Related
Hi guys
I think Xperia doesnt really capture videos in VGA @30fps
I had a nokia n95 8gb and the videos were waaaay better.
but not only that
i recorded in vga mode a 40s video and that was 2.4MB that means around 60KB/s and that means 2KB per every frame.?????!!!!! if there are 30 frames per second.(and not forget that there is also the audio so the frame size is lower than 2KB)
The funny thing is that the video size IS 640x480. so in my opinion
the videos are caught in a low resolution for example 320x240 every frame gets interpolated to 640x480 and then saved as video.... could this be true ??? what do u think.
I don't know the details but most mpeg encoders deal with I and P frames. Something to do with they take a full frame picture, and then for the next x amount of frames encode only the delta between succesive images, then another full frame I.e. if the image does not change much, then not much data will be used as there has been not much change... etc
even if the X1 takes video at 640x480 and 30fps that doesnt say anything about the quality of the chipset, which quite crappy if you ask me. Video recording quality is horrible for such an expensive device.
man, it's seem you know nothing about video encoding and you complaint x1's capacity is fake. the msg above is correct and that's why action movie normally bigger in size due to massive different between frames. there are other tricks (color pattern), algorithm and compression to reduce the size even futher
The problem is the cmos camera - not the pixels at which it is stored.
Like most mobile phones, the cmos for capturing the image is too small and not sensitive enough, therefore the quality is usually crap! and it doesn't matter what resolution you store the image/video as, cause the source was crap to start off with.
informatico said:
Hi guys
The funny thing is that the video size IS 640x480. so in my opinion
the videos are caught in a low resolution for example 320x240 every frame gets interpolated to 640x480 and then saved as video.... could this be true ??? what do u think.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought so at first too, since the quality was so bad in VGA-mode. But if you record a video of a motionless view and hold the camera very still you will see there is a difference between QVGA and VGA. So I think the bad quality in VGA-mode is the result of very hard compression.
I really hope they fix that.
yeah ... you're right
I just noticed something that i find a bit weird, even though it supports my previous statement.
I recorded two videos with the X1. They are almost exactly the same length (it differs less than a second), and the scenes are also identical. One is VGA and the other is QVGA.
Since the size of VGA is four times bigger than QVGA I would expect the VGA recording to have a bigger file size. Maybe not four times bigger, but at least clearly larger.
But actually the QVA recording was slightly bigger. Only 40 kB though, so they are basically the same size.
No wonder we experience the VGA recording to be of low quality.
Not used to making video's as all my previous phones
Universal,Hermes,TytnII,Raphael,Touch HD didn't make them too well.
So just tried out making video's while driving (as a passenger) and
they look stunningly good. There's lot's of sun/cloud changes
and it picks up beautifully.
Frame rate is above 20FPS average in MPEG 640x480. Nice.
EDIT : from comments below I see most people expect more. For once I'm on the satisfied side
What .. it too can't play 640x480 flawlessly ? I saw some benchmarks which played such videos at 200%.
Dr.Sid said:
What .. it too can't play 640x480 flawlessly ? I saw some benchmarks which played such videos at 200%.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you read his comment???? where does it say it cant play 640x480
A sample recording would be nice
Smooth playback is 24 fps and beyond. if it's between 20-24, it sucks.
It's the recording rate in 640x480 not the playback speed.
It will almost always keep the 23.99 frames per second while recording
So I meant to say, it's a great video recorder.
I think the title of this thread is a little bit naive!
C'mon 640 x 480 has been on most high end phones now since 2006!
We now have alot of phones with 640 x 480, a fair few with 720 x 480 (D1?) and one or two with 720p recording.
The hardware in this phone is capable of 720p as is that of the Palm Pre, Iphone 3GS and probably others too.
So, in summary - I dont see 640 x 480 as amazingly good at all!
On the topic, do any devs think it would be possible to up the recording to it's 720p capabilities?
See above. I accidently posted twice.
jamuk2004 said:
The hardware in this phone is capable of 720p
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Qualcomm advertises Snapdragon (rather over-optimistically in my opinion) as being capable of 720p video playback - where do they say it's capable of 720p capture?
