It would also be nice if you told us how you calculated the 330Mbps patch value...Don't get too excited... yes it can be done, but there is a catch : )
(I'm sure you will figure it out)
330Mbps: SAM_0112.MP4
here are a couple of frames from above 320Mbps+
ISO 200
ISO 3200
sure... the higher the bitrate, the lower the quality hahahaha : ))
I wanted to explicitly test the highbitrate with high ISO (to see if it will handle it, and it did). Personally I think it is quite usable, and the noise looks good (not "noise-reduced").
does it matter?It would also be nice if you told us how you calculated the 330Mbps patch value...Don't get too excited... yes it can be done, but there is a catch : )
(I'm sure you will figure it out)
330Mbps: SAM_0112.MP4
here are a couple of frames from above 320Mbps+
ISO 200
ISO 3200
I did 180mbps one hour shoot with x20 timelapse but I didn't try 320 )) It's need to be done. As for guru - well it's good to have in mind that any theory need a test that tries to disprove this theory, this is only for the bettersure... the higher the bitrate, the lower the quality hahahaha : ))
not sure what Guru is smoking, but I did add raw from camera clip, so you decide.
time-laps - yep
set x5, and you use any bitrate (almost) you want
you probably need something mode dynamic to see the difference : )Here is my 2c with NX1
Video xxxx56 - is 80 mbps UHD@30
Video xxxx57 - is 320 mbps UHD@30
Both have same settings, at first one sec it's 3200 ISO and after 6400 ISO. Here is the screengrabs:
ISO3200 - 80 mbps
ISO3200 - 320 mbps
Of course, but for more dynamic I need to finish my test-stand ))
Well, that's how NX1 iso3200 and iso6400 looks with NR-off... or maybe there is some telnet function to do this without NX1 GUI?
It seems to me that you are under the impression that I make a habit of wasting my time on things that are not important to me.does it matter?
yeah.. the stand looks suspiciously full : ))
I've run so many tests and code modifications, including registry modifications, than I care to admint.
Considering you calculated the bitrates for the initial mods (on which I based the modified values used later), I can only assume you know how to calculate them. So, why does it matter how were calculated the ones used in the test here?It seems to me that you are under the impression that I make a habit of wasting my time on things that are not important to me.does it matter?
Cheers, man ))
Yes! Actually I try to explain... well not explain, just mention this in old vasiles thread about NR, it seems that NX1 and NX500 are using different methods at least to setup NR in GUI, or there is a lack of proper tests on both cameras with same conditions? I see this difference time to time and can't be sure if this a real diff or my imagination
You know, there is always question about quality, if you (or me or anyone) see some quality step in footage CTU, someone just need fixing bug with turn-off time of the camera or rolling shutter, and nothing else matters. It's cool, tho.When it comes to the effects of the bitrate on quality, I did make that test today, here are 100% crops (used curves at the bottom, to expose the quality).
I hope this will close the question about - are higher bitrates bad for quality, and maybe we can try to prove that the Earth is not flat next.
IDK, it's just screngrab, I think there is bug with EXIF
Comparing the detail in highlights I think is crystal clear the effects of bitrate, and it does not stop at 80 nor 180.Cheers, man ))
Yes! Actually I try to explain... well not explain, just mention this in old vasiles thread about NR, it seems that NX1 and NX500 are using different methods at least to setup NR in GUI, or there is a lack of proper tests on both cameras with same conditions? I see this difference time to time and can't be sure if this a real diff or my imagination
You know, there is always question about quality, if you (or me or anyone) see some quality step in footage CTU, someone just need fixing bug with turn-off time of the camera or rolling shutter, and nothing else matters. It's cool, tho.When it comes to the effects of the bitrate on quality, I did make that test today, here are 100% crops (used curves at the bottom, to expose the quality).
I hope this will close the question about - are higher bitrates bad for quality, and maybe we can try to prove that the Earth is not flat next.
Doubt it, even 320 is not really needed ihmo.
not yet
