h a l f b a k e r yLike you could do any better.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Time lapse movies can be really cool but tend to be a bit jerky. This is due to sporadic fast changes in the subject or lighting conditions.
To make time lapse more fluid, each frame could be taken when the subject varies by a certain amount. This could be achieved by a computer algorithm that compares
the history of the last few frames and takes the next frame to fit the continuity of the movie.
[link]
|
| |
With my new "Apparition-vision" 3D movie equipment invention, soon to be described, time lapse will 'appear' to be fluid. |
|
| |
This is a good idea. I think that this could be done in post-production with real-time or near real-time captured footage as well. |
|
| |
I do think that behavior in nature, flowers opening, etc., is inherently violent--explosive, even--and that varying the sample rate adds a degree of artifice to the depiction. |
|
| |
...or simply increase the exposure time to be v. long per shot while decreasing the apperature/film sensitivity? |
|
| |
No need for computer algorithms. Oh, and baked. |
|
| |
What you're saying would work (I've done this for some motion detecting software I've made). But, the problem is, the time between frames would varry. So, you'd get pictures that were smooth, not accurate through time.
For instance, say you had a slow moving sky in the background, then somone walked in front of the camera. When they walked in front of the camera, the time between frames would decrease, so, the sky would appear to slow. Once the person was gone, the only change would be the sky, so it would speed up. If you had something fast moving, it would be in real time, not time lapse at all. For instance, with a car driving by, a difference would be detected every frame. It'd be smooth, but jerky in another sense :-) |
|
| |
I do think it would give a realy awsome effect though, if you weren't going for time accuracy. I'll set up my camera, facing the street, to try it. |
|
| |
I'm neutral on this one due to it not being very usefull, but still a good thought which would give some cool vid effects. The scene would always be moving no matter what :) |
|
| |