My bad !
I did not notice he talks about RECORDING, I thought he talks about playback.
lucid said:
Frame rate is above 20FPS average in MPEG 640x480. Nice.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So video quality is "surprisingly mediocre", then. Is there any non-HTC smartphone in the world that can't manage at least 30fps at VGA resolution? The Samsung i8910HD can almost manage 24fps at a resolution of 1280x720. If the HD2 could better that, then maybe you could describe it as "amazingly good".
The Snapdragon probably should be able to record in 720P from a hardware point of view. My currrent phone, the i8910, records in 720P at around 22-24fps, and its only packing a 600mhz Cortex 8 CPU.
So i went to the registry and messed with some values a bit. I set the bitrate much higher than the default. It would still capture video @ about 25 fps. Can't really tell the difference in quality, but the filesize has increased by a 100%. I'll try to see if there are more reg settings to mess around.
NZtechfreak said:
The Snapdragon probably should be able to record in 720P from a hardware point of view. My currrent phone, the i8910, records in 720P at around 22-24fps, and its only packing a 600mhz Cortex 8 CPU.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's a lot more to it than CPU power, I think - it's a bandwidth issue rather than MIPS. I wouldn't be surprised if Windows Mobile imposes some limitations too.
Hi,
we can take photos in 3.2 megapixel, so why we can not record video in this resolution or in 1megapixel resolution?
this 3 steps maybe can work
3 easy steps
- if reason is weak processor speed? overlock it
- if reason is low ram? extend it with microSD card and apply SD-Booster
- custom recording app with modified recording resolution. or only change /data/local.prop (but not work for most phones)
True
Sent from my GT-I5800
what a breaktrough!!! xD if it were that simple we would have 720p recording by now
ya.. it s possible.. but it just damn hard.. may b it needs to rewrite the vid rec driver.. :/
Sent from my GT-I5800 using Tapatalk
erikkubica said:
Hi,
we can take photos in 3.2 megapixel, so why we can not record video in this resolution or in 1megapixel resolution?
this 3 steps maybe can work
3 easy steps
- if reason is weak processor speed? overlock it
- if reason is low ram? extend it with microSD card and apply SD-Booster
- custom recording app with modified recording resolution. or only change /data/local.prop (but not work for most phones)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"extend it with microSD card and apply SD-Booster" ? ? ?
Really?
darksyde18 said:
"extend it with microSD card and apply SD-Booster" ? ? ?
Really?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i think he meant swap partition..
Ever thought about this:
- sensor not good enought to record 60 (or even 30/15) Photos with 3,2 MP in one second
Every other camera also needs to lower the resolution when recording video. Thats not a question of processor speed or RAM.
rueolps said:
Every other camera also needs to lower the resolution when recording video. Thats not a question of processor speed or RAM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So...
what about this:
Apple Ipod Touch 4G
Camera
Photo: 0.7MP (960 x 720), It's VGA!
Video recording:720p 30fps, it's HD!
cadusir said:
So...
what about this:
Apple Ipod Touch 4G
Camera
Photo: 0.7MP (960 x 720), It's VGA!
Video recording:720p 30fps, it's HD!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
everything depends on the sensor......ours can handle higher res recording
but drivers need to be edited...
im trying to get a kernel with higher res but the drivers are tough and i have no
c++ experience...
darksyde18 said:
"extend it with microSD card and apply SD-Booster" ? ? ?
Really?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Copied from android market:
SD-Booster speeds up your SD-Card (external memory-card) up to 40 times! Enjoy a new feeling of speed on your Android smartphone anytime and everywhere you are.
Starting apps, listing to your favorite music or just swapping data with your PC ? Whatever you do, the SD-Booster improve your phone speed!
SD-Booster needs root permission to run, otherwise SD-Booster can't do anything!
