They will move very fast and change direction very quickly for a short period of time, even at 1/33 their real speed. The balls can actually move and vibrate at speeds missed by a slo-mo simulation. I have an old Casio superzoom that can record at up to1000fps, but a very strange-aspect low-res crop with only a fraction of the sensor height, but for very fast objects, like magnetic balls interacting, you can see motion speed changes that are too complex to be expressed in a simulation. If you want slow-motion, then just do it, but if you want the best, record at a higher frame rate to begin with. Most of the time, people will not complain about the resampled or tweened simulations, but they have nothing else to compare to. Software could just fade one original image to the next over several new frames, or it can get smart and "tween" from each frame to the next, but none are going to be as accurately detailed as a recorded 120fps played back at 24, 25, or 30 fps. The result was at least as good (and subjectively smoother and less motion blur) than my attempt at doing it "right." Thanks to a suggestion by Mark9473 on this thread, I tried simply slowing the frame rate to 8fps with Avidemux, and saving. I set up a terrific Rube Goldberg method. I would say the answer is definitely yes. But so far I have no reason to believe that it will be much different, if at all. I was shooting MP4, 1080p, so I don't know what the result would/will be when shooting AVCHD or 4K MP4. It certainly was not jerky, and showed no artifacts. If I showed it to someone,(viewing full screen on 17" monitor) I don't think they would see it as deficient. I know I didn't really notice the difference when viewing the slow motion video. For most uses I would say the difference is negligible. There was slightly more blur of the moving hands and arms in the frames of the 120fps version (there was some blur in the original 30fps version, but slightly less). Subject was a person, seated, waving with their hand and then waving and criss-crossing their arms above their head. I'm curious what you'd see when going frame by frame through the 120fps video.Ĭomparing with the original, viewing on Avidemux (two copies running), not only the I-frames but also the B- and P-frames look pretty much the same on both. You also can change from 30 to 60 (instead of 120) and then to 24, but I wanted to see if I could push it a bit farther. Now, there may be some difference when I try to change a 4K video, but I see no reason to think that the result won't be at least as good. Result: a very acceptable slow motion video at 24fps. Change frame rate from 120fps to 24fps, allowing speed and duration to change. Change frame rate to 120fps, leaving duration the same.Ģ. I opened the video with Avidemux, and applied two filters:ġ. To test, I shot some 1080/30p video with my ZS50 (which doesn't have 4K). But.the fastest video is only 30p.Ĭould I use this to make a decent slow motion video? The answer appears to be yes. The benefits of this are (1) good slow motion and (2) any good frame can print out to at least 8x10 and look very good.īut I am intrigued by the Lumix ZS200, 1" sensor, 15x zoom, 4K video. When shooting video, I always shoot 60p, and with my G9 I shoot 4K/60p. I offer the following for anyone who has the same question. Can you make decent slow motion video from 30p footage? I see this question on a lot of websites, and I had the question myself.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |