Wait are you saying that increasing the bitrate won't increase the quality of the video?
Typhoon H Camera 100 mbps?
- Thread starter swags
- Start date
Correct.
The codec has a given amount of space (the bitrate) to work with, if it isn't having to throw away any information (or throwing away information that would be imperceptible to the viewer), then taking up more space to encode the video simply reduces efficiency without a gain in quality.
The codec has a given amount of space (the bitrate) to work with, if it isn't having to throw away any information (or throwing away information that would be imperceptible to the viewer), then taking up more space to encode the video simply reduces efficiency without a gain in quality.
You want lower GOP frames when you have motion. Have a long GOP frame interval when shooting say a tree, grass, a field of wheat you will get motion artifacts. And you know what we shoot those types of things with an aerial camera platform. Yuneec is the ONLY manufacture that is using long GOP intervals. Once again you are proving that you don't understand why you want a higher bit rate (its for image quality) or what role the camera plays in the distribution chain. (It's the acquisition device) You want to start with as much information possible and as you progress thru he edit and distribution chain then you can start throwing away information.
You and Tuna are VERY confused as to what makes "image quality" you have a general lack of understand motion frames. to keep saying that a low bit rate and long GOP intervals is not only fine but preferred is both ignorant and a disservice to anyone that reads these boards
Artifacts are primarily the result of not having enough bandwidth to encode the inter-frame differences. You can increase the bandwidth, or add more i-frames. The latter will often need more bandwidth as well since the i-frames take a lot more space.
In an ideal world we would all be using uncompressed or lossless codecs. Unfortunately that isn't practical, so we have to make do with various compression schemes -- this is why we get 4:2:0 color subsampling and GOPs. Yes, shorter GOPs deal with motion better because artifacts don't compound between i-frames, but long GOPs are more efficient and can deliver a visually indistinguishable image in less bandwidth under most circumstances. Netflix delivers premium 4K content using about 15 Mbps of bandwidth -- granted they use a more efficient codec, but by all accounts HEVC is only roughly twice as efficient as AVC. What makes you think that 50 Mbps isn't sufficient for prosumer drone video?
You are not understanding the point I have been trying to make. What I am saying is that with the AVC/H264/MPEG4 codecs, you would be hard pressed to take advantage of a 100 Mbps (or God forbid 100 MBps as some seem to demand) bitrate. Even DJI with a shorter GOP doesn't use that much bandwidth.
If you still think that that is what I have been saying then you have reading comprehension issues.
I wonder who derstig works for, he will not substantiate his claims of working in film/television. His every post is a criticism of all hardware and software associated with the imaging system used on the typhoon, with direct comparisons to DJI. Why he would even look at this class of consumer multirotor as merely a buyer or enthusiast is itself suspect.
He opened with discussion of his use of cameras with bitrates thirty times greater than the typhoon, but now incessantly posts how 60 mbps is wholly adequate, failing to find any issue with a rate that is still orders of magnitude lower than what he ostensibly finds necessary for professional use.
He criticized the lens for not allowing enough information to reach the sensor, but has abandoned that tact as aftermarket alternatives are available and the rumor mill has posited that yuneec is changing the lens on new units.
Now, it isn't an issue with the data reaching the sensor, it's an issue with the codec. Somehow the codec needs improvement because it can't handle the insufficient image data reaching the hardware to begin with.
Such a vociferous, muddled, and chameleonic assault on every comprehensible feature is hopefully bankrolled, because the level of effort is disturbingly high otherwise.
He opened with discussion of his use of cameras with bitrates thirty times greater than the typhoon, but now incessantly posts how 60 mbps is wholly adequate, failing to find any issue with a rate that is still orders of magnitude lower than what he ostensibly finds necessary for professional use.
He criticized the lens for not allowing enough information to reach the sensor, but has abandoned that tact as aftermarket alternatives are available and the rumor mill has posited that yuneec is changing the lens on new units.
Now, it isn't an issue with the data reaching the sensor, it's an issue with the codec. Somehow the codec needs improvement because it can't handle the insufficient image data reaching the hardware to begin with.
Such a vociferous, muddled, and chameleonic assault on every comprehensible feature is hopefully bankrolled, because the level of effort is disturbingly high otherwise.
Those constantly nitpicking and criticizing Yuneec, why don't I get blurred video? Honestly, I don't pay much attention to your posts.
I'm still waiting for Der Stig's critique on this video:
DJI and their sycophants are well known for bankrolling trolls. There are also narcissists who are legends in their own minds that write novels on forums believing that people actually read them or give a rat's behind.