------------------------------------------------
I dont know this is really working but....
rueolps said:
- sensor not good enought to record 60 (or even 30/15) Photos with 3,2 MP in one second
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So try to record your PC desktop with 30fps in resolution 1280x1024 with PATA/ATA HDD and 2GHz processor (1 core) if your HDD is low it cannot save 30 images(frames) per second to your HDD without lag.
If processor is low for rendering 30 frames frames in 1280x1024 resolution into video file and if HDD is too slow to write it, it is Fail. so if in our mobile is possible to speed up read/write speed of sd card and is possible to overlock cpu from 667MHz to 1300MHz, increase the ram using swap, so hardware side is done.
I think it is possible to change /or create custom\ driver for camera and customize recording resolution to our phone.
Sensor is one, If it can capture photo in 3.2MP it can also capture 25 photos/frames\ per second in 3.2MP and render it into video file without lags.
But I think 3.2MP is too much for our devices hardware. So 720pixel is enough to record a pretty nice video.
im trying to get a kernel with higher res but the drivers are tough and i have no
c++ experience..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am only php developer so I cant help you in this :-\
you are talking about filmin a video in 3.2 megapixel?!?!? are you out of your mind? Good cameras and high end phones take video in 1080p - that is 1920x1080=2megapixels. You think our little phone can do better? Its not only about RAM, CPU, the drivers need to be reworked but there are always hardware limitations that can not be changed. I'll bet all my money that there is no possible way to get even 720p video with our phone. If we get vga (640x480) recording we can be very happy. That is really hard to do, it may even be impossible since that is 4 times the current quality and it probably takes 4 times more power from memory, CPU, GPU, RAM and 4 months of making new drivers.
ka'cipeder said:
you are talking about filmin a video in 3.2 megapixel?!?!? are you out of your mind? Good cameras and high end phones take video in 1080p - that is 1920x1080=2megapixels. You think our little phone can do better? Its not only about RAM, CPU, the drivers need to be reworked but there are always hardware limitations that can not be changed. I'll bet all my money that there is no possible way to get even 720p video with our phone. If we get vga (640x480) recording we can be very happy. That is really hard to do, it may even be impossible since that is 4 times the current quality and it probably takes 4 times more power from memory, CPU, GPU, RAM and 4 months of making new drivers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not in 3.2 in 720pixel
This theory could work, but I think we need a driver re-write. Not only that, but can our GPU even display 720p +?
erikkubica said:
not in 3.2 in 720pixel
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Someone was arguing about video in 3.2mp. Anyway, we can't even play 720p video without stutering, so recording is impossible. VGA could be possible however, lg p500 has vga recording with 600mhz CPU and better GPU, if we can get the CPU to do more job than GPU there is a chance. Unless the sensor just can't take it, then we are stuck.
ka'cipeder said:
Someone was arguing about video in 3.2mp. Anyway, we can't even play 720p video without stutering, so recording is impossible. VGA could be possible however, lg p500 has vga recording with 600mhz CPU and better GPU, if we can get the CPU to do more job than GPU there is a chance. Unless the sensor just can't take it, then we are stuck.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
we should be aiming for about 720x480 or close......
its a good res and our gpu should be able to handle it!
i can smoothly play dvd rips on mine without lag or anything at stock speed..
sensor shouldnt be a prob we just need a guy who is good with c++ knowledge
or driver writing experience....anyone?? if u need help with kernel i have successfully compiled a kernel from source and have all the necesary tools
It would be good if we were able to record in aac audio quality,and not like now - in amr.
What will give to us higher resolution if audio is horrible ?
GT-I5800 (Galaxy 3) Video Recording: increase please
Hello at all,
i use the DutchMods ROM V5.3 on my Galaxy 3. In my opinion it's a perfect firmware... but there is a thing: poor camera (Photo and Video). It don't change change from Samsung Stock one. Video has 320x240... a very poor resolution. I think there is some possibilities to increase the resolution to 640x480 (15 fps). The solution can be a post elaboration. When you save the video, the apk Interlace the photo or video. In this way you can have 640x480 video and more high megapixel in photo. The are very good routines for interlace (for example in N70 Nokia there was a program who shot 4 photos and build an high resolution photo using 4 low res photo). The same with video : 320x240 can be 640x480 video with less number of frames. It's a suggest for all custom firmwares.
