VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2
FirstFirst 1 2
Results 31 to 36 of 36
Thread
  1. I only have a couple of short clips I made with my SD5 mounted in the car, when I first tried out De-shaker.

    Sadly, the images aren't that good. The camera was only mounted on the dash, so there are quite lot of reflections off the windscreen.

    I afraid I don't have any details of what the setting were - it was simply shot on 'auto' in the HG mode - so 1920 x 1080 50i at 13Mbps. I then reduced to 1280 x 720 50p and made mp4 of the short clips. The final bit rate is only about 5Mbps.. but the file size is now only 1280 x 720 of course.

    The first one is as it was shot..... The second has been through De-shaker, and then cropped.

    As I say, not very good - I just wanted to see what De-shaker could do..... But at least there's no rolling shutter!
    Image Attached Files
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Tijuana
    Search Comp PM
    Thank you for the examples.You had roughly the same lighting as me, from buildings shade to overcast sky.You have no ghosting.I'll try interlaced first, but the result is 50fps and my TV can't playback 1080p@50fps.It will be a shame to drop half of the frames.
    I noticed that Deshaker tried to smooth a zoom that wasn't there.Forward camera motion is different from zoom.I'll set zoom smoothing to 0.
    Quote Quote  
  3. Yes I have to make the same choice - my equipment can't cope well with 1080/50p .. at least not reliably!

    So I prefer 1280 x 720/50p over either 1080/25p or 1080i - but that's just a personal preference.

    I'm not sure quite what De-shaker is trying to do if it's auto zooming.. I certainly didn't select that option. The final clip was manually cropped after De-shaker had been used. I've attached a copy of the uncropped version of the same clip to show what De-shaker actually did, 'borders wise' as it were...
    Image Attached Files
    Quote Quote  
  4. Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Tijuana
    Search Comp PM
    In case someone still want to know how SD9 is behaving, I'll post the results of my testing.
    Image quality - way worse than my old CMOS Canon HF11.See attachments - sample clips shot at the same time with both of them, raw video, 1920x1080p@25fps, shutter speed 1/500, 17MBps VBR.SD9 has all the edges pixelated, even if there's no motion and in direct sunlight.It looks like either is an upscaled image or it has compression artifacts.
    Example with screwed edges (JPEG quality 100)
    Click image for larger version

Name:	edges.jpg
Views:	110
Size:	1.50 MB
ID:	39636
    Even at shutter 1/500 I've got motion blur, so next time I'll go for 1/1000 or higher.
    In terms of road footage/phantom ride the best quality I've got by shooting interlaced and deinterlacing with QTGMC.QTGMC's filters cleaned the pixelated aspect of the edges and retained some detail.When shooting 25p every second frame had motion blur.In the de-interlaced footage I had less motion blur (maybe QTGMC's doing, too).
    You can check below progressive vs interlaced but bear in my that Youtube re-encoded the footage and it looks worse than on my PC.Each sample is about 400MB so no attachment.
    Progressive https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIw_Il-zsnY&t=30s
    De-Interlaced https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ay7rcHW6qE&t=25s
    Unfortunately this is the only way to get rid of the ugly rolling shutter artifacts.
    PS.I had to disable "Auto slow shutter", it was responsible for messing my shutter settings.
    Image Attached Files
    Last edited by edytibi; 22nd Nov 2016 at 12:53. Reason: grammar fixes
    Quote Quote  
  5. The SD9 was the first consumer HD camcorder that Panasonic produced which featured a progressive output. IIRC, there was something odd about the color format with that progressive option that some folk didn't like ('Cinema Color' - or something like that - I think it was called?).

    Earlier models like the SD5 only provided interlaced output formats. In addition, the 3 x CCD sensors for these consumer camcorders were tiny, so they did not perform well in low light. In short, the images they produced were not that great - especially when compared to the later models...and they were only consumer camcorders...

    But - they didn't have rolling shutter problems... which is why we're still talking about them!

    It's interesting to note that a Panasonic prosumer model from around that time - the AG HMC150/151 - did have better sensors, and amazingly still fetches over $1000 on average when they come up on Ebay.... And they only had a 720 option for 50/60p progressive output!
    But because they had no rolling shutter problems, they still fetch more than some of the 'better' spec models with CMOS sensors that followed on afterwards...

    For some types of footage, rolling shutter artifacts are still not acceptable - even if the quality of the footage is slightly worse in other respects...
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Tijuana
    Search Comp PM
    Well, the progressive mode for SD9 is worse than the deinterlaced footage.After further testing of 25p mode:
    - a shutter speed of 1/1000 will not eliminate motion blur for car footage; every second frame still have motion blur, but less noticeable than at 1/500; it gives a shimmering that can be disturbing sometimes
    - even in direct strong sunlight there is annoying ghosting for fast moving objects (the cars that go in the opposite direction)
    - I learned that I can live with the the extended gamut from x.v.color, even if it doesn't look as intended on my display
    The only thing I didn't try is to disable the internal image stabilizer.To fix the motion blur and the ghosting for now the only way is to shoot interlaced at 1/1000 and to pass the footage through QTGMC.The downside is that the reconstructed image is not as precise as the progressive one (interpolation, temporal smoothing, denoising, etc).
    I wonder how the car DVRs handle the rolling shutter issue, since all of them have CMOS sensors.
    Last edited by edytibi; 6th Dec 2016 at 15:51. Reason: bad spelling
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads

Visit our sponsor! Try DVDFab and backup Blu-rays!