Optimal Camera Resolution for Stabiliser Work at DVinfo.net

John Jay · December 22nd, 2005, 11:42 AM

For a camera in motion , it doesnt take much motion blur to blur neighbouring pixels of HD resolution into SD resolution, in other words given that motion blur is in the scene an SD shot resized to HD format would look pretty much the same as if the scene was shot in native HD.

I wonder what people's thoughts on this are and whether there is an optimal camera resolution/format for stabiliser work?

Charles Papert · December 22nd, 2005, 12:20 PM

John:

I think this may be overthinking things. I don't believe that once an HD image starts to move it suddenly looks like an SD image. My limited tests with HDV did not produce this effect. Have you experienced something to the contrary?

John Jay · December 23rd, 2005, 11:36 AM

Yep

We've been doing some work for an Architectural/ Property Development company which involves a mix of fly-through animation and HD video.

While rendering with full textures we decided to do some test renders without motion blur until the speed of the fly through can be signed off by the customer. After applying motion blur [180 shutter] through an application which computes motion vectors we were astonished to see all the finest texture details vanish in the motion blur. Through hindsight we probably could have saved two weeks of render time by rendering at PAL SD resolution and resizing to HD

Thinking about it motion blur has a low pass filter effect, thus proportionately HD has more to lose than SD for the same level of motion blur , which in our case amounted to about 2 foot/sec

December 22nd, 2005, 11:42 AM	#1
John Jay Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: US & THEM Posts: 827	Optimal Camera Resolution for Stabiliser Work For a camera in motion , it doesnt take much motion blur to blur neighbouring pixels of HD resolution into SD resolution, in other words given that motion blur is in the scene an SD shot resized to HD format would look pretty much the same as if the scene was shot in native HD. I wonder what people's thoughts on this are and whether there is an optimal camera resolution/format for stabiliser work? __________________ John Jay Beware *PLUGGER-BYTES*

December 22nd, 2005, 12:20 PM	#2
Charles Papert Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 6,810	John: I think this may be overthinking things. I don't believe that once an HD image starts to move it suddenly looks like an SD image. My limited tests with HDV did not produce this effect. Have you experienced something to the contrary? __________________ Charles Papert www.charlespapert.com

December 23rd, 2005, 11:36 AM	#3
John Jay Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: US & THEM Posts: 827	Yep We've been doing some work for an Architectural/ Property Development company which involves a mix of fly-through animation and HD video. While rendering with full textures we decided to do some test renders without motion blur until the speed of the fly through can be signed off by the customer. After applying motion blur [180 shutter] through an application which computes motion vectors we were astonished to see all the finest texture details vanish in the motion blur. Through hindsight we probably could have saved two weeks of render time by rendering at PAL SD resolution and resizing to HD Thinking about it motion blur has a low pass filter effect, thus proportionately HD has more to lose than SD for the same level of motion blur , which in our case amounted to about 2 foot/sec __________________ John Jay Beware *PLUGGER-BYTES*