Thank you at all.
Bye.
Jean-Luke
Talking is useless guys..
This is intended for Froyo
Records at 1920X1080 2mp
but video players decode it to a lower rate
unreal3000 said:
we just need a guy who is good with c++ knowledge
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
of course , this is DAMN C++
erikkubica said:
if reason is low ram? extend it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ARE YOU KIDDING ?
"I can see that SDbooster or whatever, even if it converts the r/w speed to 1TBps, its not to be used as a ram
SD card is a removable media, "if it can hold apps moved from the phone memory, IT IS MOVING. same for data and everything.."
but by no means it can be used as "Random Access Memory"
RAM is directly connected to the phone and it is permanent. Thats all a person can explain"
BTW, reason is the SCREEN RESOLUTION and LENS
rueolps said:
Ever thought about this:
- sensor not good enought to record 60 (or even 30/15) Photos with 3,2 MP in one second
Every other camera also needs to lower the resolution when recording video. Thats not a question of processor speed or RAM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think that is a problem cause 25 FPS is enough right!!
I'd like to use my Note to record a mini training session (on the computer monitor). I guess I'd be recording about 1-2 feet from the screen for a total of 20 minutes. I think it's far enough to be able to still read the words on the monitor.
Anyway, I tested out the recording options and here's what I found so far:
3840x2160 for 20 seconds of recording is 130 MB (~400MB/min of recording)
1280x720 for 1 minute of recording is 92.5 MB (~90MB/min of recording)
The next lowest resolution is 320x240. This would be great for memory but the resolution is so bad that I can't see the monitor clearly.
So for roughly 20 minutes of recording a tutorial, with storage space being of some concern, I would have to go for 1280x720. This would equate to about 2 gigs of space for 20 minutes. This seems rather high since DVD movies are about 2-8 gig for 1.5-2 hours. Or am I comparing apples to oranges.
Do you guys have a better solution on what video settings I should use or maybe there's something that I haven't figured out yet?
first of all DVD has 720x480 (480p) resolution, less if it's wide screen, so Note 3 1280x720 (720p) will take more space since it has more data. Also compressing video on the fly is more difficult, since you have to do it in specific time, before you fill up buffer with following frames, so it's less efficient.
Now for solutions:
1. get micro SD card, they're really not that expensive, just make sure it's x10 speed. They even have 128GB albeit those are expensive.
2. recode video at higher compression rate later on your computer
3. resize the video from 720p to 480p on the computer since Note3 does not support 480p resolution, but it could be best balance between size and quality, but this could be tricky quality wise, since every time you uncompress and compress video you loose detail.
I would say: install screen recording software on your pc, that will give you the best quality.
Sent from my SM-N9005 using xda app-developers app
gschot said:
I would say: install screen recording software on your pc, that will give you the best quality.
Sent from my SM-N9005 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed and filesize will be lower as its optimal.
And please for godssake dont video-record a screen, its just awefull to watch. Can't stress that fact enough. Just DON'T!
(Google for screen recorder)
Hello, you surely already know about the 120fps-Recording of the Note 3. [TAGS TO THIS THREAD: SlowMo|SloMo|Record|Video|Speed]
Like (almost) any other Slow-Motion-Camera, there's something, that really disappoints me!
What disappoints me:
If you record a Slow·Mothion-Video, then the Video will be saved as Slow Motion too!
-Better: Save in Original Speed and in the Player you can slow down - and choose if the Sound keeps the pitch-level while speed adjustment.
IF i record 4 seconds @ 120 Fps, then i want to get a 4sec. Video with 120·FPS.
and not a 16 seconds-video with 30 fps with lost sound.
What i'd like: Save in Original Speed and Includes Sound while Recording!
But even worse: If you get asked to edit the video after that - INFORMATION WILL BE THROWN AWAY!
