Jump to content

What affects a camera's "motion cadence"?


Jonesy Jones
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Laurier said:

My guess it s it have to do with how the electronic curtain sync operate , the rolling shutter and the encoding.

It s a subjective observation but for example the motion blur on blackmagic camera is much more ...somewhat contrasted and apparent, whereas on sony/panasonic mirrrorless it s less visible.In camera noise reduction also remove some of the motion blur smoothness making it more hard and less pleasing.

But the motion perception is affected by your stabilization and your focal as well, I guess hand holding a tele lense on a alexa or a red epic won t look very nice if you compare it to a 35mm on a7r2 on a gimbals.

This sounds like a really good understanding of it.

Yes, in particular the GH5 looks like it definitely adds in-camera noise reduction.  Gives it a plastic-y feeling to the midtones and highlights.  As if using neatvideo on the footage a little too agressively.

Interesting observation about motion blur and Blackmagic.

Also I found shooting 185 degree shutter on the ursa mini 4.6k makes the motion feel more like an alexa.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EOSHD Pro Color 5 for Sony cameras EOSHD Z LOG for Nikon CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
18 hours ago, Jonesy Jones said:

 My understanding of what JCS is saying is that all film, even modern, is not as precise as digital. In other words, film is mechanical, not electronic, and therefore there are some extremely subtle variances to the way it records.  These variances could be both temporal and positional. Unlike digital which will be perfect.  I don't think we're talking about massive skipping and stuttering, I think we're talking about nearly imperceptible flaws that make a film feel alive the way digital, video, often does not. 

You mean makes film look not alive, as in unnatural. Alive is how we see the world, and there is no stuttering, micro or otherwise, in real life.

This is the same argument people make about vinyl, where imperfections create a different flawed sound that does not reproduce a real performance. People think it is "better", but really it is just an affection for a past era using the Luddite assumption that things were better in the old days.

5 hours ago, mercer said:

Interesting... those 5 extra degrees made a difference? Did you test that on the Micro, when you had it, with similar results?

I strongly doubt that anyone would be able to tell the difference with such a small change in shutter speed.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As humans are imperfect beings, total and absolute digital things do not cope well with our limitations.

@tugela vinyl in the perfect situation (very good turntable, amp, speakers, the print of the vinyl itself, etc) is a better reproduction of an analog recording than digital (e.g cd). It is not such a simple matter, and has to do a lot about physics, and CD ain't a great performer, never was, never will be. A high bit rate digital file can be much better, but still that depends on myriads of uncertainties (recording of music, distribution etc)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my experience the major factor of motion cadence is in camera sharpening. The in camera sharpness algorithim is always looking for high contrast edges to accentuate to increase the perceived resolution. This edge detection and enhancement creates a "flickering" edge effect + judder when things are moving horizontally across the screen. Light grades of diffusion help me get better motion cadence out of my footage because the diffusion softens the transition in high contrast areas thus decreasing the judder effect and improving the motion cadence. I do not believe all i improves motion it just reduces some of the artifacts ipb frame prediction can create

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/22/2017 at 7:53 AM, cantsin said:

"Motion cadence" is a term that only exists in camera forum discussion threads - it's neither a technical, nor a scientific term.

And only in the smallest of smallest nichey niche camera forum discussion threads. 

On 9/22/2017 at 8:04 AM, jcs said:

It would appear the primary factor in motion cadence would be the clock / sampling interval. If the sampling interval is perfect, e.g. each frame sampled at very close to 1s/23.976, that will have different a perception vs. a system with temporal jitter. It would seem film would have some temporal jitter, vs. a digital system would could be a lot more precise. The question is what 'looks better' and if temporal jitter is helpful, how would a digital camera implement it? (statistical sampling: average interval, variance, magnitude etc.). Likewise, if temporal jitter is pleasing, why aren't there post tools which specifically address this? (I've seen film effects which 'damage' footage, however nothing so far that subtly creates temporal jitter based on specific camera systems in the same way e.g. Film Convert works for color/grain).

With a precise motion pattern, cameras could be measured for temporal jitter / motion cadence (it would appear that cameras with genlocks could be jittered live).


So by this logic, we should only buy cameras which have genlock? 

Edit:  no wait, I read too hasty! You do NOT want cameras with genlock used?? :-/ 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • EOSHD Pro Color 5 for All Sony cameras
    EOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
    EOSHD Dynamic Range Enhancer for H.264/H.265
×
×
  • Create New...