I love the idea but the end result is kind of disappointing. It seems that the cameras weren't equally aligned and that the field of view wasn't corrected in post production either. This results in a jerky series of images that don't resemble video whatsoever.
Interesting stuff, but extremely flawed for the amount of professional skill and equipment involved.
1. 30fps? Why not use a 1080p video camera that can shoot 60fps? Saves a whole lot of money and trouble.
2. Using FinalCutStudio2 or some other proprietary software on Mac/PC/Etc you can easily smooth out and even interpolate the sequence. Done long long ago with the first Matrix "Bullet Time" sequences (1999).
I love the idea but the end result is kind of disappointing. It seems that the cameras weren't equally aligned and that the field of view wasn't corrected in post production either. This results in a jerky series of images that don't resemble video whatsoever.
But he should keep at it.
Not all frames were used in the online image gallery. It was reduced from 70 frames to 22. It would have been smooth if all frames had been used.
Quote:
1. 30fps? Why not use a 1080p video camera that can shoot 60fps? Saves a whole lot of money and trouble.
That would be fine (and a very easy way of doing it as you stated) for video or that little online gallery, but not really good enough for print or the type of photo detail that sports magazines and media companies require. 1080p has a low pixel density (1920x1080 - the equivelent of about 2.1 Megapixels) apposed to around +- 5008 x 3336 from a pro level camera (16.7MP). The latest generation of Canon EOS-1Ds take images with around 5616 x 3744 pixels (21MP).
Not all frames were used in the online image gallery. It was reduced from 70 frames to 22. It would have been smooth if all frames had been used.
Only if all frames are from one camera alone. Because of slight angle differences mixing any frames from any other camera will cause some jerkiness that will need to be fixed in post.
You know what they should have done? Use like a camera array so that for each millisecond of the hit you have not just one angle but multiple angles. AKA bullet time or http://www.timetrack.com/... Could have some nice effects for even as low as a 10-camera array. But I guess the main problem here is having to use all those telephoto lens. But they could have co-ordinated with MLB to get closer...?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpinDrift
That would be fine (and a very easy way of doing it as you stated) for video or that little online gallery, but not really good enough for print or the type of photo detail that sports magazines and media companies require. 1080p has a low pixel density (1920x1080 - the equivelent of about 2.1 Megapixels) apposed to around +- 5008 x 3336 from a pro level camera (16.7MP). The latest generation of Canon EOS-1Ds take images with around 5616 x 3744 pixels (21MP).
Yeah, I thought about that. It's definitely a very print-oriented approach, because for video or even flash you need to stabilise and retime (optical flow interpolate etc.).
I've always like motion picture effects and photography over the (understandably very popular) sports stil photography scene.
Comments
But he should keep at it.
1. 30fps? Why not use a 1080p video camera that can shoot 60fps? Saves a whole lot of money and trouble.
2. Using FinalCutStudio2 or some other proprietary software on Mac/PC/Etc you can easily smooth out and even interpolate the sequence. Done long long ago with the first Matrix "Bullet Time" sequences (1999).
3. Overall, I am left somewhat confused.
I love the idea but the end result is kind of disappointing. It seems that the cameras weren't equally aligned and that the field of view wasn't corrected in post production either. This results in a jerky series of images that don't resemble video whatsoever.
But he should keep at it.
Not all frames were used in the online image gallery. It was reduced from 70 frames to 22. It would have been smooth if all frames had been used.
1. 30fps? Why not use a 1080p video camera that can shoot 60fps? Saves a whole lot of money and trouble.
That would be fine (and a very easy way of doing it as you stated) for video or that little online gallery, but not really good enough for print or the type of photo detail that sports magazines and media companies require. 1080p has a low pixel density (1920x1080 - the equivelent of about 2.1 Megapixels) apposed to around +- 5008 x 3336 from a pro level camera (16.7MP). The latest generation of Canon EOS-1Ds take images with around 5616 x 3744 pixels (21MP).
Nice to see he's using a Mac but it didn't look like Aperture he was using.
Not all frames were used in the online image gallery. It was reduced from 70 frames to 22. It would have been smooth if all frames had been used.
Only if all frames are from one camera alone. Because of slight angle differences mixing any frames from any other camera will cause some jerkiness that will need to be fixed in post.
You know what they should have done? Use like a camera array so that for each millisecond of the hit you have not just one angle but multiple angles. AKA bullet time or http://www.timetrack.com/... Could have some nice effects for even as low as a 10-camera array. But I guess the main problem here is having to use all those telephoto lens. But they could have co-ordinated with MLB to get closer...?
That would be fine (and a very easy way of doing it as you stated) for video or that little online gallery, but not really good enough for print or the type of photo detail that sports magazines and media companies require. 1080p has a low pixel density (1920x1080 - the equivelent of about 2.1 Megapixels) apposed to around +- 5008 x 3336 from a pro level camera (16.7MP). The latest generation of Canon EOS-1Ds take images with around 5616 x 3744 pixels (21MP).
Yeah, I thought about that. It's definitely a very print-oriented approach, because for video or even flash you need to stabilise and retime (optical flow interpolate etc.).
I've always like motion picture effects and photography over the (understandably very popular) sports stil photography scene.