fast frame/sec at DVinfo.net

Dale Guthormsen · June 3rd, 2007, 09:36 AM

Good Morning,

Does anyone have some footage of the 6 seconds of slo motion the camera can do!!!!

Greg Boston · June 3rd, 2007, 09:42 AM

Dale,

Do a YouTube search for 'firelighter'. I saw this example posted the other day and it's impressive. Shot at 240 frames/sec. I didn't realize the V1 had this capability.

-gb-

Stu Holmes · June 3rd, 2007, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg Boston

Shot at 240 frames/sec. I didn't realize the V1 had this capability.

-gb-

V1 can't shoot at 240 fields per sec...
240 frames per sec... yes!

Brad Bodily · June 4th, 2007, 05:17 PM

The slo-mo footage isn't progressive, so doesn't that make it 240 fields a sec? (And, I think it's actually 250)

Joe Busch · June 4th, 2007, 08:57 PM

240 / 4 = 60

Pretty sure it's fields, 240 frames would be rediculous.

120 frames isn't THAT unbelievable if it's for a short burst (camera can store that in a buffer)

Thought it was for 12 seconds?

Either way I want an FX7 to test it out :)

Paul Frederick · June 5th, 2007, 06:18 AM

The super-slo-mo feature is of such poor quality I find it unusable. It's only good for checking your golf swing or something. It would never work for broadcast, maybe web but you'll see, it's all blocky.

Stu Holmes · June 5th, 2007, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stu Holmes

V1 can't shoot at 240 fields per sec...
240 frames per sec... yes!

Sorry my typo... got that the wrong way round... it's 240fields per sec which = 120frames per sec.
Sorry for the confusion..!

Robert Young · June 5th, 2007, 05:45 PM

I've been disappointed with the in-camera slo mo effect.
I think I get a better image applying After Effects Timewarp in post. That adds some softness to the image, but doesn't generate the other kinds of artifacts I see in my V1 in-camera effect.
The one suggested thing I haven't tried yet is to shoot the slo mo in HDV, bring it into the NLE as Cineform CFHD avi, convert the CFHD directly to standard def m2v, burn it to a DVD and watch it on a TV monitor. That's supposed to give a more acceptable image, similar to what you see on the Sony V1 demo DVD.
I would appreciate hearing from anyone who has done something like this. If not, I'll try it myself and report back.

Joe Busch · June 5th, 2007, 09:04 PM

Anyone try converting their slow motion footage to progressive?

June 3rd, 2007, 09:36 AM	#1
Dale Guthormsen Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Saskatchewan Posts: 3,048	fast frame/sec Good Morning, Does anyone have some footage of the 6 seconds of slo motion the camera can do!!!! __________________ DATS ALL FOLKS Dale W. Guthormsen

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

June 3rd, 2007, 09:42 AM	#2
Greg Boston Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: DFW area, TX Posts: 6,117 Images: 1	Dale, Do a YouTube search for 'firelighter'. I saw this example posted the other day and it's impressive. Shot at 240 frames/sec. I didn't realize the V1 had this capability. -gb-

June 4th, 2007, 05:17 PM	#4
Brad Bodily New Boot Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Boise, ID Posts: 21	The slo-mo footage isn't progressive, so doesn't that make it 240 fields a sec? (And, I think it's actually 250)

June 4th, 2007, 08:57 PM	#5
Joe Busch Major Player Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Sammamish, WA Posts: 398	240 / 4 = 60 Pretty sure it's fields, 240 frames would be rediculous. 120 frames isn't THAT unbelievable if it's for a short burst (camera can store that in a buffer) Thought it was for 12 seconds? Either way I want an FX7 to test it out :)

June 5th, 2007, 06:18 AM	#6
Paul Frederick Major Player Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: WestChazy, NY Posts: 291	The super-slo-mo feature is of such poor quality I find it unusable. It's only good for checking your golf swing or something. It would never work for broadcast, maybe web but you'll see, it's all blocky.

June 5th, 2007, 05:45 PM	#8
Robert Young Trustee Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Coronado Island Posts: 1,472	I've been disappointed with the in-camera slo mo effect. I think I get a better image applying After Effects Timewarp in post. That adds some softness to the image, but doesn't generate the other kinds of artifacts I see in my V1 in-camera effect. The one suggested thing I haven't tried yet is to shoot the slo mo in HDV, bring it into the NLE as Cineform CFHD avi, convert the CFHD directly to standard def m2v, burn it to a DVD and watch it on a TV monitor. That's supposed to give a more acceptable image, similar to what you see on the Sony V1 demo DVD. I would appreciate hearing from anyone who has done something like this. If not, I'll try it myself and report back.

June 5th, 2007, 09:04 PM	#9
Joe Busch Major Player Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Sammamish, WA Posts: 398	Anyone try converting their slow motion footage to progressive?