View Full Version : Jumpy Pan Shots w/XL2
Steve Jakubowski August 19th, 2007, 08:26 PM I am just getting my feet wet using this camera but the effect I am getting seems a bit extreme. I was hoping someone could take a quick look and give me some input. I shot at 30p setting and I am trying to do walk throughs of properties for out of town clients but was expecting better results. Is this operator error or ?
http://www.reil.tv
Richard Alvarez August 19th, 2007, 08:33 PM Looks like a combination of bad compression and movements that are TOO fast.
Don't know what you compressed it with, but you might try changing your settings. And the pans/camera movements are fast and jerky... and kind of nauseating. Think SLOW and SMOOTH as you move through the rooms, let the eyes linger. You want people to feel welcome, not like they are part of a home invasion or police intrusion.
Just my thoughts.
Chris Soucy August 19th, 2007, 08:54 PM As Richard says, but you may want to revert to good 'ol 60i with the amount of movement involved. And invest in a SteadyCam or similar. You're gonna have clients chundering into their corn flakes.
CS
Steve Jakubowski August 19th, 2007, 09:30 PM Thanks for the feedback so far. I am using Adobe Premier Elements 3, compressing to Flash 8, 500k (no audio) On2 VP6. I thought 60i was more for broadcast applications but I'll try it, again I am just getting into this stuff so please be gentle with me. Loved the corn flakes comment. Hey I'd love to get one of those steady cam things but my wife thinks I'm nuts already for shelling out for an XL2.
Bill Hamell August 20th, 2007, 02:45 AM Sounds like you had the Image Stabilization on, turn it off and try again.
Bill
Steve Jakubowski August 20th, 2007, 09:08 AM No image stabilization, i was using the 3x lens.
Bill Hamell August 20th, 2007, 01:52 PM What shutter speed were you using?
To fast will cause the images to be jumpy.
BTW; did you ever live in Connecticut? Asking because I knew a Steve Jakubowski in high school.
Bill
Steve Jakubowski August 20th, 2007, 02:20 PM Well I'm a litte embarassed to admit it but I was in auto "A" because I figured the light would be changing as I moved from one room to the other, I was sort of in a hurry and I only had one opportunity to do this, oh yeah and I'm kind of green too. Any suggestions on shutter speed for next time in a similar situation?
BTW, Never been to Connecticut so it wasn't me but thanks for asking.
Bill Hamell August 20th, 2007, 03:09 PM For 30P, start with 1/30th or 1/60th remember this is film/video not still photography you want some motion blur. That said sometimes you have to use higher shutter speeds but use them only when you need to not to adjust the exposure. To adjust exposure, use ND and the aperture settings as well as light control.
Bill
Steve Jakubowski August 20th, 2007, 03:49 PM Thanks for the advice, I'm going to try that on my next attempt and repost the results just in case it could benefit anyone else.
What a great site, thanks a bunch for the input.
Scott Delish August 21st, 2007, 10:14 AM Turn off the OIS while using a tripod.
Bill Hamell August 21st, 2007, 06:49 PM Turn off the OIS while using a tripod.
Read above he is using the 3x lens so no OIS
Chris Soucy August 22nd, 2007, 01:15 AM Sorry about the "Corn Flake" crack, it was apt, if not exactly PC. I do hope you can get this sorted, as it's something I've thought of but not done yet.
But it does beg the question: "Why 30p"? I have no idea how this is going out to "the masses", you didn't say. Why pick 30p?
Again, appologies if it wasn't in order.
CS
Steve Jakubowski August 22nd, 2007, 01:48 AM Hey Chris, I chose 30P because I read that it was the better choice for the web which is where it will be displayed. Why do you think 60I would be better for this application?
You say you have thought of doing this, I asume you are talking about the real estate walk through. I am only doing it special requests and for out of town buyers until I figure this out with a little help from y'all. Its too much of a hastle otherwise, for me anyway. I am not trying to win any awards with this but I know I can get better results.
No prob with the corn flakes. I came into this forum expecting a few shots from you guys since I am just learning this stuff. I liked the comment from about the video looking like a home invasion, now every time I watch the clip I think about that. Maybe I'll submit it to "cops" for a demo reel.
Chris Soucy August 22nd, 2007, 03:06 AM I guess I had the idea for this 20 years ago, but wasn't in a position to do a da*m thing about it, and the technology just wasn't there.
The "home invasion" quip was, actually, spot on.
The 30p Vs 60i thing? Well, I shoot 50i exclusively (Pal people, ya' know!). Tried 25f and found it seriously wanting, hell, if I want it to jump, I'll make it jump. It ain't allowed to do it all on it's own!
I guess when they (eventually) get around to 50P, then I'll consider "P" as an alternative, but in the interim, if it's gotta move, it's gotta be I , cos P/ F just can't cut it (in my book).
CS
Chris Soucy August 22nd, 2007, 03:34 AM OK, even that last post came across negative on re - read (seriously not my intent). Let's try again!
