Mavic Pro: why DJI doesn't fix this huge flickering/compression problem?

[Gimme the copperheads Dom]

Very interesting thread. It gave me much food for thought. I already had some amateur experience in photography and post processing and have been told I shoot some decent pictures. Maybe lies but I like to believe it. Video, however, is a completely different ballgame. I found that out the hard way when I started playing around with the Mavic, which I originally intended to use for stills only. The most important bit I have learned so far is that there is no size that fits all when it comes to settings. Local environmental light conditions, objects/themes and personal taste differ vastly. So does available time or willingness to spend it.

I assume that most Mavic users are hobbyists that enjoy flying around taking some cool footage for use on YouTube and social media etc. I also understand the Mavic is a consumer product targeting customers that had been shying away from RC aircraft due to their traditional learning curve. Anyone who used to fly RC helicopters (the good old nitro engine ones that could chop somebody's head off) will agree that the introduction of battery powered quads has opened the RC aviation market to pretty much anybody with next to zero skill required. Now, the latest incarnation, the Mavic with all its auto features and bells and whistles make it downright idiot proof to fly.

So, it's really an extremely fun, predominantly rich kid's toy that can provide some iPhone quality aerial footage. Maybe some few professionals can use it for survey work, as an "eye" in the air to look at hard to reach things sort of stuff but even that might be limited. I love it for what it is because that's what I currently have time and motivation for. Quick, easy and relatively good results. If I get a bit of a taste of videography along the way, even better. But I wouldn't go crazy with it for that purpose specifically since I know it's basically a toy. Deadwing, I'm curious. You are obviously a video professional. Your knowledge of videography seems to exceed most people's here and I thank you for your sharing some of it.
What I don't quite get is though, how come you bought a Mavic if your professional senses and requirements are that developed that you would be probably much better served with a pro level drone? I mean, the camera is TINY. So is the entire drone, it's made for portability and, yeah a lot of fun. Isn't that a bit like a professional photographer who is trying to find a way of commercially using an iPhone for taking photos? Did I miss something?

 

[Fixaldo]

Interesting topic indeed. There was a similar problem, back in the days, with the Panasonic GH1. It eventually was hacked, but got many stability issues as a sidekick. My guess is that DJI don’t take the risk and/or it doesn’t follow their business model…

I am a BIG supporter to get rid of the GOP flicker problem with a more robust codec, and I hope that DJI will do something about it. I agree, with so many others, that the word PRO in the name seem a bit Ironic and false at first glance. The Phantom 4 PRO(P4P) is just a marvel when it comes to footage straight out of the box, why not the Mavic PRO?

Many have asked me “how do you get such great results from a Mavic Pro?”. IMHO, buy a decent NLE that can address the problem in post. Shot +1 sharpness/2.7k24fps/ and use ND filters. This will make the Mavic a flying camera that you can bring “anywhere” and eventually give PRO content. The -1 and -2 sharp settings destroy your footage, but is effective to get rid of the flicker if you can’t address it in post.

“What! Buy an expensive NLE do make it work!?! No way!”. Some perspectives. A P4P will cost you about 2000$, against a similar 1299$ fly more mavic combo. That leaves you about 700$ for a NLE. You can get davinci resolve for 299$ these days, leaving you 400$ to your pleasing. The only thing that you will truly miss, is the ability to shot 60FPS (P4P). But the size… Try to climb down from a mountain with a big lump of P4P on your back and feel the horror.

 

[Oglo]

Couldn't agree more Fixaldo. Backed off from adding my 2 cents worth awhile back, but keep coming back to " if you want to see nice images on a UHD screen, you really do (unfortunately) need to use the contentious +1 on the sharpness". I see great output from the guys using -1 etc, but Gee, it looks like low resolution. (Try watching SD TV shows on Netflix after getting used to HD.... I can't, I just find it distracting)
For me the jury is still out on whether 8bit can handle dlog without banding in the highlights. It certainly does help the codec record the shadow areas but maybe(?) at the expense of highlights.
The holy grail still for me would be to get full 60mbps at 2.7k and record with no profiles.
One can but wish.......

Interesting topic indeed. There was a similar problem, back in the days, with the Panasonic GH1. It eventually was hacked, but got many stability issues as a sidekick. My guess is that DJI don’t take the risk and/or it doesn’t follow their business model…

I am a BIG supporter to get rid of the GOP flicker problem with a more robust codec, and I hope that DJI will do something about it. I agree, with so many others, that the word PRO in the name seem a bit Ironic and false at first glance. The Phantom 4 PRO(P4P) is just a marvel when it comes to footage straight out of the box, why not the Mavic PRO?

Many have asked me “how do you get such great results from a Mavic Pro?”. IMHO, buy a decent NLE that can address the problem in post. Shot +1 sharpness/2.7k24fps/ and use ND filters. This will make the Mavic a flying camera that you can bring “anywhere” and eventually give PRO content. The -1 and -2 sharp settings destroy your footage, but is effective to get rid of the flicker if you can’t address it in post.