Well... Xperia Z2 includes the Sound and the WHOLE Scene but the Slown-Down parts
The not-slown-down parts will be saved at normal framerate, so information gets lost.#
The Output file has 30 Fps.
„An Example“ said:
Here's one good example -
IF i record one hour Slow-Motion at 100 Frames per Second, then i don't want 4 Hours with 25 Frames-per-Second in the Output-File.
The outputfle must have Sound and 100 Frames per Second and must be 3600 seconds long in this example!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But the manufacturers think, that all the people like the sucking method!
The sucking method example:
I record 10-Seconds in real-time at 480 fps.
Then the output file has a length of 2 Minutes and 40 Seconds with 30 fps.
Then the Output-File isn't in real time.
That does suck! This sucks!
I want output file with no information loss (full framerate) but at real time with REAL 480 fps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What you'd probably think right now:
Just play the Video at a higher speed in the Video Player!
My Answer:
Oh, i'm soo lucky, that 60 fps at real time is possible! With sound!
I simply want an output file without information loss.
Now what you'd think:
Well, that not-realtime-video which is slown down does have ALL Frames!
My answer - Well, yes... but then in the Video-Specs
What i'd simply wish:
If i record a Video (example: 00:00:10, 96 fps) then i want an output file with the SAME SPECIIFICATIONS.
What i don't want:
If i record a Video (00:00:00:10, 96fps) then i get a Video with a Length of 40 Seconds and 24 Frames per Second.!
NOW DON'T SAY:
„Why is slow-motion called SLOW-Motion?
Because you want to get a Video with SLOW-Motion!“
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then my answer would(avtuallý ) be:
My Personal answer:„Well... ýes but this is what I want. And it is more pratique! The players display real-time-equivalent speeds (1.00x Playing Speed= Original RealTime-Equivalent Speed ) and a Higher Bitrate/REAL second would be maybe worse for devices with weaker processingPower but the filesize would be the same. (4x Higher bitrate but 4x shorter video. Why not 5x higher bitrate? Less detail-loss! (WooHooo!)) “
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Suprised this hasn't been mentioned before, this will be very useful.
@celderic: Thank you very much!
celderic said:
Suprised this hasn't been mentioned before, this will be very useful.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
THank you SOoooooooooo much for UnderStanding mee!
:d :laugh:
Read this post to avoid mistunderstandings...!
Now what you'd think:
Well, that not-realtime-video which is slown down does have ALL Frames!
My answer - Well, yes... but then in the Video-Specs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I Forgot to finish writing here!
Both Videos ([email protected]) and [email protected] both have ALL Frames.
But the RealTime-Equivalent Video with REAL 120 fps is simply better!
Well, it's got 4x higher bitrate but is also 4x shorter.
So the Quality will be approxmintly the same.
If you see a 50fps or 60fps Video (real time), then you'll see how awesome smoothly it is!
120fps at 720p ([email protected] 120/100fps for LUMIX FƵ1000, great!) has a little bit lower resuoloution but runs even more smoothly.
Which mode you choose depends on situration.
4k is for detailed moments if 24-30fps is smoot enough but 60fps for a little bit more movier moments...
120fps is useless because there's no sound and the output file is slown doen.
120fps would be useful in some sitouarations, if the output file would have a RealTime-Equivalen-Speed (1.00x Plaýback Speed ≜ 1x Realtime Speed) and also sound, in the Full Microphone-Quality of the device(can do.!).
Did you know... ?
In (the )most more Advanced Players (Windows and Android) you can slow down playing. 0.125x/12,5%/⅛ Playback speed are also ⅛ in REAL WORLD.
Hannah Stern said:
I Forgot to finish writing here!
Both Videos ([email protected]) and [email protected] both have ALL Frames.
But the RealTime-Equivalent Video with REAL 120 fps is simply better!
Well, it's got 4x higher bitrate but is also 4x shorter.
So the Quality will be approxmintly the same.
If you see a 50fps or 60fps Video (real time), then you'll see how awesome smoothly it is!
120fps at 720p ([email protected] 120/100fps for LUMIX FƵ1000, great!) has a little bit lower resuoloution but runs even more smoothly.