Steve, do this for yourself. Tape the same sequence, whatever it is, at both 30p/f and at 60i. Fiddle, twiddle and whatever, and upload both, and see which one YOU think is the better (visual) version of the story you are trying to tell.
At the end of the day, you are trying to tell a story to people who don't know you, or your message, from a bar of soap. What they see is what they know. The story is the message. Get it across, you've won. Fail, obviously, you've lost.
IMHO it is totally irrelevant what format you shoot it in as long as the content and presentation come up to scratch - lest the former does, indeed, cause them to hurf into the CF's!
CS
Dale Guthormsen August 22nd, 2007, 03:54 PM Chris,
I would appreciate it if you could be a little more detailed about the specifics that , "don't cut it." when you use progressive. I find this really interesting because I shoot about 98% in progressive.
I am not trying to be argumentive!! I want to KNOW more about your perspective in relation to the actual physics and aesthetics of video imaging and the imagery you require.
For interest here is some of my perspective:
When I started video I did not expect video to look like film!! You know, video is video, film is film. I grew up shooting film of course ( I am 57 and just starting the second half of my life) and was making the step into the modern world.
As I started shooting I moved from my gl2 to the xl2 ( I love both). As I learned to use the presets I slowly tweeked my settings until they give me the closest appearance to what I see with my own eyes (and yes i see 20 20)
As it turns out, I shoot with a modified Technicolour preset shooting in 30p at 1/60th of a second as much as possible.
I shoot events on a professional level and wildlife as my amateur passion. In all regards I have found these to appear as close to how I would actually perceive them from my own eyes.
While I made no intention of trying to emulate film, but as it turns out that is actually what i did. Perhaps because that is what I grew up with, perhaps because that is what looks closest to real life to me.
My biggest issue with 60i is the flicker effect I get when filming fast movement. The only way I can make it right is to shoot in 30 P.
I Have come slowly to understand that it is not so much the exact clearity of a picture that is important (I am not refgering to focus), but rather more what the mind perceives.
Of course my mind may be totally screwed up, and my wife might agree with that assessment!!
Chris Soucy August 23rd, 2007, 03:20 AM Sorry it's taken a bit of time but, hey.....
No argument implied or taken.
My perspective... well, sounds like I'm a bit more of a novice than yourself (tho' we'd probably be pretty close in the thinning hair stakes).
When I first got the XH A1 I tried all sorts of tests to determine just what "P (f)" was all about. I shot scenes with "I" and the same scene with "P". I fiddled and fiddled and came to the conclusion - yep, "P" was sharper but jumpier, "I" was softer but smoother (hey, take this in context - I ain't been in a cinema in over 25 years!, sad but true, so everything I've watched has been "I").
So (as you're a wildlife bod too) I put it to the test - shoot fast moving, totally unpredictable whatevers requiring fast camera movements, quick pans etc. Every time I compared the two I came back to : P is sharper but stutters, I is softer but smoother.
I tried getting the best of both worlds: Shoot "P" for the long slow establishing shots of scenery etc and intercut it with "I" for the action. Both made the other look "odd" as they flipped back and forth from one to the other.
OK, so if you can't have both, I had to pick one. Given that most (if not all) of my "projects" are 70% (ish) wildlife and pretty quick wildlife at that, it had to be "I".
Does the video suffer from it? Well, not according to those who watch it.
Will I ever get my head around "P(F)"? If there was a switch on the camera labeled "50P" I'd use it in a flash, but would have to admit that the other "100I" option would get a pretty fair going over as well.
I am interested in your comment regarding "flicker" in your 60I on fast moving targets - my perception is that it is the other way round.
I suppose it's quite possible that 3+ decades of "I" innebriation have programmed my brain to assume that "I" is the "real" thing (not having anything apart from reality to duplicate "P" - tho' I do have my doubts that the human eye/ brain system actually "sees" in either).
Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree (not that I'm disagreeing with you - you haven't said anything to disagree with!).
Going back to Steves little problem, on second and third viewing I am not convinced there isn't something else going on with the posted video - the "stutter" seems so gross it's almost like there are complete groups of frames missing, I've seen mine jump, but never that much.
What do you think? Can you make your "P" look like that? I couldn't get "I" to do that in a fit.
CS
Steve Jakubowski October 22nd, 2007, 01:07 AM Its been a couple of months now and I have aquired a Canon XHA1 with a glidecam 2000. It is a major improvement but I 'm sure it will take alot more practice before I get the results I desire.
I still have the same problem, although on a much smaller scale. The source footage is nice and smooth however when I encode to .flv it gets this jerky/choppy hessitation to it every second or so. I have tried a zillion different compression formats to get rid of it. The H264 is the only one that seemed to get the smooth motion back but I use Brightcove and they just turn it back into .flv.
Any suggestions?
http://www.reil.tv
|
|