Has anyone done any extensive comparison about choosing between these two settings other than the fact that one produces much larger files. The manual says it is easier to edit in post.
Wilmark said:Has anyone done any extensive comparison about choosing between these two settings other than the fact that one produces much larger files. The manual says it is easier to edit in post.
HurtinMinorKey said:I think the basic deal is that you get more latitude in post, but only if you are editing frame by frame. If you are applying edits to the whole take, then IPB is just as good for editing. Furthermore, IPB has more detail in each frame because it isn't reliant on each frame providing all the information for the entire frame. Many people have reported block artifacts with ALL-I, because it requires significant compression in each frame.
Think about it, truly uncompressed 1080, ALL-I should be (2M(resolution)*3bytes(24bit color)*(24fps)=144 MB/s=1.1Gb/s
The 5dmkiii max data rate is 1/10th of that, so it requires massive compression in each frame. IPB circumvents this issue somewhat by putting more detail in a key frame.
Cptn Rigo said:HurtinMinorKey said:I think the basic deal is that you get more latitude in post, but only if you are editing frame by frame. If you are applying edits to the whole take, then IPB is just as good for editing. Furthermore, IPB has more detail in each frame because it isn't reliant on each frame providing all the information for the entire frame. Many people have reported block artifacts with ALL-I, because it requires significant compression in each frame.
Think about it, truly uncompressed 1080, ALL-I should be (2M(resolution)*3bytes(24bit color)*(24fps)=144 MB/s=1.1Gb/s
The 5dmkiii max data rate is 1/10th of that, so it requires massive compression in each frame. IPB circumvents this issue somewhat by putting more detail in a key frame.
144 MB/s=1.1Gb/s mhhh.... nope![]()
Cptn Rigo said:144 MB/s=1.1Gb/s mhhh.... nope![]()
HurtinMinorKey said:Cptn Rigo said:144 MB/s=1.1Gb/s mhhh.... nope![]()
144 MB/s=1.15Gb/s=.144GB/s
Everybody happy now?
If you think about it, the 5d mkiii can handle 6 fps @ 25MB per shot, so its capable of doing over short bursts(at least in terms of processing). But they can definitely do better than the bit-rate they currently offer.
psolberg said:the pathways for stills record raw data. video needs to be processed and tons of data discarded. this bit rate is likely baked in the circuits and can't be really upped or they would have started higher. if you want higher rates you need a clean uncompressed HDMI out. hopefully magic lantern will find a way since that is the only real solution to bit rate issues.
HurtinMinorKey said:psolberg said:the pathways for stills record raw data. video needs to be processed and tons of data discarded. this bit rate is likely baked in the circuits and can't be really upped or they would have started higher. if you want higher rates you need a clean uncompressed HDMI out. hopefully magic lantern will find a way since that is the only real solution to bit rate issues.
I don't know. Just think about what the 1D-C can pump out, with Raw 4k. the DIGI 5 processor is a big leap over 4.
HurtinMinorKey said:So the 5D3 should be able to rock it at 250Mbs. Thanks for the correction on the lack of Raw on 1DC.