Tips on shooting sports? at DVinfo.net

Scott Cook · December 26th, 2009, 05:32 PM

I'd sure appreciate your wisdom on this. Which settings work best when you shoot sports with fast motion? I'm still looking for which settings give crispest image, say of the face of the player, combined with the smoothest looking image. At 720p60, 120 shutter isn't as crisp but higher speeds don't seem as smooth.

Here's a sample of what I shoot, though my apologies that Vimeo seems to introduce tremendous shudder. Is there an alternative to Vimeo that doesn't add shudder?

Best in this sequence may be at 1:38 which was 720p60 slowed to 50% in Final Cut. (Ignore the indoor shots as they were shot with a Canon consumer AVCHD camcorder.)

Here is a test of shutter speed alternatives, though I'm not that happy with either.

Marty Welk · December 26th, 2009, 10:10 PM

on the bottom video with the shutter test, i cannot tell a difference, and i am not going to pause/still it to see it because that would defeat the purpose of the test.
Vimo on this computer is balking during the high data areas so much, and i even adjusted the buffering and acceleration settings, and still no go. that it is cutting into things more than any change in shutter that you did. (and so i still hate flash :-)

after seeing the awesome slow-mo , the regular speed looks like its faster than regular speed :-) untill i wrap my brain around it again.

i know there should be a lot of visable difference having changing how much motion blur there is vrses it looking a bit stutterly, but i dont see it. mabey the balking and failing via the flash media playback thing keeps me from being able to analise it.

either way i might think your being to critical :-) the colors, the resolution, in that lighting , contrast brightness settings make a a great picture. The web, well its the web.

that reminds me of a codec that was a windows codec that people thought made an excellent picture for how small the video was (for web transport and pda playback stuff) instead of destroying the picture with compression, it would just toss out whole frames left and right, playback went from 30fps to 20 and even 15 as it couldnt keep up with the Changes on the screen. They loved it because the pic was not so badly compressed, i hated it, and didnt use it again.

Gavin Rawlings · December 27th, 2009, 01:39 AM

Funny you mention the jumpy video playback on Vimeo as I have found the same problem with this clip of mine. You notice it most in the scenes where the chopper takes off.

I have uploaded the video at 50fps and have noticed that all the other videos of mine on Vimeo (at 25fps) run fine...

Matt Davis · December 27th, 2009, 08:23 AM

Regarding Vimeo playback, it's just that: all in the playback. If you let it download a bit, or stop it where it judders or skips frames, back it up a bit, then play again, suddenly it's smooth. It's a progressive download rather than a stream, so stutters are generated when there's not enough time for the computer to decompress and display, and it drops either every other frame for a bit (to catch up) or just lets all the plates drop and pick up at the next keyframe.

When every pixel changes from frame to frame (fades, dissolves, zooms, pans) there's a whole ton of work to do, especially as definition scales ever upward. And get this: the more compressed you make it (making the file smaller and easier to download) the harder the computer has to work to re-'inflate' it. Especially with codecs like H.264. One can help with intelligently placed keyframes and variable bit rate encoding (which is how most high end movie trailers get done), but Vimeo has to draw the line somewhere.

Increasing the frame rate with high action footage actually makes the situation harder as more pixels are changing faster, and you're destined for a 60Hz device with a 24, 25 or 50 Hz (fps) source, how is the display going to take into account the fact that the source has a different frame rate? 30fps works well because it's a clean fraction.

So... Take that movie, burn as a Blu-Ray and put it on a decent HD display (not a computer monitor) and judge from there. Or, if you're needing the absolute top notch quality but only on Computer monitors, consider shooting at 30fps. But I'm splitting hairs here - quite often a smaller movie 'surface area' will help the most: 960x540 from 1080p would be smoother than 1280x720. But not HD admittedly.

You could try ExposureRoom.com.

