Leaderboard

[media]http://vimeo.com/71582077[/media] Perspective Aerials have released (in small quantities) a new $4500 rig which promises to replicate the performance of MoVI for much less than FreeFly System's $15,000 asking price. [url=http://www.eoshd.com/content/11026/perspective-aerials-match-movi-performance-at-13rd-of-price]Read the full article here[/url]

Vincent Laforet will obviously come out and extol how revolutionary this is right? I mean it opens everything up for filmmakers doesn't it as it is so much cheaper than the Movi.  

I love the images coming out of this camera and the form factor, I almost ordered this but pulled back due to lack of IS support, will definitely reconsider if they enable it. 

It's because the guy demonstrating rock steady was sliding the camera from side to side while also making rotational moves, he did not keep his movements tight. Whereas the movi guy did the same demo without sliding the camera from side to side, he kept his rotational movements in a tight circle without sliding side to side. The key is to watch the actual camera base and body...both rock steady and movi stay perfectly level.

I'm here Andrew because I think someone needs to put forward this point of view. Not because it's correct in all cases. But the opposite of isn't correct in all cases either. And I believe most cases.   I want to see something substantial from you Andrew. At least a 30 minute short or something, where you have primary responsibility as both director and DP. I haven't reviewed your history at all but I've read this site for over a year and I imagine you'd refer to something if you had done it. With that hindsight I do think you'd amplify rather than be allergic to my comments. I think you'd survive the experience. And your blog would be better off for it, as you'd see what your readership is really struggling with as opposed to helping them join you in constantly putting off judgment day for your art by focusing on preparing some arbitrarily interchangeable part.

  Actually it's non-moving shots that interlacing helps. For a given bit rate, you have a certain amount of resolution you can represent. On progressive scan you have to show every line in the same frame, so there's less information you can squeeze into that bit rate. If you instead skip every other line for one frame and do them on the next, and back and forth, you can represent the same resolution at half the bit rate. However, when your footage is in motion, there will be scan lines on the edges of the motion as you are combining two different frames where the subject was in two different places.   That's an ugly artifact and for fast-motion shots you would often rather do 720p than 1080i. But for still shots with no changes from frame to frame 1080i is essentially just as good as 1080p yet half the bandwidth, and for the same e.g. 50Mbps bandwidth the 1080i will actually be better than what you can do 1080p at least with an intraframe codec. Long GOP codecs like H.264 relieve a lot of that problem by incorporating information from multiple frames, but introduce other artifacts of their own.   You can interpolate 1080i60 to 1080p60 for slo-mo but you do run the risk of the interlacing artifacts on edges. This is how you can get slo-mo on the C100 for instance. All the 4K modes for the BMD listed are progressive and therefore can't be used for slo-mo other than with something like Twixtor if that supports 4K now.