|
Ninja Rope posted:A client wants me to try and put together a flash video of various landscape pans. Whether I take them as actual video pans or fake it with stills making the video should be relatively easy, but I'm not sure how to make that into a flash movie. Converting to flv isn't tough, but getting it onto a web page is the hard part. I'd really like to avoid spending $700 on flash creator, so I'm hoping there is some open source/free/cheaper solution? Just throw everything together in a video, convert it to Flash using whatever's easiest for you, and toss it on a webpage using a free flash player. I'm guessing since it's for a client, youtube would be out. :P Just from some random googling it looks like there's a few flash players out there you can just grab and use yourself.
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2010 15:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 18:16 |
|
|
Ugh, I just tried to watch some of the diggnation footage in hdr and its an abomination. I get where they're going with it, but its going to take a crap ton of refinement before it looks good. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGT8b-_o7hs Check in about 5:15 to see the effect and a double decker distraction come crashing through the background. ARRGH this is what they used 2 5DMKIIs for... edit: I like pushing technology, so while it hurts my eyes, I'm hopeful something useful will come from it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2010 14:16
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:Ugh, I just tried to watch some of the diggnation footage in hdr and its an abomination. I get where they're going with it, but its going to take a crap ton of refinement before it looks good. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGT8b-_o7hs Check in about 5:15 to see the effect and a double decker distraction come crashing through the background. ARRGH this is what they used 2 5DMKIIs for... I feel like it would look a lot better if they just recovered more highlights (like the houses on the left), kept more/darker shadows, and used a shallower depth of field so the houses directly behind them weren't so distracting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2010 16:39
|
|
|
Gravity shots dude flying a hectacopter with a 5dmkII attached : http://vimeo.com/16217390 The motion is so smooth.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2010 21:30
|
|
|
I am amazed by the lighting actually. All this brightness and consistent color from a couple of fluorescents ?
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2010 01:32
|
|
|
Wake up dSLR video thread! I just ordered a T2i last night and it's on it's way here! I'll be making short climbing videos with it where I'll need at least two additional accessories: 1) some kind of lightweight stabilization. I was thinking about something like a Flycam Nano but if anybody can suggest anything cheaper/better I'd love to hear about it. 2) An external mic. I want to basically go as cheap as possible (I mostly for wind-baffling). I know zero about audio, really. Can anyone suggest a few options along the bottom of the price-range for anything worth buying? Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2010 15:21
|
|
|
Cannister posted:Wake up dSLR video thread! Check this site out...great reviews of everything DSLR video related. http://cheesycam.com/ LOL! I didn't see that Cheesycam is in the video.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2010 18:42
|
|
|
Cannister posted:Wake up dSLR video thread! Bought a T2i last night aswell, but i'm looking for something to make zooming more smooth as I'm stuck with the kit lens. Is there any kind of thingy I can attatch to the zoom ring to make it easier to adjust the zoom smoothly? I am terrible at DIY
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2010 18:59
|
|
|
You can buy follow focus rigs and use them on a zoom ring, but they are expensive still. I forget if that will even work with the kit lens. As far as the fly cam, I'd say forget it. Balancing that poo poo is a pain in the rear end, especially if you are going to be changing your focal length. The best thing you can get for mobile stabilization is a mono pod or a shoulder rig. Unless you want to spend a ton, I think you are better off with a simpler solution.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2010 21:50
|
|
|
I started to play with video again after leaving it alone for a few months. After watching a ton of other people's video I think you have to work within the limitations. I don't think you need to zoom or pan or even move around much. Some of the best shots are achieved with the camera locked down and let your subjects come in and out of frame. If I have to follow someone, I've balanced the camera well enough using an extended tripod for short trips. Also focus pulling is fun for like a day, then you realize that everyone is doing it and you should stop.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2010 22:03
|
|
|
well focus pulling is done every day by cinematographers the world over and without it motion photography wouldn't be possble
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2010 09:20
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:I started to play with video again after leaving it alone for a few months. After watching a ton of other people's video I think you have to work within the limitations. I don't think you need to zoom or pan or even move around much. Some of the best shots are achieved with the camera locked down and let your subjects come in and out of frame. If I have to follow someone, I've balanced the camera well enough using an extended tripod for short trips. Also focus pulling is fun for like a day, then you realize that everyone is doing it and you should stop. I'm officially "yeah whatever, guy"ing you on this poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2010 13:04
|
|
|
What else are you going to do without continuous video AF anyway? Even that's still pretty unreliable. And even with a fixed rig you're still limited to movement along the focus plane (or within the depth of field).
