Thanks for your input guys. Just to clarify, the 1 hour 15 minutes of continuous recording produced three files with movie restart switched on i.e. ( two 30 min and one 15 min file ).
However, if the quality of CBR 0.4 footage lies between unusable and stock, it is hard to notice without any proper testing. Is it possible that just like increasing the CBR to above 1.0 is supposed to increase video quality, in reality, (according to most of the forum topics on the subject), it is not noticed by most people?
Sometimes in our quest for the best, much time can be spent in doing so when in reality, it cannot be perceived by the eye, or in the case of audio sampling rates, by the human ear.
What I was really hoping for was someone who has done some testing with side by side comparisons of footage shot at CBR 0.4 versus Default 1.0 and higher.
However, if the quality of CBR 0.4 footage lies between unusable and stock, it is hard to notice without any proper testing. Is it possible that just like increasing the CBR to above 1.0 is supposed to increase video quality, in reality, (according to most of the forum topics on the subject), it is not noticed by most people?
Sometimes in our quest for the best, much time can be spent in doing so when in reality, it cannot be perceived by the eye, or in the case of audio sampling rates, by the human ear.
What I was really hoping for was someone who has done some testing with side by side comparisons of footage shot at CBR 0.4 versus Default 1.0 and higher.