Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2015 · time lapse questions

  
 
RobAmy
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · time lapse questions


I did my first time lapse of a water lily. I set it to a picture every 4 seconds then edited for 30 fps

Being my first I thought it came out okay but feel it could be better

I would like to know how to improve. More time, less time between shots etc. The movement is from the water not being still, there is a waterfall with constant movement.

href="

">Water Lily Time Lapse</a> from <a



Jun 15, 2015 at 05:14 PM
stanj
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · time lapse questions


Not bad for a first try! As you point out yourself, the movement that's caused by water is too harsh. The problem there is that even doubling the frame rate to one frame every 2s, and playing it back at 60fps, won't improve it: the water moves in 2s as much as it moves in 4s (or 40s for that matter). Water is very ... fluid. You have fundamentally two different options:

- Choose a different subject matter. Yes, I know I'm funny, but there's only so much you can do with this. Pick a flower that's in quieter waters. There's a reason why you don't see time lapses of flowers opening in the wind.

- Don't just play back at a higher frame rate, but actually interpolate between frames. Some apps have different degrees of re-timing goodness. Apple's Compressor has pretty good re-timing options, and then there are phenomenal studio quality re-timers for the cost of a coveted 5DSR. In the example that you posted, you would keep the 30fps original footage, but would tell the software to retime it for 60fps, and it should come out smoother.

I would start with the first one, but a combination of 1 & 2 will give best results. In general, random and non-essential movement is to be avoided. Time lapses want movement, obviously, but it should be linear or predictable. The movement of water is neither, and in the movie you show, not essential. So out with it if at all possible.

Keep at it - I know it's incredibly time consuming, but it can be worth it!



Jun 15, 2015 at 05:27 PM
RobAmy
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · time lapse questions


Thank you very much Stan


Jun 15, 2015 at 08:08 PM
Aaron D
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · time lapse questions


Great job at first attempt! Instead of altering the fps at all, personally I would have set the timer a little longer. It opened a little too slow for my taste.

You could try shooting large aperture for thinner DOF, and I think this would help to "blur/smooth" the water, making it more OOF and less distracting. I dont think doubling frame rate (by duplicating or interpolating frames) would help any. I use Sony Vegas for video work. Theres a way you can track motion. By tracking the flower, its possible to set up a blur mask on the background, and leaving the flower in focus. But I think thinner DOF would be easier and less time consuming. Besides...interpolating frames has the possibility of introducing artifacts/ghosting. Something we as photographers despise.

Here's the first timelapse I did a couple years back. Its the making of Easter dinner. Total time was about 2 hours. Even though it's only 19 seconds, I got the look I was going for. I believe I timed the intervalometer for 1 shot every 30 seconds.

http://youtu.be/vsA1UdSxqUs



Jun 15, 2015 at 09:51 PM





FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.