“What! Buy an expensive NLE do make it work!?! No way!”. Some perspectives. A P4P will cost you about 2000$, against a similar 1299$ fly more mavic combo. That leaves you about 700$ for a NLE. You can get davinci resolve for 299$ these days, leaving you 400$ to your pleasing. The only thing that you will truly miss, is the ability to shot 60FPS (P4P). But the size… Try to climb down from a mountain with a big lump of P4P on your back and feel the horror.

Interesting topic indeed. There was a similar problem, back in the days, with the Panasonic GH1. It eventually was hacked, but got many stability issues as a sidekick. My guess is that DJI don’t take the risk and/or it doesn’t follow their business model…

I am a BIG supporter to get rid of the GOP flicker problem with a more robust codec, and I hope that DJI will do something about it. I agree, with so many others, that the word PRO in the name seem a bit Ironic and false at first glance. The Phantom 4 PRO(P4P) is just a marvel when it comes to footage straight out of the box, why not the Mavic PRO?

Many have asked me “how do you get such great results from a Mavic Pro?”. IMHO, buy a decent NLE that can address the problem in post. Shot +1 sharpness/2.7k24fps/ and use ND filters. This will make the Mavic a flying camera that you can bring “anywhere” and eventually give PRO content. The -1 and -2 sharp settings destroy your footage, but is effective to get rid of the flicker if you can’t address it in post.

“What! Buy an expensive NLE do make it work!?! No way!”. Some perspectives. A P4P will cost you about 2000$, against a similar 1299$ fly more mavic combo. That leaves you about 700$ for a NLE. You can get davinci resolve for 299$ these days, leaving you 400$ to your pleasing. The only thing that you will truly miss, is the ability to shot 60FPS (P4P). But the size… Try to climb down from a mountain with a big lump of P4P on your back and feel the horror.

 

[Gastone360]

Reading around I see that the problem of compression and flickering also afflicts the phantom 4 pro .... do you find it?
At this point it is simply and just a codec issue (H264 or H265)....

 

[Fixaldo]

Yes there is always a degree of codec flicker problem regard the H264 and H265, cause of the GOP. But it’s very pronounced with the Mavic, especially when recording 4K in a scene with a lot of moving texture.

 

[DSI]

Hi I shot this in 2.7k +1, -1, -1 d cinelike

Can anyone tell me if anything wrong with this?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[DSI]

And also used a nd32PL

 

[Gastone360]

maybe an nd filter could tone down the GOP issues?? I can't record at -1 or -2....I don't like these parameters, too fuzzy

it is the only problem I found with this beautiful machine.....

 

[4wd]

Hi I shot this in 2.7k +1, -1, -1 d cinelike

Can anyone tell me if anything wrong with this?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

If you like how it looks then it's OK.
To me it's pretty flat and mushy looking, some sections prhaps a little under-exposed, and colour balance is not great.
Uploading at 720p makes it look soft anyway, 1080p makes a big difference, for some reason the difference dropping to 720p is especially marked with Mavic footage.

 

[patrickduijndam]

It's great reading all your insights guys, really helpful. I'm still deciding myself between 4K -1 sharpness or +1. I do think I got the best results with this video, using 4K D-Log, -1,-1,-1 / -1,0,0:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Of course all manually color graded and used some grain for the filmic results.

Also shot this at 4K D-Log, +1,-1,-1 to test the settings the youtube people tell you to use:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Although the last one definitely looks sharper, there's also a lot more flickering evident. I think therefore I still prefer the slighty softer look, enhanced with some post-sharpening and grain, along with some nice grading.

Let me know what you guys think.

EDIT: I used the Polarpro Cinema shutter series ND filters, to keep the shutter between1/50 and 1/200

 

[Gastone360]

beautiful footage but the real problem with the mavic is the flickering at 4k, even with sharpness at -1.
For no grading footage I shoot in 2.7k 25fps (europe) with sharpness at ZERO, true color, nd filter original dji and I live happy with a very little flickering and a very good image
In 4k the flickering ruins the entire image in my opinion I made many many many tests

 

[Fixaldo]

It's great reading all your insights guys, really helpful. I'm still deciding myself between 4K -1 sharpness or +1. I do think I got the best results with this video, using 4K D-Log, -1,-1,-1 / -1,0,0:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Of course all manually color graded and used some grain for the filmic results.

Also shot this at 4K D-Log, +1,-1,-1 to test the settings the youtube people tell you to use:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Although the last one definitely looks sharper, there's also a lot more flickering evident. I think therefore I still prefer the slighty softer look, enhanced with some post-sharpening and grain, along with some nice grading.

Let me know what you guys think.

EDIT: I used the Polarpro Cinema shutter series ND filters, to keep the shutter between1/50 and 1/200

It’s so evidential more detail in the +1 setting compare to the -1. Not that obvious on a small screen like a tablet/phone etc. The problems pop up especially on monitors with less forgiving adjustments.

