HDR Video

HeavyJ · December 10, 2011

DavidTO · December 10, 2011

Nicely done! Go get more!

wailor · May 5, 2012

Very nice

Overfocused · May 6, 2012

I like!

Easiest free way to make it longer is don't shoot in full size. You can shoot 3 or 4 megapixels and its still large enough for 1080p after cropping (set up your scene for the video ratio of course)

You could also get an Eye-Fi SD card and have it automatically transfer to a nearby laptop if your camera has an SD slot. Some CF to SD card adapters can work for CF only cameras and use the wireless, but you'd have to do your homework to find one or people that have done it and can tell you what will work. Imagine having 500GB of space for a shoot! You could go for weeks on smaller settings.

Another is having a camera with an in-camera HDR feature. Most cameras with it can be set to keep only the processed result. If you find a camera that does a good job with it, then you could do many many many more frames. Thousands more frames if you take photos at a smaller size than maximum combined with in camera HDR.

HeavyJ · May 8, 2012

The reason you would shoot larger images (Full res) is so that you can actually do pans and zooms and not lose any quality. This is essentially a 4K video downsized to 1080p. By leaving it at 4000 pixels or so on the longest side, you can zoom in and out or pan left to right, up or down...all sorts of moves WITHOUT losing any quality.

The reason for keeping it in RAW is to give myself more wiggle room for the HDR process. In-camera would take the creativity away from me.

Overfocused · May 8, 2012

HeavyJ wrote: »

The reason you would shoot larger images (Full res) is so that you can actually do pans and zooms and not lose any quality. This is essentially a 4K video downsized to 1080p. By leaving it at 4000 pixels or so on the longest side, you can zoom in and out or pan left to right, up or down...all sorts of moves WITHOUT losing any quality.

I was assuming you were shooting at the maximum size of whatever your camera is, which is usually 12-18MP now. 4k by 2.6k is 10.2 so I guess its not necessarily that high of a savings if its on the low end. Also, I didn't see any pans or zooms in the video so I thought it was just for straight up tightly framed time lapse stuff.

HeavyJ wrote: »

The reason for keeping it in RAW is to give myself more wiggle room for the HDR process. In-camera would take the creativity away from me.

In my experience, if its a good in-camera HDR, its not creatively restrictive at all... its actually pretty liberating. I agree a lot of in camera HDR go way too far and just do all the loopy stuff for you, but the good ones offer settings for a no gimmicks technically correct shot that gives you complete room for creative editing afterward. It just gets that extended step of crunching them together in the HDR software out of the way. I use the 5D MKIII now, and it does an excellent job of simply getting the tones in range and making it look like its still a normal single-shot photo. I still get to edit in post as I would a normal single exposure, as creatively as I want to. At least for me, it changes workflow and gives the boot to HDR generating programs saving time/space, while still giving me results I'd get through the HDR programs.

But yeah I'm not saying you should buy a MKIII or something just to try it, lol

Back to the original point... it looks great, but needs to be longer! The eye-fi card or a USB tether with netbook would probably be your best bet

HeavyJ · May 10, 2012

I plan to do more of not only Osaka but the Kansai area.

HDR Video

Comments