Which mode you choose depends on situration.
4k is for detailed moments if 24-30fps is smoot enough but 60fps for a little bit more movier moments...
120fps is useless because there's no sound and the output file is slown doen.
120fps would be useful in some sitouarations, if the output file would have a RealTime-Equivalen-Speed (1.00x Plaýback Speed ≜ 1x Realtime Speed) and also sound, in the Full Microphone-Quality of the device(can do.!).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the Sucking method:
4x or 8x Playback Speed= Original Speed in the Reality. And no sound. I hate that.
[Hide="Did you know - ?"]So did ýou know? : that you can slow down in more advanced players? And they show those REAL-TIME-EQUILEVANT speeds. 0,25x Playback Speed= 0.25x Real-Time-Eq. Speed! Better method!
And it's quite stupid to think, that everybody likes a slown-down output file - and even without sound (mutid). Muted sound=lost sound information in [umgebung] and 4x playback speed = 1x Speed in Real world? - „Oh no!“ But those manutfacturers think, that everybody likes it. What do you think of it? Simply post it![/HIDE]
So you just need to slow down inside of the player, to see all those small moves.
I find that(/this) better - ... ¡
TItle;: - Note 3 Camera - Slow Mothion Function - Original (real·time) Speed! -–-?
This is simply the [FONT="Courier New"[COLOR="Blue"]]the [/FONT]more
[/COLOR]pracctique waý! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ·! - ·
What do YOU think is better?
How i'd like to have it or the way, the manufacturers do it?
You actually know, what i'd like tO0!
Is the method (that the Manufacturers use) [REALLÝ] BETTER?
...and WHAT is the Advantage of the method, that i don't like soo much for slow motion?
I don't think so- every player must have a Feature for Slow Down, Reverse Playback:laugh: and Ƶoom while Playing/Pause/Preview Frame. (Rotation is very Funny.)
And it must have a Feature to adjust sound mode at Speedup/Slow down! (Keep Original pitch or make it Lower/Higher at Slowdown/Speedup.)
And it may also would be a good idea to use te trick in the Média Players, which one the High-Advanced SmartTV's - „Calculating“ the Frame(s) between 2 Frames. (Works almost perfect for flowent running text ).
Hannah Stern said:
...and WHAT is the Advantage of the method, that i don't like soo much for slow motion?
I don't think so- every player must have a Feature for Slow Down, Reverse Playback:laugh: and Ƶoom while Playing/Pause/Preview Frame. (Rotation is very Funny.)
And it must have a Feature to adjust sound mode at Speedup/Slow down! (Keep Original pitch or make it Lower/Higher at Slowdown/Speedup.)
And it may also would be a good idea to use te trick in the Média Players, which one the High-Advanced SmartTV's - „Calculating“ the Frame(s) between 2 Frames. (Works almost perfect for flowent running text ).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
WooHooooooooooooo! :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh: 256 Posts!!!!!
If the Slow Motion would be, like i described here, then making Slow Motion Videos would be a much bigger fun.
Example Videos:
Here is an example of what i 'd like.:
http://www.dkamera.de/media/testber...100-iii/6_beispielaufnahmen/video/video05.MP4
XAVCS-Coding
With Audio
Real Time 100fps (eqilevant to sensor output.) ☺☻☺♦
But THAT'S what i don't want:
http://www.dkamera.de/media/testber...-fz1000/6_beispielaufnahmen/video/video04.MP4
No Audio
And not Real Time Slow motion. (Sensor: 100 fps, File: 25 fps, really Sucks)
One of the Most shocking things of GSMArena - (in my opinion)
Look here, at the end of the page: http://blog.gsmarena.com/the-apple-iphone-5s-is-not-actually-recording-720p-slo-mo-video/
What i want to talk about is not that with the 480p but...
