IPB vs ALL-I for a filmic/cine camera look

[sparedog]

I have a question for everyone who is shooting to achieve a cine camera look, I appologise if it has been asked before.

If shooting 24p to acheive a filmic look, I would choose all-I instead of IPB, to emulate the way how film grain randomly changes per frame and also to copy the way how movement is captured by cine cameras.

I have read alot of people prefer shooting with IPB over all-I. I have not much experience with IP and I would love to clear up possible misconceptions in my mind.

If you prefer IPB, are you using it to achieve a ´filmic´ look and in your experience how do you best achieve that look?

For example, do you shoot to get the cleanest image out of camera and then add grain in post, for example, or does IPB not need this and look like cine footage grain straight out of camera?

[1%]

stock ipb is fairly low rate. all-i should give you better post. the movement is kinda up for debate. hacked i'd take the ipb because it achieves the same rates all-i does but technically better quality. all-i has to be double the rate of ipb for same quality according to theory.

imo: filmic look isn't related to compression. just 24p and color correction.

[pontus]

all-i has to be double the rate of ipb for same quality according to theory.

Why is that? I don't quite get all this talk about init qp's, qp1, bitrates, IP-B and what not.

[1%]

its all encoding terms.
read up on H264/avc codec, etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC

qp in a nutshell is quality level. so a qp of 1 i high quality, a qp of 50 looks all pixelated.

All-I every frame is an individual keyframe, IPB the frames are inter frame compressed so you can pack more data in within the same bandwith and quality level at the expense of more processing power and possibly artefacts.

the configs are supposed to pick the same qps for all-I and IPB so 70mb/s all I vs 70mb IPB the IPB *SHOULD* win. But needs more testing and pixel peeping to be sure.