Interview with Panasonic - raw HDMI output may be coming to future GH4 firmware plus anamorphic aspect ratios in firmware V2.0

[tupp]

Great interview! Lots of good information. Thanks!

The only other camera to shoot 4:3 for anamorphic is the Arri Alexa Studio (which Roger Deakins used on the latest Bond film Skyfall)

 
As I understand, all of the Alexa XT models (XT, XT Plus, XT M and XT Studio) have 4:3 sensors.
 
Furthermore, I think that there are a few 4k machine vision cameras that have 4:3 sensors.

[DamienMTL]

That sounds amazing and I really want to know if Panasonic will work on an update a dedicated to film-makers to desqueeze (display & file writing) internaly our future lovely 4:3 X2 footages. If Panasonic plans on doing that, the GH4 will destroy the indie / Pro-Am market with all those amazing features. Thanks to Andy for pushing our ideas to Panasonic staff's ears.

[levisdavis]

... Thinking that the 1:1 and 4:3 modes, with a 2x anamorphic, is actually closer to a classic 35mm field-of-view based on the new pixel height... Adding a .71 speed booster might actually take it over the top.

 

Hey, that post earlier about changing the sensor resolution to create a "CinemaMode" is awesome! Great idea. Hoping this is taken seriously by Panasonic.

 

- - - - - - - - - - - -

 

2X Lensing Tests in PhotoMode:

 

I've found that with an ISCO 2x Ultra Star Mini that a 28mm Nikkor Prime doesn't vignette with PhotoMode set to 1:1. When shooting towards lights vignetting becomes noticeable. A Nikkor 35mm Prime in 4:3, 3:2, and 16x9 has no vignetting. However, in a 16x9 aspect ratio the vignetting becomes noticeable when shooting towards lights.

[Andrew Reid]

Great interview! Lots of good information. Thanks!


 
As I understand, all of the Alexa XT models (XT, XT Plus, XT M and XT Studio) have 4:3 sensors.
 
Furthermore, I think that there are a few 4k machine vision cameras that have 4:3 sensors.

 

Is it the full 4:3 area they use for anamorphic? That would give 2.66:1 when the cinema standard is 2.4:1.

 

Time for me to visit the Arri website for specs I think :)

[drokeby]

This is slightly off-topic, but in addition to wondering why Panasonic has not implemented a cinemascope aspect ratio along with 1:1, 3:2 and 4:3, I find myself wondering why there is no ex-tele option for 96 fps. I am not sure how they actually sample the sensor to do 96 fps, but they do seem to be doing something funky that results in lower image quality, like strong filtering to hide line-skipping. 

 

If they did a one-to-one readout as in ex-tele, for 96 fps, we might get a much cleaner and crisper 3 x slomo, and some extra lens flexibility at the same time.

 

Since they are reading over 8 million pixels 30 times a second in 4K, reading 1/4 of that 96 times a second should be well within the capacity of the processor and sensor. Indeed, 120 fps would be an equivalent pixel rate. Wouldn't that be nice!

[Andrew Reid]

I don't know the answer for sure but my guess is that although the data rate would be manageable I don't think the scanning rate of the sensor would be fast enough to do every pixel in 1080p crop mode.

 

96fps is not 'really' 1080p, they skip a lot of pixels to do the faster scan.

[Guest Ebrahim Saadawi]

Just after I sold my Gh4  :rolleyes:

I never shot anamorphic but this might be the final push that makes me try it. I think it's the situation for many, if Panasonic implemented a good anamorphic mode as Andrew suggests the camera could revive anamorphic shooting for the indie market, 

I sold the Gh4 because I don't like the image, it looks too much like broadcast video for me, I prefer the D5300 image enormously, but with a raw file it will be possible to get any look you want out of the image, whilst keeping the resolution advantage the GH4 gives compared to all cameras out there. 

I hope they really do push raw... I would need to re-buy though  :ph34r:

[pietz]

im so picky with what many people call the "video look" and many seem to complain about this on the GH4. and yet, i just dont get it. this camera captures such beautiful images, so far away from anything like the broadcasting look, that it blows my mind.