I see that you have a plus membership on vimeo. If you look at the device report on your videos inside vimeo, you will probably find that more than 70% look at your footage with a PC/MAC desktop. My point is. Make it look good on a less forgiven monitor and most people will think it looks great on most devices.

IMHO the +1 setting will look much better with some effort in post. However, I totally understand that not everyone will spend time fiddling with post work. Is some cases -1 should probably be good enough.

 

[patrickduijndam]

It’s so evidential more detail in the +1 setting compare to the -1. Not that obvious on a small screen like a tablet/phone etc. The problems pop up especially on monitors with less forgiving adjustments.

I see that you have a plus membership on vimeo. If you look at the device report on your videos inside vimeo, you will probably find that more than 70% look at your footage with a PC/MAC desktop. My point is. Make it look good on a less forgiven monitor and most people will think it looks great on most devices.

IMHO the +1 setting will look much better with some effort in post. However, I totally understand that not everyone will spend time fiddling with post work. Is some cases -1 should probably be good enough.

Thanks for the response. I always put in effort in post though, whichever setting I shoot in. Shooting -1 will need some sharpening and grain work in post to get to a nice result as well.
What techniques would you recommend doing in post with the +1 footage, to make it less overly sharp and flickery? I tried a couple different (subtle) blur effects (using the Adobe CC package) and it definitely made it look worse than shooting in -1 and enhancing that footage.

 

[Fixaldo]

Thanks for the response. I always put in effort in post though, whichever setting I shoot in. Shooting -1 will need some sharpening and grain work in post to get to a nice result as well.
What techniques would you recommend doing in post with the +1 footage, to make it less overly sharp and flickery? I tried a couple different (subtle) blur effects (using the Adobe CC package) and it definitely made it look worse than shooting in -1 and enhancing that footage.

The footage you posted looks really great, and I can tell that you do a lot of effort. I was talking more about the generic society that don’t like to do much post work. No offence given

A decent noise reduction software will handle the GOP flicker. I’m not that good with premiere, been a while. However, I would be surprised if they don’t have a decent, built in, noise reduction software that can coop with this?

It feels strange to dumb down the picture in post. Especially how far you have to go with the Mavic footage. I have never take it this far with other cameras. It’s quite another experience. Its actually hard to do it sometimes. However, when you show the final render to a clients or other viewers in general. They rarely complain about sharpness in my experience. If you gave them a side-by-side comparison than some would probably say “hay! That one look much sharper”… Obviously. Nevertheless, with the +1sharp in 2.7k you get texture. And texture can be contained.

I have done side-by-side comparison 2.7k vs the 4k. If you shoot static res.chart on the wall with no motion involved. Than the 4k wins. I believe many take that as an evidence that 4k is the best… that’s wrong IMHO. Bring it out in the open and record foliage and oceans, anything that moves and have a lot of texture, and the flicker and other nasty artefacts start to become more evident in the 4k footage. My findings is that 2.7k ironically contain more texture than 4k in some cases. 2.7k yields a more professional look in the end of the day, even though it still contain some flicker and compression issues. I only which they pumped up the bitrate to 60mbits for 2.7k. It would make the Mavic a perfect 2.7k drone not challenging the P4P 4k 100mbits. Good for business and good for us.

 

[patrickduijndam]

The footage you posted looks really great, and I can tell that you do a lot of effort. I was talking more about the generic society that don’t like to do much post work. No offence given

No offence taken! I'm sorry, English is not my native language, didn't mean to sound offended, just curious to your thoughts!

I've never given 2,7k a proper try, will do that next time! I agree, there's no reason we shouldn't have the 60mbits for 2.7k.

 

[Gastone360]

I only which they pumped up the bitrate to 60mbits for 2.7k. It would make the Mavic a perfect 2.7k drone not challenging the P4P 4k 100mbits. Good for business and good for us.

I totally agree!!!! They could pump the bitrate and the pain is over....

 

[4wd]

I totally agree!!!! They could pump the bitrate and the pain is over....

It's the codec which could be better.
Mavic 2 will likely have H.265 which should improve things.

 

[Gastone360]

to avoid hours and hours of neat video, I shoot in 4k and zero sharpness because the flickering is less than with sharpness at +1....

ps: I already use original dji nd filters and the situation is better than before

pps: For my taste, at +1 sharpness is too sharp and looks less filmic. I think my way is 2.7k with 0 sharpness

 

[nomnomnom]

Does anyone know if this problem happens with P4? I'm very sick of the mavic at this point. I have to run neat video for 10-15 minutes for each cut before I it is useable. It's just ridiculous.

 

[nomnomnom]

Just to add to my previous post. Can someone confirm whether this is what you guys are calling flickering?

See this video show noise. Notice that in all the trees area, there is crazy dancing of all these "dots". Is this the GOP flickering you guys are talking about?

And if so, this can be resolved by switching to 2k with -1 or 0? But film poet has a video saying that 0 or -1 has "in built" noise reduction applied that causes part of the image to be soft/blurred. Do you guys not find that to be the case? Or is that only in 4k?