As for the showjumping clips and choice of shutter speed, it depends (sorry): for spatial prediction (fancy) retiming, the sharper frames (shorter shutter speed) will work better. For FCP's frame blending, interlaced footage and longer shutter speeds) work better. Then there's mood - short shutter (Top Gear/Private Ryan) says something different to your audience than the standard 'double the frame rate' or '180' (most other films).

But I'll bite the bullet and state that I preferred the Brown horse in slomo, but didn't like the speeded up versions as there appeared to be some frame blending going on.

Marty Welk · December 27th, 2009, 02:53 PM

i have a net connection of 15Mb, which usually buffers entire videos before they are 10% done, so it must be a decode display issue for me, back it up over the buffered part, it is still balking.

for referance, can you see that second video without any frame balking at all?

Gavin Rawlings · December 27th, 2009, 03:56 PM

Thanks Matt

I've actually noticed that the same video of mine on ExposureRoom plays back fine compared to the Vimeo upload.

Does ExposureRoom use similar encoding to Vimeo? I only ask cause the footage on ExposureRoom tends to look slightly better to me or am I imagining this?

Gints Klimanis · December 27th, 2009, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gavin Rawlings

I have uploaded the video at 50fps and have noticed that all the other videos of mine on Vimeo (at 25fps) run fine...

I just scanned the Vimeo FAQ and Help to find no mention of specific frame rates. Originally, Vimeo supported only 24 fps, then 30 fps. Although they state that they support 720p, I see no mention of the frame rate for the encoded video. I'll have to try uploading a 720p60 video.

Matt Davis · December 27th, 2009, 04:04 PM

You may be experiencing the joy of 2-Pass encoding. I think that's the default on ExposureRoom, and only part of the Plus (pay for) membership for Vimeo.

ExposureRoom may have a higher bitrate too.

December 26th, 2009, 05:32 PM	#1
Scott Cook New Boot Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Woodside, CA Posts: 6	Tips on shooting sports? I'd sure appreciate your wisdom on this. Which settings work best when you shoot sports with fast motion? I'm still looking for which settings give crispest image, say of the face of the player, combined with the smoothest looking image. At 720p60, 120 shutter isn't as crisp but higher speeds don't seem as smooth. Here's a sample of what I shoot, though my apologies that Vimeo seems to introduce tremendous shudder. Is there an alternative to Vimeo that doesn't add shudder? Best in this sequence may be at 1:38 which was 720p60 slowed to 50% in Final Cut. (Ignore the indoor shots as they were shot with a Canon consumer AVCHD camcorder.) Karl, 2009 on Vimeo Here is a test of shutter speed alternatives, though I'm not that happy with either. Which of two clips looks better to you? on Vimeo

December 26th, 2009, 10:10 PM	#2
Marty Welk Major Player Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: East Bay Cali Posts: 563	on the bottom video with the shutter test, i cannot tell a difference, and i am not going to pause/still it to see it because that would defeat the purpose of the test. Vimo on this computer is balking during the high data areas so much, and i even adjusted the buffering and acceleration settings, and still no go. that it is cutting into things more than any change in shutter that you did. (and so i still hate flash :-) after seeing the awesome slow-mo , the regular speed looks like its faster than regular speed :-) untill i wrap my brain around it again. i know there should be a lot of visable difference having changing how much motion blur there is vrses it looking a bit stutterly, but i dont see it. mabey the balking and failing via the flash media playback thing keeps me from being able to analise it. either way i might think your being to critical :-) the colors, the resolution, in that lighting , contrast brightness settings make a a great picture. The web, well its the web. that reminds me of a codec that was a windows codec that people thought made an excellent picture for how small the video was (for web transport and pda playback stuff) instead of destroying the picture with compression, it would just toss out whole frames left and right, playback went from 30fps to 20 and even 15 as it couldnt keep up with the Changes on the screen. They loved it because the pic was not so badly compressed, i hated it, and didnt use it again. __________________ ----------------sig----------------- Re-learning everything all over again, one more time. Last edited by Marty Welk; December 27th, 2009 at 03:15 AM.

