HDR Video

HeavyJHeavyJ Against the GrainPosts: 95Registered Users Big grins
edited May 10, 2012 in Video
<iframe frameborder="0" scrolling="no" width="425" height="240" src="http://api.smugmug.com/services/embed/1621848809_Rg44S9Q?width=425&height=240"></iframe>;

This is another attempt at HDR video timelapse...

3 bracket shots for 16gigs worth of RAW photos. Import and batch process in Photomatix, bring into lightroom and batch edit till happy...go into After Effects to create the timelapse....now I just need to go out and find more to make it longer...

Comments

  • DavidTODavidTO Mod Emeritus Posts: 19,160Administrators moderator
    edited December 10, 2011
    Nicely done! Go get more!
    Moderator Emeritus
    Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
  • wailorwailor Beginner grinner Posts: 5Registered Users Beginner grinner
    edited May 5, 2012
    Very nice
  • OverfocusedOverfocused Photo Nut Posts: 1,067Registered Users Major grins
    edited 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.
  • HeavyJHeavyJ Against the Grain Posts: 95Registered Users Big grins
    edited 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.
  • OverfocusedOverfocused Photo Nut Posts: 1,067Registered Users Major grins
    edited 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 rolleyes1.gif



    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 nod.gif
  • HeavyJHeavyJ Against the Grain Posts: 95Registered Users Big grins
    edited May 10, 2012

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

Sign In or Register to comment.