. If the number was 100. Then $7100 x 100 = $710,000. On top of that people probably bought another $500K to $700K in accessories (high margins). Later, the users will buy additional batteries, storage, upgrade, etc., as the first round of buying leads to this. More importantly, these individuals are 80% secure clients. They are not with the competition. My 2 cents. Cheers [/quote] I think RED are in their own world. Elitists.I remember the 'bringing a bazooka to a gunfight comment' comment. I thought it was ridiculous. If RED were really concerned about pricing and stuff, they would not wait for competition. They would create a 2k camera (if not a 2.5k one), in the league of the BMCC. The fact that none of the big guys care about pricing just outlines a cartel effect. Also, it would be great, if an underdog like BMCC kills a lot of the competition. I am guessing, the Hero guys are planning a BMCC version too,maybe without the RAW (probably with 10 bit 4-2-2) and 2.7-3k video. That would kill all the other Full HD over-priced and over accessory hungry cameras around. Maybe people should start a worldwide fund, for creating the Ultimate Indie Film Camera, and let BMCC take the initiative, Let them dictate a collection amount, and lets collect twice that much. That should shut up Canon, Nikons, Sony and RED, for a nice long time.

[quote name='charlie_orozco' timestamp='1351365867' post='20443'] This moiré problem we're seeing is definitely a processing problem in the hardware department. But I bet it is plenty capable of resolving images without moiré, so I guess the scaling method could be improved or the architecture modified to solve this without losing all of the other things the GH3 does get right. It does bother me that the so called "wide dynamic range" isn't really there either (although I saw picture shot with the High Dynamic Range profile and it looked Cinestyle like a bit). Could it be that the small delay has been stated to solve it? [/quote]In the GH2, only a portion of the sensor was used for the video, and the down scaling wasn't the usual method, used in other sensors. Therefore, presumably, the circuitry was in order. Maybe, the GH3 has a better sensor, than the GH2, notwithstanding the smaller size (and disengaging the multi-aspect ration bit, and disabling the ETC, for video). But, merely because a sensor (and even the processor), is better, doesn't mean that the camera's video and stills would be. In the newer sensors, circuity is extremely complicated (especially in the back-lilluminated ones). The GH3 may not have a back-illuminated one (GOD only knows the exact kind of sensor it has), but,I am guessing, that Panasonic has to seriously tweak a lot of things, including circuitry and codec. After the benchmark the GH2, set, for video, the only sensible way, would have been, either a 2.5-2.7k video,or a 2k video, with the dynamic range of atleast 2-3 points higher, and much flatter colour profile. This without Any Moire or Aliasing. This is something, which is Clearly lacking in the GH3. I am guessing (that) the delay, was due to not getting their act in order. They chose Photokina, because, otherwise, they would have had to showcase at some smaller, less prestigious, venue. If Panasonic is afraid that the GH3 will eat into their Professional Video Camera market, then, they should think of the revenues only in terms of numbers and not the profit margins. If the GH3 shoots anywhere near the Alexa or C300 (or even the C100), then, it would easily outsell the GH2, Many Times Over, and most people who picked up one GH2, would easily be tempted to get 2 GH3s, instead. This apart from all the new buyers. Also,people thinking of picking up any of the Canon duds including the 5D Mark II and Mark II and their C100 and C300, would have a good enough reason to move to the GH3. Maybe other models like by Nikon and Sony also could be passed over, for a GH3. Panasonic should think of things, from a broader perspective, and from a quantity perspective, rather than larger margins, per camera.

I have a strong gut feeling, that the image and video quality, is more than just a codec issue. It may have to do with the sensor, as well as the wiring (circuitry). I guess, we'll know by the start of December, when (hopefully), the Firmware is finalised, for release.

[quote name='KarimNassar' timestamp='1351260233' post='20369'] did not pay attention to that Talk about loosing a very interesting feature... could come with a firmware update maybe? [/quote] Hmmm ... I am guessing it should be able to fix it, in a firmware update. Also, the ETC mode has reduced the focal length, of the mode (for stills), from 2.6x to 2.0 (I am assuming they are both in the 4:3 aspect), since this isn't a multi-aspect ratio sensor, anymore. "[b]Max. 2 (when a picture size of [s] (4M) , aspect ration of [4:3] is selected).[/b]"

Strange: 1. When recording motion picture no ETC (Extra Tele Conversion) ... what???? Mentioned here: [url="http://www.freeimagehosting.net/ipsgx"]http://www.freeimagehosting.net/ipsgx[/url]

hmmm ... ok. Actually, my connection has gotten pretty slow. Its supposed to be 512Mbps, but,i guess, its hovering around a tenth of that. Jut waiting for the video to download.

From the screengrab, the resolutions seem similar. Have just started downloading the file. Is huge (223 MB).