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2010 13:19
|
|
|
Is he talking about a dolly zoom or something? Focus pulling, to my understanding, is taking a tape measure and figuring out what your focus should be. Isn't it only viable for cine lenses that have very accurate graduations?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2010 14:27
|
|
|
ease posted:Is he talking about a dolly zoom or something? Focus pulling in general pretty much just means focusing the lens. So whether thats just using your hand to guess it. Or meauring it out. Or using a focus motor or whatever.... But yes its much easier to do it on something like a zeiss lens than a canon camera lens because A) Theres more rotation between close and infinite and B) The lens STOPS rotating when it hits either end so you can actually put a mark on the lens. The canon/Nikon lenses will keep rotating which will ruin the mark.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2010 14:43
|
|
|
I have found a possible solution , http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-eos-7d-hd/475832-quick-easy-inexpensive-clever-focus-lever-7d.html seems like it would work for a zoom lens, the length of the cable tie means I should be able to get a smoother zoom going. This does the same sort of thing http://www.cinevate.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=203 at 1000% of the price. This is for a focus follow but it looks perfect for sorting my jerky zoom problems http://vimeo.com/4270555 -edit after a bit of searching round and a genius idea from a co-worker , behold my new zoom grip http://www.amazon.co.uk/Kitchen-Craft-Rubber-Bottle-Opener/dp/B0012V17Y4/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=home-garden&qid=1289314167&sr=1-5 Teabiscuit fucked around with this message at 15:51 on Nov 9, 2010 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2010 14:54
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:What else are you going to do without continuous video AF anyway? Even that's still pretty unreliable.  if you are shooting video you should probably be shooting with manual focus anyway
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2010 18:09
|
|
|
Twenties Superstar posted:
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2010 19:43
|
|
|
For some reason, when I record full HD video on my 5D Mark II, it will only record 7 mins 39 seconds on an 8GB Sandisk CF card (60 mb/s). Is there some setting I should be changing or is it just the card quality causing this?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2010 22:50
|
|
|
bobgeldofsunderwear posted:For some reason, when I record full HD video on my 5D Mark II, it will only record 7 mins 39 seconds on an 8GB Sandisk CF card (60 mb/s). Is there some setting I should be changing or is it just the card quality causing this?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2010 00:34
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:This was kinda my point, friend! I thought I would highlight it, even if you have continuous AF video on your DSLR using it for video makes about as much sense as running your camera in full automatic mode for stills. Twenties Superstar fucked around with this message at 08:41 on Nov 10, 2010 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2010 08:39
|
|
|
TheLastManStanding posted:The file system used by cameras limit it to a max size of 4gb files. On my T2i it records at 330mb/m which works out to ~12min. Considering the video type is standardized I can't image it's different in the 5dii, which means it's probably your card. One thing you have to realize when buying a card is that they are always rated in read speed since that number looks better from a marketing stand point. I can't image a sandisk card having a read of 60 and a write of less than 5, but you shouldn't rule it out. What kind of card do you have to get that supports a non-retarded file system
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2010 10:15
|
|
|
Teabiscuit posted:What kind of card do you have to get that supports a non-retarded file system
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2010 10:36
|
|
|
