@Meierhans
25p geht nicht, noch nicht - jedenfalls nicht vor dem kommenden offiziellen Pana-Fw-Update.

I asked driftwood about it and he answered that it was a false assumption. So no 25p so far.

Anyone able to record past 3 minutes and 52 seconds with Driftwoods 176 gop 1 patch?

@krisCanonizado That all depends entirely on each scene, as in the average bitrate, if you're saying it isn't spanning. Which I guess its not.

@bkmcwd Very cool, it's getting there. It would be easier if we knew what the Initial QP would be for AQ2 at the specific bitrate. I'm stuck doing a load of post work now until the middle of next week, so I won't have much time to test, or try out some ideas. If I get some breaks though I'll definitely be on this and will try some setting changes out for comparison with what you're seeing.

@ignatius
It has everything to do with bitrate at the moment of spanning, low detail, higher chance of spanning.

Cheers sohus, didn't know that. Thought it just stopped at 3.99GB no matter what.

@bkmcwd Sorry didn't understand entirely what you were saying when I read your post first time. Nice, congratulations, thats it then I reckon. Its as good as its going to get, and the drop in bitrate is a positive too. I will still try and tweak a tiny bit more out of it if I get time in the next few days.

+1

Had to shoot some tests under flickering fluorescents tonight. 720p60 worked perfect. Thanks again driftwood. Can't wait to try running this through twixtor!

***NEW*** 176M GOP3 Shootout - P Frames versus B Frames using 'GOP1 style' compressor settings. Who wins? You decide!
1/ First three charts B Frames plus ini
2/ Second three charts P frames plus ini

Note: Both settings have been made under exactly the same stability tests and conditions, B frames version required slightly more maxlimiting tuning.

GOP3ILLA !!!

@PerryWilson This probs aint for you :-) Its for the GOP 3 1080p24 fanatics. Having said that, they run GOP1 close! ;-)

@B3Guy LOL, yeah it makes it easier to remember defo. :-) Ive enjoyed setting these babies up, didnt take long. Ive found a very fast way with elecard to get to stability once the first few tests have completed. :-)

@driftwood With your new GOP3 I would have thought that having B-frames of the same (and in some cases according to that graph greater) size than I-Frames was pointless. What you can get out of a lower GOP is larger I-Frames than GOP1 is capable of, and therefore better image quality within the same bitrate settings. At the moment according to the graphs you've posted bkmcwds current 154M GOP3 is outperforming this 176M GOP3 considerably. However, this could possibly be because @bmcwkd ran tests with the denser colour chart, which is going to push the codec to create larger I-Frames. But I don't think that of itself will make the I-Frames climb the additional 160000 to come to what his 154M GOP3 is achieving. It could also be due to him running the deathchart test at a high ISO and shutter speed. The other thing I'm not sure of is if removing the rogue P-frame forces a lowering of frame size.

As I showed with a test I ran a few days ago, there is very little difference in terms of image quality between the 176M GOP1 quant me baby and Chris's 66M AQ2 GOP12 (in fact the 66M is slightly better sometimes). I've not compared any of the 176M GOP1s since that one though, but from the graph outputs posted I don't see it being much different. Obviously GOP1 motion is going to look incredibly different to that of a longer GOP though, and maybe the noise would be better too (as in easier to clean). Saying that though, with some small tests I've done, Neat Video and Nukes denoiser seem to clean up the image just as well anyway long GOP or not, but I'd really need to do a lot more tests there. My own subjective view is that GOP3 creates comparable looking motion to the GOP1, not the same but very close. Couple that with greater compression efficiency, and therefore image quality, and it makes more sense to me. But yes, definitely, noise looks a lot better out of the GOP1 before any denoising is done at all.

@Stray
Thanks a lot! :-)
On the problem of my language, I was always sketchy, sorry!

BTW,I also stick FLx1 Version for a sense.
Although this is the patch set to T4=T1, I do not know to put a check into T4.
I have seldom understood the difference.

And although it is completely satisfactory at the time of the usual recording, I do not know whether it is that its form of cadence at the time of this highest stress is satisfactory.

NOTE:
The camera position is also moving and changing SS and F value with the 3rd chart that recorded many leaves.
Of course, keeping ISO3200.

EDIT:
2nd patch was added.
This is a setting of the same contents as 1st patch except "T4=T1 UNCHECKED".