Relax dude.If the settings were perfect, then Panasonic would be, ahem, obliged to pay you. ;) That why they offer such lousy shooting conditions :P Wow, the Flowmotion V2.02 is my favourite hack too. If the fair is there, for another day, you could use your charm, and persuasion skills, to get another go at it. But, even then, I am sure, anything coming out of the GH3, is curiosity worthy, and testing should be done under all test conditions.

don't EVER focus on a steadycam or any other stabilizer. Keep the aperture around f5.6 (or higher), and the closest thing from you, should be Atleast 3 feet (preferably double that, if possible). Everything should be in focus, at the same time.The sole purpose of the steadycam, is to make panning, without rails, smooth. Focus doesn't have to adjust the depth of field. For those, shots on tripods make sense.

Wow. Eagerly look forward to the results. Also, try and colour correct and grade both the (hacked) gh2 as well as the gh3 video. btw, Which hack have you installed?

was that question for me? what will blend?

Avoid iDynamic and iResolution. They were terrible on the GH2, as well.

Could you try this (and maybe note everything with a pen and paper): 1. Shoot in the various Modes of the GH3. 2. Shoot the videos at 5, 0 and -5. 3. Wear a Checked Pattern Shirt (preferably which exhibits moire patterns on cameras), and let someone run the video over your shirt, left to right. 4. Try and shoot a comparison with a Panny Lens (preferably a 12-35, if its there, and a 14-140), and a Non-Panny lens (maybe a Voigtlander). 5. For indoors use a fast lens, and keep the ISO low. 6. Carry a shade card, to check the comparison in colours on various modes, as well as the colour difference between the GH2 and the GH3. 7. Shoot in the 50p/ 60p mode, and compare the same, with the 720p on the Gh2. Let us know.

I am assuming that all the various tests done on the GH3, apart from highlighting a lack of instructions (and maybe even knowledge, to an extent),from the Panasonic team, also, go to show, that the Codec is Indeed developing, and, the fact, that, people are getting the hang of things with the GH3, like they did with the GH2 (in the formative months). I guess, this can only spell good things, for the GH3 to come. I also saw another video yesterday, and I found the video quality pretty impressive. I am not really sure, why he's shot it at 50fps, if he's shot it at 720p. He could have done that on the GH2. But,great resolution, anyway. Also, since the guy has shot it on the 14-140 lens, there appears to be hope for the Panny lenses. I am also, hopeful, that the Panny lenses will have more specific codec, for assisting with the autofocus in the future (not that it is required, I feel, if you open the aperture enough). Here is the video: [url="http://vimeo.com/52005342#at=0"]http://vimeo.com/52005342#at=0[/url]

okkkkkkkkk ... Actually, I guess, most tests for ISO would keep the Aperture constant, so that, they have a rough Idea, of the increase in brightness. But, I guess, this test highlighted the fact, that, contrary to popular belief, in the m4/3rds, the aperture ring has to be opened up, and the aperture lowered, to get more things in focus. P.S.: I meant, opening up the aperture below the f4-f5.6 level (maybe beyond f8 level)

"4K and 50Mbps422" ? Is that enough Mbps, for 4k?

[quote name='Julian' timestamp='1351029942' post='20200'] Media Player Classic (so the levels aren't correct) > Print Screen > MS Paint > Save as PNG. I suppose there are superior ways. Just have Lightroom here and that doesn't work really well for this kinda things. Keep in mind the screen grab is a close up of a huge portrait photo, see in the video. I think the screen grab looks much better than the YouTube version btw.. Here's another screen shot (same lousy method) of the scene. Looks fine to me. [url="http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/130-screen-grab-2/"][img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/gallery/album_16/gallery_20742_16_2455628.png[/img][/url] [/quote] Wow. I find this image, pretty sharp too (though, the other one seemed a little sharper). Could you use a faster lens than the 14-140, for testing the ISO. Also, strangely till ISO 800 the focus, on the lamp-shade, seemed poor. The focus gets sharper, once the ISO reaches 800 (and above). Also, I found the ISO till 3200, pretty usable. There appeared banding from the lowest ISO. Though, loss of detail, seemed (for me), to become noticeable post ISO3200.

[quote name='Julian' timestamp='1351028145' post='20192'] Thanks! The sharpness is fine indeed. At -5 it is a bit soft, so that's why I shot at -2. No sharpening artefacts but the detail is there. Some shots are around f/5.6 or maybe even lower. But I had to go for smaller apertures since I have no ND filter in my kit right now. I don't think it would make much of a difference though, at f/4-5.6 the lens is probably even sharper because diffraction kicks in pretty soon on micro four thirds. The shot from 2:08 to 2:22 might be a bit misleading, since it's a huge blow-up or a photograph. So maybe there's banding in the print ;) And the YouTube compression doesn't help. Here's a screengrab (view at full resolution): [url="http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/129-gh3-screen-grab/"][img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/gallery/album_16/gallery_20742_16_771748.png[/img][/url] @yellow: your clip shows black and white here. Isn't it more likely that it is because of the way YouTube processes it? They re compress the files... [/quote] Oh, ok. Thats why (possibly) John's (Twigt) video seemed sharper (he set everything at '0'). But, this new video, of yours, is pretty sharp. Lots of detail, and the picture profile, is pretty flat. The banding is mostly noticeable, indoors. In the outdoor shots its hardly there. I guess, the outdoor shots must have had banding, more due to the compression by youtube.