Ok so from what I understand if I want to be shooting at 24 fps to simulate the 180 degree shutter of normal film cameras you basically want to double your framerate, so 1/50 is fairly locked in (unless I want blurring or strobing). I think I'll try and stick to that for a while until I at least have an idea what the different settings LOOK like. I also understand that in bright daylight, 1/50 is a pretty slow shutter drag even at ISO 100, f/11. I haven't experimented in video but I know that sharpness and contrast kind of go out the window after f/11 or so... So the suggested solution is ND filters... Can anyone suggest some half-decent ND filters that won't rip my wallet to pieces, as well as which densities I should have on me for most situations? I've heard that lightcraft fader filters are cool (adjustable) but will that kill the quality of my video, or no?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2010 16:22
|
|
|
Hey team, I am seeking to make the leap into the fine world of video. A quick synopsis of my situation: at 23, with a journalism degree in hand, I have come to Seoul to teach English. Teaching not my calling; journalism is. And the direction of journalism is online video. I seek to make this my direction as well. I have been shooting (still) a Pentax K100D, through which I've learned the basics of photography over the past three years. But I need video. I crave it. I intend to principally do travel writing (getting a piece published this month in the Globe and Mail, hooray!) and quality video will set me apart from my freelance peers. I finish my time in Korea at the end of January, after which I head to China for a month, (then tentatively) a stop in Hong Kong, then to India, onward to Nepal. I want to write, shoot and sell as many stories as possible in this time. The conundrum is this: My budget for gear is about $2,000, maybe more, especially if I want to (ugh) borrow from my parents. So it's pretty tight financially. Let me tell you about my conclusions: it's come down to the Canon 7D and Rebel X2i. From the spools of forum discussion and reviews I've read the sample videos I've seen, the video quality seems to be quite comparable, although the 7D is superior for low light. In addition, I'm off-put by having to wade through menus to get to my adjustments using the X2i. Also, of course, the still photography is going to be leagues better for the big brother. But does that warrant paying double the price? At this point, my reasoning runs along two lines: First, I'd rather free up that extra $800 to buy some quality glass. So I can make some deliciously shallow depth of field. Oh yeah. Plus I'm going to want to get a monopod, a new bag, etc. Second, personally, I need to decide if I am ready to commit to video. The 7D's ability to shoot high-level still and motion is of course attractive. Third, I'm going to be in some notable weather conditions, including the Himalayas' Anapurna Circuit. The classy weatherproofing on the 7D is intriguing in this regard, but surely I must be able to find some sort of condom for the X2i? At this point, I think the price makes the choice. Right now I'm seeing the X2i body on B&H for $700 and the 7D for $1,599. That's quite the difference. With the X2i, I believe I could collect most all of the gear I need to be a backpack journalist within my budget. Thoughts? drinkingthesun fucked around with this message at 18:17 on Nov 10, 2010 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2010 18:14
|
|
|
It's T2i, not X2i. and Adorama's got them refurbished for 650. It's a drat fine picture-taking machine, but in a small body that's harder to control than the 7D - although if it's video you want to do there honestly isn't too much messing with the menu you have to do. Set you aperture, shutter, ISO and start shooting. Just but the T2i. It's way better than what the pro's of the past had to work with.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2010 21:21
|
|
|
I should know this because I had a x2i, but does the mode dial control the exposure modes for video like it does on the 7d?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2010 22:03
|
|
|
Cannister posted:Ok so from what I understand if I want to be shooting at 24 fps to simulate the 180 degree shutter of normal film cameras you basically want to double your framerate, so 1/50 is fairly locked in (unless I want blurring or strobing). I think I'll try and stick to that for a while until I at least have an idea what the different settings LOOK like. I also understand that in bright daylight, 1/50 is a pretty slow shutter drag even at ISO 100, f/11. I haven't experimented in video but I know that sharpness and contrast kind of go out the window after f/11 or so...
