The Official DSLR w/ Video feature Thread
09-23-2008, 08:57 PM
#41
The Third Ball
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Los Angeles, Ca
Age: 45
Posts: 49,133
Received 4,825 Likes
on
2,572 Posts
I guess what I was alluding to was that variations in how different combinations of devices handle pulldown and/or mismatched refresh rates can change what someone perceives as the "look" of something. Granted, what I'm referring to as a "look" here is likely not the by-the-book film look that was originally asked about.
Taking your example, clearly there has to be some frames made up or interpolated to make up the difference in acquired frame rate versus displayed frame rate. Srika's combination of equipment might "make up" the frame rate difference by displaying entire frames multiple times whereas my combination of equipment might make up the difference by creating frames from fields in adjacent frames. It's these differeneces that I was thinking are what potentially creates a different looking image on Srkia's stuff than mine.
Of course now that I just typed all that, I'm starting to get the feeling that everything I just spewed primarily effects edge definition during movement. Bah! I'm not meant to run on four hours of sleep.
Taking your example, clearly there has to be some frames made up or interpolated to make up the difference in acquired frame rate versus displayed frame rate. Srika's combination of equipment might "make up" the frame rate difference by displaying entire frames multiple times whereas my combination of equipment might make up the difference by creating frames from fields in adjacent frames. It's these differeneces that I was thinking are what potentially creates a different looking image on Srkia's stuff than mine.
Of course now that I just typed all that, I'm starting to get the feeling that everything I just spewed primarily effects edge definition during movement. Bah! I'm not meant to run on four hours of sleep.
09-23-2008, 09:17 PM
#42
Senior Moderator
From my perspective, a father who has to carry around a camera and video camera (among a host of other things) to photograph and video his two small children... this is the best innovation since sliced bread.
Can`t wait til becomes more affordable.
Can`t wait til becomes more affordable.
09-24-2008, 12:30 AM
#43
The Third Ball
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Los Angeles, Ca
Age: 45
Posts: 49,133
Received 4,825 Likes
on
2,572 Posts
09-24-2008, 10:30 AM
#45
The Third Ball
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Los Angeles, Ca
Age: 45
Posts: 49,133
Received 4,825 Likes
on
2,572 Posts
09-24-2008, 10:32 AM
#46
The G9 shoots 1024x768
09-24-2008, 10:35 AM
#48
Senior Moderator
G10:
Movie: 640 x 480 (30 fps), 320 x 240 (30 fps) available up to 4GB or 60 minutes
G9:
Movie: 1024 x 768 (15 fps), 640 x 480 (30 fps/30 fps LP), 640 x 480 (2 hours at 0.5 fps/1 fps), 320 x 240 (30 fps) available up to 4GB or 60 minutes, 160 x 120 (3 minutes at 15 fps)
Why would they drop 1024 for the G10?
Movie: 640 x 480 (30 fps), 320 x 240 (30 fps) available up to 4GB or 60 minutes
G9:
Movie: 1024 x 768 (15 fps), 640 x 480 (30 fps/30 fps LP), 640 x 480 (2 hours at 0.5 fps/1 fps), 320 x 240 (30 fps) available up to 4GB or 60 minutes, 160 x 120 (3 minutes at 15 fps)
Why would they drop 1024 for the G10?
09-24-2008, 10:40 AM
#49
Moderator Alumnus
I have to think about this, but I almost don't want Full HD.
For a casual video shooter like me, I'd be plenty happy with 720p.
I should do a rough calculation and see how much memory "one day's worth"
would be, if I shot video in 1080 during yellowstone rather than the tiny size of the SD800. (although granted, they are finally using a real codec, so perhaps it won't be that outrageous)
- Frank
For a casual video shooter like me, I'd be plenty happy with 720p.
I should do a rough calculation and see how much memory "one day's worth"
would be, if I shot video in 1080 during yellowstone rather than the tiny size of the SD800. (although granted, they are finally using a real codec, so perhaps it won't be that outrageous)
- Frank
09-24-2008, 10:41 AM
#50
The Third Ball
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Los Angeles, Ca
Age: 45
Posts: 49,133
Received 4,825 Likes
on
2,572 Posts
Interesting. But not surprising...
Its the old and awesome S series...S50,60,70 all could shoot RAW...then in the S80 they dropped it...why?
Its the old and awesome S series...S50,60,70 all could shoot RAW...then in the S80 they dropped it...why?
09-24-2008, 10:46 AM
#52
Moderator Alumnus
A while ago, I read an article that shipping cameras overseas had a
smaller import fee (or something) than video cameras. The separation being
the video capability of the camera. The article speculated that Cameras
would start getting 'dumbed down' video capabilities (particularly resolution),
as a result.
I wasn't sure how valid the article is, but it might explain this.
- Frank
smaller import fee (or something) than video cameras. The separation being
the video capability of the camera. The article speculated that Cameras
would start getting 'dumbed down' video capabilities (particularly resolution),
as a result.
I wasn't sure how valid the article is, but it might explain this.
- Frank
09-24-2008, 10:50 AM
#53
Moderator Alumnus
That's why it got removed from all the Powershots, including the G series for
a while. It was a surprise that they re-enabled RAW in the G9.
- Frank
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