I'm still waiting for Der Stig's critique on this video:
Last edited:
PatR
Premium Pilot
It's quite obvious where DerStig's allegiance lies. Thus far his efforts appear to be directed towards disparaging the H and its camera while subtly promoting DJI. A wolf remains a wolf no matter the disguise.
You have failed to read what I have been saying all along. Changing the lens will reveal the other weakness in the system. My criticism of the lens was that it was of low resolution (it is as verified on an optical bench) My comparisons have been with GoPro's not DJI and I do not work for DJI. I work in Film and Television and you have seen the products of my work. I also consult for equipment manufactures and cameras and support has been redesigned due to my involvement. 60Mbps can look fine, it will look like a gopro but Yuneec has missed that mark while initially selling us on a 100Mbps camera
The answer is, don't feed the troll. Until he starts posting constructive advice, or using his extensive experience to help people rather than shout them down, the ignore button makes the forum far more pleasant.
It's a shame, because Yuneec could do a lot of things to improve the platform, and genuine input from real experts could help make that happen. Unfortunately he rubbishes absolutely everything and anything, so who's going to pay attention the one time he actually makes a useful point?
Lets not forget that you have an agenda tuna. I wanted yuneec to succeed but they keep shooting themselves in the foot. I spoke to Yuneec USA on three occasions and their answer each time was that they knew what they are doing and that they don't need any help.
The other issue is the people that say that the camera is perfect and if you don't like it you must work for DJI but none of those people will compare their cameras to the competition. Then people will argue without understanding what they are arguing about. Arguing that a GoPro needs more GOP frames because it's an action camera and then saying that the CGO3+ doesn't because it's stabilized shows a total misunderstanding of what a camera needs to function correctly same for arguing that's lower bitrate is fine because Netflix delivers at 15Mbps (especially when it's really 35-50Mbps). Not understanding that capture has very different requirements than delivery
That's interesting i'm no pixel pro. My professional experience with cameras reflects better performance with increased bitrate.I started with panasonic GH2's.. The GH2 shooting at it's native bitrate versus the same camera using hacked software to increase bitrate shows a very noticeable diffeence. Especially where there is movement. Running water etc....
This is an old sample and I now shoot my events with GH4's but this illustrates what I'm talking about.
I have a question. Do you guys that actually fly Typhoons ever look at the video quality that other platforms produce? Do you find the Typhoon to be worse, comparable or better? Do you care?
I never said increased bitrates can't result in better quality -- what I'm saying is that it won't necessarily do so. If the codec can encode the image in the bitrate that is available, doubling the bitrate from 50 Mbps to 100 Mbps is only going to take up more space.
I for one am sick of hearing you rant about 100Mbps over and over. Work products? Are you serious, do you honestly think anyone believes you? Lighten up, get a life. Smell the roses.
I have no problem with people complaining that they didn't get what Yuneec promised and advertised, though I think the expectation of a 100 MBps codec (rather than 100 Mbps) is unreasonable and anyone who insists that they get the former is being unreasonable. I think the MBps vs. Mbps mess is solely the responsibility of a graphic designer who felt the fat font all-caps text looked better than the mixed case text, without realizing the ramifications.
Last edited:
I was looking at that one too. I'm about to send my second H back for a refund. The first one was kinda blurry (or not as sharp as the phantom 4, which I also sent back to get the H instead) or at least that's what I thought until got the same image quality as before with the replacement and I looked at a couple of reviews mentioning the bit rate was different the what was advertised plus this thread. Might go back with the p4 or just wait a while. Hopefully, a firmware update gets the H camera looking right, I'll buy again. But, I also don't like how the H camera seems to warp... at leas that's how it seems
Really enjoying my premium, and buying on prime day puts me at 900 for the platform, removable gimbal, case, two batteries, charger, 64 gb micro sd, two sets of props and smaller items. No way I could justify the P4 with that deal, putting on the brakes for something immediately in front of it isn't worth hundreds of additional dollars to me for a small quad that is otherwise similar in utility to the autel, outside of using thinner plastics overall and being stuck with the one camera and gimbal.
Now I just need to see the cgoet in action and I'll likely have a typhoon alongside it. For construction tracking, inventory verification, and RE prospects from our commercial/contracting customers I'm not worried about many of the things causing bunched panties elsewhere. When concrete pads and plate steel stacks are creating motion artifacts, I'll have something much more serious to worry about.
What I am saying is that if the codec isn't requiring the full 50 Mbps available to encode the video, then giving it 100 Mbps isn't going to improve the quality.
Similar threads