 

+1000 to what drokeby said. being able to record 4512x1920 would blow my mind. not only for the higher resolution but also for the full sensor readout and less crop!

[drokeby]

I don't know the answer for sure but my guess is that although the data rate would be manageable I don't think the scanning rate of the sensor would be fast enough to do every pixel in 1080p crop mode.

 

96fps is not 'really' 1080p, they skip a lot of pixels to do the faster scan.

 

Clearly the current 96fps is not really 1080p, but we also know that at 96 fps, it is having to skip over pixels to get the image.

 

In ex-tele 1:1 pixel readout, the reading of the sensor would be much more efficient (no skipping / waiting to skip pixels, and no filtering of the result on the fly either).

 

Many of the industrial image sensors use variable windowing allowing you to freely grab any smaller portion of the sensor at higher frame rates.

 

Perhaps read back access to the GH4 sensor is more constrained than that and Panasonic is doing something funky to access the sensor for 96 fps... some sort of special access that only works at very specific rates and resolutions. If so, this may be why we cannot engage ex-tele crop mode in 96 fps currently.

 

But certainly the rate that pixels must be read off the sensor for 4K at 30fps is higher than the rate that 1080p read off at 96 fps in crop mode. 

[Dominic Clarke]

I was planning to do the whole blackmagic raw thing until THIS comes along. 

3:2 and 4:3 even at 25p is nice and hopefully 24p will happen. 

Would use this with a Baby hypergonar and it's annoying to always crop the sides off. Can the 4k stills mode output to a recorder for 10bit prores? 

[DamienMTL]

@drokeby is absolutely right. 4512x1920 is the Future.

I am really looking forward to watching Andy's 2.66:1 first testshots. ;)

[JazzBox]

Did they add some more framing guidelines for 2.35:1? 

I continue to steal rubber band from my daughter's bracelets, but I really miss this function on screen! :)

[richg101]

Makes me wish you could get a big steel toe cap in the doorway of Sony and feed them some useful feedback too.  Seems that Panasonic are being very forward thinking.  

[Mat17]

Thank You Panasonic!  i have been a Canon user for so many years, Not Any More!  i'm totaly diappointed with the lack of respect for their customers opinions and needs! they become so arrogant and ignor their loyal customers.

I got my GH4 along with many lenses months ago and it's just great,  please continue your excellent job. Love You Panasonic. .

[Mat17]

Andrew, this is great news! 

 

You know, you should start a fundraiser so we can gift Panasonic for how they look out for the independent film-maker at this price point. I think if every GH4 owner would give a bit ($20 or less) we could give them a nice big check to so them our appreciation. :)

 

So set it up, and I'll be the first to donate! 

count me in

[drokeby]

The other thing that these aspect ratios offer that I haven't heard much talk about is that you have a completely different set of reframing options for 1080p. I often produce video for portrait orientation, and the 1:1 gives the option of copping to 1080p in either orientation, with plenty of reframing room on top.

[itimjim]

Let me get this right. The new aspect ratios are just further crops than the 16:9? Or at least on Seb's video test the chin to head vertical angle of view looked the same. So in theory it actually offers no further image enhancement, just time saving in post not having to chop off the edges - but then at the same time it doesn't give you the flexibility to recompose horizontally.

 

Am I right?

[Nikkor]

On the first page a made a comparison. You gain vertical resolution and space compared to the 4K modes.

[rkunstmann]

Is it the full 4:3 area they use for anamorphic? That would give 2.66:1 when the cinema standard is 2.4:1.

 

Time for me to visit the Arri website for specs I think :)

 

Actually 4:3 would or does give you 1:2,35 AR which is also Standard Cinemascope. 4:3 is 1:1,33 so how could it be wider than 1:1,37 ?

I guess you meant 5:3 (Super 16 AR) that gives you 1:2,66 but I didn´t do the math ;)

[DamienMTL]

Some nice shots are already available on vimeo thanks to early testers.

it seems that the jello effect is enhanced and a tripod will be mandatory.

Maybe shooting HD1080 with 4/3 and not 4K with a X2 lens will be the best option, to reduce wobbles artefacts.

That's incredibly promissing!