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2010 23:46
|
|
|
drinkingthesun posted:Let me tell you about my conclusions: it's come down to the Canon 7D and Rebel X2i. From the spools of forum discussion and reviews I've read the sample videos I've seen, the video quality seems to be quite comparable, although the 7D is superior for low light. In addition, I'm off-put by having to wade through menus to get to my adjustments using the X2i. Also, of course, the still photography is going to be leagues better for the big brother. But does that warrant paying double the price? The 7D isn't superior to the T2i in low light and it isn't leagues better. The 7D is a more professional camera that offers many advantages over T2i, but their picture quality is indistinguishable from each other.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2010 23:50
|
|
|
Twenties Superstar posted:I thought I would highlight it, even if you have continuous AF video on your DSLR using it for video makes about as much sense as running your camera in full automatic mode for stills.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2010 00:35
|
|
|
The waves at york beach were supposed to be epic today so I took the 5DII and my 70-200mm 2.8 out for a bit of a test. I'm not completely satisfied with how it came out. It's a little too shaky and it's feels kind of colorless, but I learned a lot and I'm hoping to shoot more video soon.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2010 03:25
|
|
|
TheLastManStanding posted:Shutter speed =/= frame rate. I could record with a shutter speed of 1/4000 while recording at 18fps. The only way they are related is that the shutter speed has to be quicker than 1/framerate.. Also, if your playback and recording use equal framerates, then changing the framerate won't have any visible effect; so the differences between 60fps, 30fps and 24fps will be indistinguishable. Any perceived 'look' comes from either altering the playback ratio or using pulldown. Yeah, I know that shutter speed isn't the same as frame rate. I was saying that to avoid the "saving private ryan" effect on a dSLR you have to keep the frame rate down, but too far down and you get a lot of motion blur. I'm going to be experimenting a lot with different framerates and shutter speeds over the next few weeks. Here's a crappy thing (password = underground) I made basically to learn premiere CS5. The last version I used in highschool was like premiere 6 or something, so there's quite a bit of new stuff. That one's in 24fps - I'm thinking 30 might look nice for climbing videos though, or some 60fps played back @30 for a slow-mo feel on certain shots. I'm going to try and emulate this for starters. Cannister fucked around with this message at 17:14 on Nov 15, 2010 |
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2010 14:14
|
|
|
Wooten posted:The waves at york beach were supposed to be epic today so I took the 5DII and my 70-200mm 2.8 out for a bit of a test. I'm not completely satisfied with how it came out. It's a little too shaky and it's feels kind of colorless, but I learned a lot and I'm hoping to shoot more video soon. Bump up the iso and tweak the white balance. That should get you closer to what you want.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2010 00:01
|
|
|
Cannister posted:Yeah, I know that shutter speed isn't the same as frame rate. I was saying that to avoid the "saving private ryan" effect on a dSLR you have to keep the frame rate down, but too far down and you get a lot of motion blur. I think his point was that motion blur comes from slow shutter speeds and not low FPS per se. However, I'm pretty sure that all else being equal, 60fps video played back at 60fps will be much smoother than 24fps played at 24fps, since there are going to be more than twice as many frames to capture any movement.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2010 10:43
|
|
|
Shot and edited this this weekend. I was forced to shoot in 720p instead of 1080 as my 2 16 gig sd cards aren't here yet and all I have is 1 4gig card. I also accidentally set the resolution to 480 for 2 of the climbs apparently. Besides that I did some experimenting with stability and I think my best footage came out when I had a monopod on the ground and just tilted back and fourth. Keeping focus is hard - seems best to just shoot in nice bright light and stop down to f8-f11. With climbing videos it also seems like the way to get the best editing footage is to ask the climbers to repeat a few moves while you film from different angles. Hopefully the next one will be better! Also my fiancee got mad at me for spending nearly 6 hours editing away our Sunday together... whoops.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2010 17:13
|
|
|
I did not just watch your friend clip his toenails in HD. That is so gross
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2010 17:22
|
|
|
TheLastManStanding posted:The 7D isn't superior to the T2i in low light and it isn't leagues better. The 7D is a more professional camera that offers many advantages over T2i, but their picture quality is indistinguishable from each other. I believe the 7d is the only Canon DSLR that can output 1080p signal via HDMI while recording. The T2i and 5Dmk2 can output at 1080p for viewfinding, but as soon as you hit the record button, the screen goes blank for a second then comes back on in standard definition. At least I'm pretty sure that's the case (my 7" Lilliput monitor hasn't arrived yet).
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2010 22:31
|
|
|
Cannister posted:I was forced to shoot in 720p instead of 1080 as my 2 16 gig sd cards aren't here yet and all I have is 1 4gig card.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2010 02:51
|
|
|
TheLastManStanding posted:Shooting at 1080 and 720 take up the same amount of space. 720 is ~half the resolution at twice the frame rate. They both record at 330mb/m. I thought that might be the case. Well, I did end up shooting a bit of footage in 480, which was kind of lame, but I guess it meant that I could fit what I did on a 4GB card. Oh well - soon I'll have more memory!
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2010 04:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 18:16 |
|
|
Welp look like I need to invest in some rigging because these pans are awesome. With all that work they didn't try and fix a few obvious rolling shutter issues. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvkPN1Buok0
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2010 17:03
|
|
Have you seen my apex seals? I seem to have lost them.