GSMArena said:
The slow motion clips might look cool on your iPhone, but they look quite disappointing on a TV or a monitor. Which reminds us of our other disappointment about the feature – when we tried to play those iPhone 5s slo-mo videos on a PC we found that unlike all previous slow motion-capable smartphones, the iPhone 5s actually encodes the video at 120 fps and your computer will play it on 120fps unless you explicitly force it to slow the video four times in order to achieve the desired slow-motion effect. It would have been way more natural the iPhone 5s to process the frames and output a standard 30fps video as most of the phones do, which doesn’t require special players and tools to play properly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't know before, that iPhones save with ORIGINAL FRAMERATE and SOUND.
But their opinion is, that the sucking method:laugh: is actually better!
I can actually also understand what they mean, but is there any other reason? ...for the sucking method of taking Slow-Motion Videos
For me it's actually not a disappointment - well done Apple! :laugh:
Im gégenteil - das finde ich toll!
I hope, that all (of) the other manufacturers do the same!
...Canon SX50hs and Sony RX100 :good: DMC-FZ1000 very good camera with [email protected] [Output file 30fps and muted sound ; ( :crying: ]
GSMAréÀ said:
Here’s hoping Apple fixes this promptly with an update – it certainly can’t be that hard.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh no PLEASE NOT!
the standard 30fps video as most of the other phones do
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's too bad.
I respect other opinions. But i prefer my described way to take Slow Motio Videos.
So all the best, and have a nice day!
Ok, Nice Feautre! :laugh:
You can download the original video here - 720p @ 120fps (8MB). You'll need a player capable of reducing the framerate to experience the slowdown, the video itself runs realtime.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This time, i'm really proud of Apple.
Plesae, learn something from here, other manufacturers that do it wrong.
.upscaling from 480p to 720p is still better than taking „SUCKING “ slow-motion videos.. <·
„Piche-Level“ [EXPLAINED]
Hannah Stern said:
Hello, you surely already know about the 120fps-Recording of the Note 3. [TAGS TO THIS THREAD: SlowMo|SloMo|Record|Video|Speed]
Almost every Slow-Motion Capable Device does the Same mistake.
What disappoints me:
If you record a Slow·Mothion-Video, then the Video will be saved as Slow Motion too!
►Better: Save in Original Speed and speed adjustment comes inside of the player
- and being able to choose if the Sound keeps the pitch-level while speed adjustment.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and choose if the Sound keeps the pitch-level while speed adjustment ...inside of the Player.
Pitch-Level
2.0x Playback Speed - 2.0x or always keep x1.0 Pitch Level?
For example: VLC Always keeps x1.0, indipendant from Playback Speed. But MPC-HC► makes the Pitch-Level dependent from the Playback Speed (► x2.0 = ♫♪x2.0)
Pitch Level is Tone Height. aka Pitchbend.
AKA=Also Known As
Have a Nice day
Isssue 4ever
I can't really believe that the new Galaxy Notes alos have this issue.
No Sound and not Realtime.
...
Hrm...
Many manufacturers embarrass theirself by doing the same mistake but good the luck 1[email protected] with sound and realtime is possible.:laugh:
I can't believe that the FƵ1000 and the 255 HS also have that issue.
But the SX50 HS and the RX100/3 are completly free of this issue .
...also, the S5 (not the Note 4) are able to adjust the Playback-Speed in the player...
and... duh, forgot what.
Have a nice day
Links and Info
The Canon IXUS 256 HS would be actually nice - it IS nice. (And also low noise at high iso and full resolution iSO6k)
...but it has this again.
Look here, many people also want AUDIO on Slow Motion.
Link 1
Link 2
Link 3,4,5
Link 6
One Advantage
If you want to see the Slow-Motion effect on a Friendly RT-Slow Motion (Output file is the Same as Sensor Records), you've got to slow down inside of the player to see the Slow-Motion effect. And also... not every player has this feature.
This is a big advantage of the Sucking Method but i think, that it's really the one and only advantage.
My New Thread
New Thread: http://forum.xda-developers.com/general/general/slow-motion-phones-device-how-to-imo-t2998500
If you want, you can still write here!
(With the word „Writing“, i meant „Posting“)
:laugh: