DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> 20,000 photo timelapse
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 33, (reverse)
AuthorThread
06/19/2011 03:19:57 PM · #1
I recently completed a timelapse video here in switzerland. I really enjoyed putting it together and wanted to share it with you guys. I recommend you watch it in HD. I JUST uploaded it.

Youtube:
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IBPHo3uxME

Vimeo:
//www.vimeo.com/25315964

T

Message edited by author 2011-06-19 15:20:15.
06/19/2011 03:33:56 PM · #2
Really nicely done, particularly like watching the swans darting about on the water!

Showed off Switzerland's landscape nicely, really pretty country, had the good fortune of spending a couple of weeks there back in 2008 when I was working with Nestlé.

Message edited by author 2011-06-19 15:36:33.
06/19/2011 03:39:10 PM · #3
That was very cool! I think you did an excellent job, and I like the choice of song! It works great with the video. The only lapse I wasn't crazy about was the one that I believe was taken while in a train? and only because you can see the camera's reflection.. but the rest was great! :)
06/19/2011 03:55:30 PM · #4
Awesome! 20,000 has to be a new record. Do you have any suggestions after shooting that huge timelapse??
06/19/2011 04:08:03 PM · #5
Originally posted by Tom:

Awesome! 20,000 has to be a new record. Do you have any suggestions after shooting that huge timelapse??


Yes, shoot JPEG!

The actual frames that go into the video are much less than 20,000, i just thought 20,000 makes for a catchy title ;)

However, I did shoot well over 20,000 shots including the parts that didn't make final cut.

06/19/2011 04:09:37 PM · #6
Originally posted by Revecca:

That was very cool! I think you did an excellent job, and I like the choice of song! It works great with the video. The only lapse I wasn't crazy about was the one that I believe was taken while in a train? and only because you can see the camera's reflection.. but the rest was great! :)


Yeah i kinda hesitated on the train scene because of the reflections - but i was looking for something explosive to fit the music.
06/19/2011 04:11:46 PM · #7
Originally posted by Timosaby:

Originally posted by Tom:

Awesome! 20,000 has to be a new record. Do you have any suggestions after shooting that huge timelapse??


Yes, shoot JPEG!

The actual frames that go into the video are much less than 20,000, i just thought 20,000 makes for a catchy title ;)

However, I did shoot well over 20,000 shots including the parts that didn't make final cut.


how many would you estimate actually went into it?
06/19/2011 04:27:01 PM · #8
Originally posted by Revecca:

Originally posted by Timosaby:

Originally posted by Tom:

Awesome! 20,000 has to be a new record. Do you have any suggestions after shooting that huge timelapse??


Yes, shoot JPEG!

The actual frames that go into the video are much less than 20,000, i just thought 20,000 makes for a catchy title ;)

However, I did shoot well over 20,000 shots including the parts that didn't make final cut.


how many would you estimate actually went into it?


Its very hard to say,

Each clip was sped up between 5 to 20 times so its really hard to make an accurate estimate based on video time - I would guess at least 10,000-15,000 photos are in the actual video. The total images I took are closer to 30,000.
06/19/2011 04:51:35 PM · #9
Just watched it. I enjoyed it a lot. The music is a really good match.

The fountains were my favourite part.
06/19/2011 04:52:22 PM · #10
Originally posted by Timosaby:

Originally posted by Revecca:

That was very cool! I think you did an excellent job, and I like the choice of song! It works great with the video. The only lapse I wasn't crazy about was the one that I believe was taken while in a train? and only because you can see the camera's reflection.. but the rest was great! :)


Yeah i kinda hesitated on the train scene because of the reflections - but i was looking for something explosive to fit the music.


I will fight you saying such things. The train scene, especially as you mixed it with the music, was amazing. The transition into the train scene was perfect. I do hate the music, as being from Seattle it's a clear rip off of Ben Gibbard and Postal Service, but that's not your fault.

Awesome stuff.

Edit: I agree that the fountains scene was probably the best part.

Message edited by author 2011-06-19 16:53:35.
06/19/2011 06:29:34 PM · #11
Thanks paul, scott, i'm really glad you both liked it.
06/19/2011 07:18:38 PM · #12
Fantastic work, my favourite part is the merry go round. Well worth the effort.
06/19/2011 11:54:46 PM · #13
I liked the clouds around 1:37. but he fountain scene was the best part. imo.
06/20/2011 02:38:47 PM · #14
What was your standard shots per minute when shooting and what is your standard frames per minute when compiling?
06/20/2011 04:10:22 PM · #15
I thoroughly enjoyed that. Well done!
06/20/2011 04:59:56 PM · #16
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

What was your standard shots per minute when shooting and what is your standard frames per minute when compiling?


There was no real standard shots per minute. Frequency really depended on the scene and lighting, it varied between 0.8 to 3 second exposures, so between 20 to 75 shots per minute. The train scene for example was done at 0.8 seconds per shot and I had taken a total of 1,700 photos. (which only amounts to like 20 minutes in total of actual shooting) - the earlier cloud scenes i did at 3 seconds per shot and sped them up 20 times in imovie, it also took about 2 hours or so of shooting and 2,200 photos.

When I compiled i used iMovie to export using quicktime, i'm not sure what the frames per minute was. I used a standard format i think 24 fps Apple pro res.

Once I had the exported video i'd then speed each one between 5 to 20 times, but most clips were sped up around 9 times the original speed.

Hope that answers your question!
06/20/2011 05:46:01 PM · #17
So, just to ask a question, because I think this stuff is cool and would like to do some. Why don't you just shoot video on your 7D and then compress the time? I can understand on some where you have motion blur, that would be gone, but some of the scenes looked mainly like they were sped up rather than blurry.

It seems easier to shoot video rather than the .jpgs?
06/20/2011 06:33:23 PM · #18
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

So, just to ask a question, because I think this stuff is cool and would like to do some. Why don't you just shoot video on your 7D and then compress the time? I can understand on some where you have motion blur, that would be gone, but some of the scenes looked mainly like they were sped up rather than blurry.

It seems easier to shoot video rather than the .jpgs?


I did a video about 6 months ago as part of a team project where we had to mimic an ad previously run by the company I work for. I took a bunch of footage and sped it up and it just looks different. There's no blur effect. It really ends up looking like a sped up stop motion. It's certainly easier to simply take video and speed it up but ud be loosing not just the blur effect of long exposures but also the fluid image sequence.

Another benefit of shooting individual images - if you have the patience and time - is the control you have on each frame while using batch processing software.

I'm also not sure I can compress the video the same way as I do the images I take. I'd have to test that to verify. You probably can but end up with a very choppy result with video as a result of dropping frames.

Speeding p video just drops frames in order to speed up the clip and ends up not looking as fluid in terms of image sequence.
06/20/2011 06:38:32 PM · #19
Originally posted by Timosaby:

Speeding p video just drops frames in order to speed up the clip and ends up not looking as fluid in terms of image sequence.


But if you think about it, aside from your long shutter speed, all you are doing is "dropping frames" as well. You turn yourself into a video machine shooting at maybe 20 frames per minute rather than 24 frames per second. The chop would be no different if you shot the video then picked out one frame from every 3 seconds of video.

Still, maybe it's the long shutter speed that adds something to the magic. This is why I'm asking the questions. :) I like to know about these things.
06/20/2011 06:53:37 PM · #20
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by Timosaby:

Speeding p video just drops frames in order to speed up the clip and ends up not looking as fluid in terms of image sequence.


But if you think about it, aside from your long shutter speed, all you are doing is "dropping frames" as well. You turn yourself into a video machine shooting at maybe 20 frames per minute rather than 24 frames per second. The chop would be no different if you shot the video then picked out one frame from every 3 seconds of video.

Still, maybe it's the long shutter speed that adds something to the magic. This is why I'm asking the questions. :) I like to know about these things.


My brain hurts now. lol.

You'remaking good points. I didn't put that much thought into it to be honest. I do know the end results look very different.

After exporting the images into video and before speeding it up, you can see each frame ticking by. Something like 5 images per second. So maybe I'm dropping less frames when speeding up as opposed to video and hence a less choppy and more fluid result?
06/20/2011 07:54:48 PM · #21
Here's a general question that anybody can answer, I can't remember. Can most Canons shoot with an electronic shutter rather than a mechanical one? In other words, can you have the shutter open all the time and then the camera samples the info flowing through the sensor to capture an exposure? The reason I ask is Timosaby has now put 20-30,000 actuations on his little shutter. Shooting video doesn't do this, but can we shoot a series of 1 second exposures without opening and closing the shutter every time?
06/20/2011 07:56:14 PM · #22
Originally posted by DrAchoo:


Still, maybe it's the long shutter speed that adds something to the magic. This is why I'm asking the questions. :) I like to know about these things.


It's definitely a factor. It will look *very* choppy without the long shutter speed. The frames will be sharply different, not blending into one another.
06/20/2011 08:33:38 PM · #23
The reason you work with still pictures for timelapse rather than video is because you have more information to work with. Shooting in HD gives you 1080x1920. Shooting in large jpeg format, depending on your camera, will give you 4000x4000ish pixels (Check your camera). You can then downsize it to fit the HD frame BUT you can also do pans and zooms without losing any resolution. If I set my camera up on a nice landscape, I can then bring that in to my video editor and have it pan from left to right and it's all HD. Then, if the clouds are also impressive in that scene I can cut them in somewhere else and pan again. It sends up being sharper.

Of course if you don't have the patients or time to work that way, go with video.
06/22/2011 07:53:52 PM · #24
Here's another good one; Vimeo

Frank
06/23/2011 12:13:53 AM · #25
Originally posted by Timosaby:

Originally posted by Revecca:

That was very cool! I think you did an excellent job, and I like the choice of song! It works great with the video. The only lapse I wasn't crazy about was the one that I believe was taken while in a train? and only because you can see the camera's reflection.. but the rest was great! :)


Yeah i kinda hesitated on the train scene because of the reflections - but i was looking for something explosive to fit the music.


It works fine. It's interesting seeing a timelapse from a train. Never seen that before.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 12/07/2019 10:31:23 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2019 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 12/07/2019 10:31:23 PM EST.