Shimmering Closeup Footage

[Jay Gladwell]

Originally Posted by Anthony Marotti

Hello,

If you are using the ND filters in bright sunlight, they can give you optical effects that aren't expected... Ghosting, Blurring, and shimmering....

Heat effect is real, but you can see that with the naked eye as well, so you should have noticed it... but it may have been concentrating on other aspects within your frame.

That's why I mentioned it :-)

I always shoot exteriors with an ND filter and I've never had that happen to me. Like patrick said, an ND filter will not introduce any anything that causes an optical effect, unless you have a damaged filter.

Jay

[Anthony Marotti]

Hello Guys,

"While recording under bright conditions, the camcorder sets a small aperture value, and the picture may appear blurred. When you are using a lens with built-in ND filter, turn it on/off according to the screen display."

That's exactly right. This is nebulous to me, because I read it to mean something different than you did. I have experienced the problem though, which is why I interpreted it the way that I did. Removing the ND cleaned up the image (pretty cool effect though). Now under other conditions, this does not happen and the ND functions as expected.

It could very well be that their QC let some small sample slide through that were marginal, but I suspect it is within the engineering not QC. Depending on the angle of the sun to your subject and in relation to you and the subject, the intensity of the scene, etc all can factor in to cause unexpected results.

Just because an operator hasn't hit the exact conditions that cause this anomaly, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Keep shooting, you might experience it someday. I have only experienced it twice, but hay that's 2 more than you... right?

Like I said, the cause could be 100, or 1000, or an infinite amount of conditions and combinations, but this could be one of them.

BTW at the time this first happened to me my XL2 was still returnable, so I explored the problem with vigor... unfortunately I have since forgotten most of the results, but I kept the camera so I didn't believe it was a damaged component.

Peace

[Lucinda Luvaas]

But Jay, if you had a damaged filter wouldn't it show up all the time? not only when you are close up?

[Lucinda Luvaas]

I mentioned in another thread that the 20X lens had a flaw in it and Canon had to replace the whole camera because they won't have any 20X lens in stock until September. Tomorrow I will have my new XL2. It may be vaguely possible that the shimmering effect came from the flawed lens? At any rate, I plan to repeat the same conditions and see what happens. It sure looks like heat rising to me. And yes...it looks very cool!

[Jay Gladwell]

Originally Posted by Lucinda Luvaas

But Jay, if you had a damaged filter wouldn't it show up all the time? not only when you are close up?

Maybe, maybe not. The fact is a static filter--internal or external--faulty or not--will not (cannot) create any form of "motion" within an image, shimmering or otherwise.

The only condition I can image that something like that would happen is if the filter were not optically uniform--thick and thin spots. Then, as the camera was panned or titled (moved physically), the image might appear to have waves moving across or up and down as a result the "warped" surface of the filter.

Jay

[Lucinda Luvaas]

Well this seemed to happen while the camera was still and moving.

Lucinda

[Stephanie Wilson]

While recording under bright conditions, the camcorder sets a small aperture value, and the picture may appear blurred. When you are using a lens with built-in ND filter, turn it on/off according to the screen display.

Hey all,

Regarding the above quote from the manual: I personally can't imagine when you would want to turn off your ND when shooting in bright light?? That's pretty much exactly when you're SUPPOSED to use them. Unless there is some weird camera bias regarding bright indoor vs. outdoor environments that the manual is trying to address? Seems totally weird to me.

I'd call Canon and ask them what's up? Go directly to the horses mouth I say. And BTW, does anybody know where that saying came from?

Sincerely,

Steph

[Anthony Marotti]

Originally Posted by Stephanie Wilson

[i]

I'd call Canon and ask them what's up? Go directly to the horses mouth I say. And BTW, does anybody know where that saying came from?

Sincerely,

Steph

Good Luck, after the long phone tree voyage, if you spoke to 10 techs, you'd have 10 different answers.

Any time you add a filter into your optical mix, you create the opportunity to experience reflections, which can look like ghosting.

[Lucinda Luvaas]

"Go directly to the horses mouth I say. And BTW, does anybody know where that saying came from?"

I'll take a wild stab: Joyce Carey's novel: The Horse's Mouth?....

[Graham Bernard]

In a situation where everybody is running around attempting to get the best knowledge and tips on the outcome of a race, you can ask the owner, the stable lad or even the jockey. BUT, in a situation where many people have opinions, thoughts and predictions, there is but ONE real authority ONE individual within this "fog of information" and that is the actual Horse that will be running the race!

However, and here is the beauty of the English language and with a large dollop of irony, even the HORSE cannot determine the "outcome" of the race as it is a gamble. High stakes and even higher expectations. This situation pushes one to get even more informed information. Even more separation from an outcome we cannot ever hope to actually confirm with 100% certainty.

So, the concept of a horse ( from the horse's mouth )race truly, pictorially and succinctly illustrates the sometimes ludicrous steps we all go to get to "the" definitive answer we hunger after. We are all after certainty. The mouth of the animal is the nearest we are going to get. And guess what? Horses can't speak. That is the "other" irony. If it knew, it couldn't tell you anyway.

It's a bit like my attempt to explain this saying! HAH!

Grazie

[Anthony Marotti]

Originally Posted by Graham Bernard

In a situation where everybody is running around attempting to get the best knowledge and tips on the outcome of a race, you can ask the owner, the stable lad or even the jockey. BUT, in a situation where many people have opinions, thoughts and predictions, there is but ONE real authority ONE individual within this "fog of information" and that is the actual Horse that will be running the race!

However, and here is the beauty of the English language and with a large dollop of irony, even the HORSE cannot determine the "outcome" of the race as it is a gamble. High stakes and even higher expectations. This situation pushes one to get even more informed information. Even more separation from an outcome we cannot ever hope to actually confirm with 100% certainty.

So, the concept of a horse ( from the horse's mouth )race truly, pictorially and succinctly illustrates the sometimes ludicrous steps we all go to get to "the" definitive answer we hunger after. We are all after certainty. The mouth of the animal is the nearest we are going to get. And guess what? Horses can't speak. That is the "other" irony. If it knew, it couldn't tell you anyway.

It's a bit like my attempt to explain this saying! HAH!

Grazie

Yeah, what he said :-)

[Patrick King]

Originally Posted by Graham Bernard

...attempting to get the best knowledge and tips on the outcome of a race...And guess what? Horses can't speak.

And the one horse that could speak didn't race...of course, of course.

[Jay Gladwell]

Lucinda, can you post a sample of what you shot, or send me a file to view?

Jay

[Graham Bernard]

Great quote in your sig. Jay! That Kevin Stav had SOME method with his acting.

I would really like to see the results too.

Grazie

[Jay Gladwell]

Grazie, I hope we hear something from Lucinda.

By-the-way, are you sure that "G" in your names isn't supposed to be a "C"?

Jay