December 27th, 2009, 01:39 AM	#3
Gavin Rawlings Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia Posts: 40	Funny you mention the jumpy video playback on Vimeo as I have found the same problem with this clip of mine. You notice it most in the scenes where the chopper takes off. Perth to Sydney Helicopter Journey on Vimeo I have uploaded the video at 50fps and have noticed that all the other videos of mine on Vimeo (at 25fps) run fine...

December 27th, 2009, 08:23 AM	#4
Matt Davis Trustee Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Berkshire, UK Posts: 1,562	Regarding Vimeo playback, it's just that: all in the playback. If you let it download a bit, or stop it where it judders or skips frames, back it up a bit, then play again, suddenly it's smooth. It's a progressive download rather than a stream, so stutters are generated when there's not enough time for the computer to decompress and display, and it drops either every other frame for a bit (to catch up) or just lets all the plates drop and pick up at the next keyframe. When every pixel changes from frame to frame (fades, dissolves, zooms, pans) there's a whole ton of work to do, especially as definition scales ever upward. And get this: the more compressed you make it (making the file smaller and easier to download) the harder the computer has to work to re-'inflate' it. Especially with codecs like H.264. One can help with intelligently placed keyframes and variable bit rate encoding (which is how most high end movie trailers get done), but Vimeo has to draw the line somewhere. Increasing the frame rate with high action footage actually makes the situation harder as more pixels are changing faster, and you're destined for a 60Hz device with a 24, 25 or 50 Hz (fps) source, how is the display going to take into account the fact that the source has a different frame rate? 30fps works well because it's a clean fraction. So... Take that movie, burn as a Blu-Ray and put it on a decent HD display (not a computer monitor) and judge from there. Or, if you're needing the absolute top notch quality but only on Computer monitors, consider shooting at 30fps. But I'm splitting hairs here - quite often a smaller movie 'surface area' will help the most: 960x540 from 1080p would be smoother than 1280x720. But not HD admittedly. You could try ExposureRoom.com. As for the showjumping clips and choice of shutter speed, it depends (sorry): for spatial prediction (fancy) retiming, the sharper frames (shorter shutter speed) will work better. For FCP's frame blending, interlaced footage and longer shutter speeds) work better. Then there's mood - short shutter (Top Gear/Private Ryan) says something different to your audience than the standard 'double the frame rate' or '180' (most other films). But I'll bite the bullet and state that I preferred the Brown horse in slomo, but didn't like the speeded up versions as there appeared to be some frame blending going on. __________________ Director/Editor - MDMA Ltd: Write, Shoot, Edit, Publish - mattdavis.pro EX1 x2, C100 --> FCPX & PPro6

December 27th, 2009, 02:53 PM	#5
Marty Welk Major Player Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: East Bay Cali Posts: 563	i have a net connection of 15Mb, which usually buffers entire videos before they are 10% done, so it must be a decode display issue for me, back it up over the buffered part, it is still balking. for referance, can you see that second video without any frame balking at all? __________________ ----------------sig----------------- Re-learning everything all over again, one more time.

December 27th, 2009, 03:56 PM	#6
Gavin Rawlings Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia Posts: 40	Thanks Matt I've actually noticed that the same video of mine on ExposureRoom plays back fine compared to the Vimeo upload. Does ExposureRoom use similar encoding to Vimeo? I only ask cause the footage on ExposureRoom tends to look slightly better to me or am I imagining this?

December 27th, 2009, 04:04 PM	#8
Matt Davis Trustee Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Berkshire, UK Posts: 1,562	You may be experiencing the joy of 2-Pass encoding. I think that's the default on ExposureRoom, and only part of the Plus (pay for) membership for Vimeo. ExposureRoom may have a higher bitrate too. __________________ Director/Editor - MDMA Ltd: Write, Shoot, Edit, Publish - mattdavis.pro EX1 x2, C100 --> FCPX & PPro6