Jump to content

Mokara

Members
  • Content Count

    498
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Mokara last won the day on March 23

Mokara had the most liked content!

About Mokara

  • Rank
    Frequent member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Keep in mind that the frame rate options may well affect the license fee Canon have to pay for using the codec. If the camera is being almost entirely used by amateurs who never use 24p, then they would have an incentive to not use that frame rate in order to cut costs. If people want to shoot 24p for professional reasons, there are other products that can do that. Stuff shot at 24p is re-encoded for streaming. Footage that is re-encoded can be complied to any frame rate through interpolation of motion data in much the same way that TV panels extrapolate 60Hz to 120Hz or 240Hz. Just with a non even match it likely takes a bit more computation.
  2. If you shoot for content that is to be primarily viewed on or through a computer, you want to be shooting at framerates that match the refresh rates of those devices. If you don't, you will have stuttering issues when the device inserts additional frames, but with different intervals. For example, your 24 fps will be displayed as a series of 2 or 3 duplicated frames on a 60 fps device. Because those effective frames are now of different duration it will cause the appearance of a stutter in any scene that has motion. On a native 24 fps device you will not see stutter. That is why you NEVER shoot 24 fps unless that is your display media. If you are shooting for cinema, or a device that will match it's frame rate to your frame rate then you are ok. But if you don't have that then your footage looks shit. These cameras are designed for every day consumer users. They have zero need for 24p. Pretty much every viewing device will support 60 fps (or even fractions of that) but not every device will support 24 fps. If you want to shoot for as wide an audience as possible, irrespective of what they are gong to use to view the content, you need to shoot at the most appropriate frame rate, which is some even multiple or fraction of 60 fps. Granted, the device they have may be capable of adjusting frame rate, but if the software/hardware they are using to generate the video stream doesn't, and produces a 60 fps output instead, they will still get stuttering. Why do people shoot at 24 fps at all? The reason is because that was a historically convenient way of shooting movies, and because movies were historically shot that way, people who want to mimic that "look" shoot that way as well, even though there is no good reason for them to do so. It is an affection, people do it, especially those who have been to film school and what not, because that is how they have been taught to do it. For them it is the "proper" way because some old guy they respected said so. Unless you are shooting an actual movie where you know that the display is going to be 24 fps, there is no reason to use 24 fps at all. And if you do, you had better be damned certain that whatever is being used to display your footage is actually fully able to match frame rates.
  3. I shoot everything in 30p or 60p, since those framerates do not have stuttering problems on 60Hz displays like 24p does. Unless you have a output device that matches your 24p footage you are going to have issues.
  4. Pretty much nobody does for video, other than some cinema wannabes. They do make a big fuss when it isn't there though.
  5. That depends on if it has been agreed to as a standard (the patent holder has to agree to this, some third party can't just decide to make it a standard). And even then you still have to pay the license fee, it only caveat on the patent holder being that they can't pick and choose who to license to. You don't have the right to demand access to patented technology unless you are the government. You can record RAW without infringement, as long as the compression used is under 6X. Anything from 0 to 5.9X compression would be fine. Another way to circumvent the RED patents is to record the different colors onto separate cards, essentially 4 files, one red, one blue and two green. These could then be compressed as much as you like (since they are separate videos). The user could then reconstitute the full color image in post.
  6. Two points to note: 1) Simply producing a device that does something first does not necessarily make it novel. It doesn't matter if no one else had such a camera at the time, as long as the idea was bandied about that in itself would be sufficient to destroy novelty. Likewise if people had done similar things and it was obvious that those similar things could be combined. 2) They talk about preprocessing as a component in their workflow. Presumably with no preprocessing their claims would not cover the general concept. And even with processing, they should only be getting claims where they use a specific method of preprocessing. If the patent office is doing their job properly, IMO the broad claims should be disallowed.
  7. If they are using the Digic 8 then the video capabilities are probably not going to exceed the EOS-R. Unless magic is a thing now A new codec from Sony would imply a new processor as well, since the processor does that in hardware. A new processor will also likely bring an increase in other specs, such as frame rate, resolution and bit depth along with the codec.
  8. Do you need a swat team to come and rescue you?
  9. Right. Except that in blind tests photographers overwhelmingly chose the Sony colors. Canon came last.
  10. This was brought to my attention on another website. What do you guys think about this guy's opinion?
  11. That is not the point. The S1 is a hybrid with a video emphasis. Of course it will be beaten by other hybrid cameras that have a stills focus if you are shooting stills, but it is never the less a hybrid that is very capable as a stills camera, unlike the BM products. If you need a hybrid camera in your workflow you will not buy the BM camera unless you were hit hard on the head as a child.
  12. The S1H will kick the snot out of this thing as a stills camera.
  13. Unlikely that most S1H buyers would take this instead. The S1H is a hybrid, the BM camera is not.
  14. So, find some puppies, put them in some dire life threatening situation, then "rescue" them?
×
×
  • Create New...