This is true... but with a stills cam analogy if you shoot a perfect jpg it looks great, if you get it a little bit wrong or a lot wrong you (the OP) will be aware that the jpg will break when manipulated - same is true for 'jpg' video codecs
Incidentally that logic (and empirical experience) leads me to believe that log and flat and other home-brew source image 'looks' on 'jpg' (h264), motion cameras should be avoided
Yeah. I do think that luts in post should be avoided with h264
But trying to get the closest possible look from capture
And just require to fine tuning in post.
It seems that bitrates (following the still analogy) acts
Like the quality numbers on jpegs. A very high bitrate would be like a
12 quality jpeg.
But it's not as simple. In the gh2 era, I tested almost all the
Possible hacks between a similar range of bitrate and it's
Not just about the highest bitrate but very much about
The matrix and other oscur technical reasons.
There were hacks that virtually didn't bring any serious
Improvements with just a higher bitrate, and others where
Yes a clear, visible improvement was immediatly
But then, I'm not sure we should think still into motion.
The brain doesn't catch a fixed image but a succesion of
Stories. What really matters are the conections between
Each scene, the transitions. What would be an unaceptable
Quality in still imagery can be absolutly irrelevant
Into a motion context.