Related
Been searching for this everywhere!
Can anyone tell me what the frames per second the video capture is at maximum resolution and can you maybe post a sample. Cheers.
Over 30 views and no reply? Someone must know.
padlad said:
Been searching for this everywhere!
Can anyone tell me what the frames per second the video capture is at maximum resolution and can you maybe post a sample. Cheers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi padlad.
To answer your question:
records in MP4 format only @ 15.oo fps and resolution of 320 x 240 max!!
there it is. Dissapointed? I was initially, but the quality is actually better than any other HTC product/device that I have seen.
personally, I'm waiting 'till next month when Aketsofts' Coolcamera Software will be compatible on the hermes. Presently, my old Jamin?HTC Prophet takes much better pictures and higher resolution videos than my Hermes/VarioII, albeit with Coolcameras' help!
So I'm looking forward to next month or end of this month. :wink:
See below for small video recorded on my VarioII/TyTN/Hermes...
Won't allow the upload.
Thanks for that, pity you couldn't upload the sample video
I tried that software on my Wizard yesterday, it was crap, i was only getting 7fps at 320 x 240 and 1 to 2fps at 640 x 480! Maybe its because of the small processor? Anyway, i wasn't impressed.
Quality of camera for trinity is quite good but I don't like the 15 fps movies.
So I went to
HKLM/SOFTWARE/HTC/Camera/Recparam/MP4Large/Framerate
and changed the value from 15 to 30.
I get fluid movies but bitrate stays the same and picture quality is going down.
so I tried to change the BitRate value (384000 by default) but there is no effect. You can put whatever you want, the compression is controlled somewhere else.
Is there a way to increase this bitrate? I don't mind if movies get big as long as quality is improved.
Can you tell mi what is the maximum available video recording resolutin with Trinity and what frame rate?
maximum recording resolution is 352*288 (mode CIF).
In fact I checked that if you change the value:
HKLM/SOFTWARE/HTC/Camera/Recparam/MP4Large/
"Bitrate"=384000
Then whatever value you put the resulting file will be encoded with a default value of 192000.
Nobody has a clue of how the real bitrate is defined for the encoder???
192000 is the value for MP4medium and MP4small profiles.
Isn't it strange?
It's like if you change the value for MP4Large it falls back on MP4medium bitrate value...
Are you sure that trinity actualy record video in 30fps after registry hack? To bad bitrate can't be changed, is mp4 only available format for recording?
I tried it too, indeed de 30 fps tweak works, but bitrate is terrible.
I hope anyone got an idea how to fix this thing.
fraggar said:
I tried it too, indeed de 30 fps tweak works, but bitrate is terrible.
I hope anyone got an idea how to fix this thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you try a slower frame rate, like 25 fps? It is still a pretty good speed.
Matterhorn said:
Did you try a slower frame rate, like 25 fps? It is still a pretty good speed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm wondering how powerful that ATi chip in the Trinity is. If it can handle 30fps with a higher bitrate... let's see if we can squeeze the most of it!
forcedalias said:
I'm wondering how powerful that ATi chip in the Trinity is. If it can handle 30fps with a higher bitrate... let's see if we can squeeze the most of it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I've read, the ATi video chip is not being fully utilized by the ROM, maybe when we get an upgrade that will change.
Matterhorn said:
From what I've read, the ATi video chip is not being fully utilized by the ROM, maybe when we get an upgrade that will change.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not much is being utilized by the current ROM is there? I mean, it's seriously disappointing that HTC decided to release the Trinity with so many features disabled or toned down.
forcedalias said:
Not much is being utilized by the current ROM is there? I mean, it's seriously disappointing that HTC decided to release the Trinity with so many features disabled or toned down.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed that most of the build-in features were disabled or not turned up fully, GPS, USB-Host and now Ati Chips. How HTC can release a "Full features" ROM soon.
Just wondering if anyone's who flashed their Trinity with one of the latest test ROMs noticed any changes to the video performance.
Anybody solve this problem?
also want to im prove videobitrate...
any clues?!
push need help
how to increase videobitrate
1. total amount of memory must be constant (I think)
2. more fps less bitrate
3. decrease fps and increase the bitrate
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.
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:
Why is this not available on the newest version of nexus line?
If you pick a other app, is then possible to record 1080p 60fps?
Send with the App Tapatalk
????
Send with the App Tapatalk
Hmmmm cant see anywhere the answer
Send with the App Tapatalk
Technically speaking the Snapdragon is capable of processing 1080 @ 120 FPS, however there may be either a hardware limit on the sub-processor of camera (haven't even looked if there was one). As far as I can see from the kernel source posted on AOSP there is a high media profile for [email protected] fps and [email protected], Theoretically you might be able to just create another entry in the profile to enable it.
Bump..
Send with the App Tapatalk
I'm very very interested to this discussion! The last nexus 6 was 100% capable of recording fullhd videos @60fps but Google disable that function and nobody know why, I was absolutely sure that in this nexus 6p that record mode would be present! There are no reason why it should be disabled, who cares if I can record a bird at 240fps (in slow motion), how many times somebody use this functions? One in a month?
How many instead make some (normal) videos? Maybe two/three times a week or even more and recording @ 60fps instead of 30fps is like day and night! Damn Google.
Why would you ever want to record 1080p videos @ 60fps? You would never be able to tell the difference from from 30fps. The human eye can only see about 42-45 fps. If you shoot a video at 60fps it is actually going to look unnatural. Most that shoot 60fps do so only because they intend to slow it down to 30fps in post production.
30fps is the standard and it is rare to shoot video at higher frame rates. In fact, shooting at 60fps would reduce your shutter speed requiring more light to get a quality video.
nonnasmyladie said:
Why would you ever want to record 1080p videos @ 60fps? You would never be able to tell the difference from from 30fps. The human eye can only see about 42-45 fps. If you shoot a video at 60fps it is actually going to look unnatural. Most that shoot 60fps do so only because they intend to slow it down to 30fps in post production.
30fps is the standard and it is rare to shoot video at higher frame rates. In fact, shooting at 60fps would reduce your shutter speed requiring more light to get a quality video.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because 60fps looks a lot better - obviously.
I don't know how you, or anybody can even come close to thinking the 30 frames per second is OK when you have the option of 120 and 240.
Have you never seen a YT video with 60fps!? Yeah... You're blind if you can't see the difference. It makes no sense for Google to have those very high frame rate options but still not have 60 frames per second at 1080p.
Also, no, you are wrong about people slowing down 60 frames per second video. You would slow down 120 or 240, yes, but nobody in their right mind would use 60 frames per second down to 30 in today's world. You would just use the 60 frames per second video because it looks a lot smoother.
You sound very ignorant in your post. Nearly all of what you said is bull****.
nonnasmyladie said:
Why would you ever want to record 1080p videos @ 60fps? You would never be able to tell the difference from from 30fps. The human eye can only see about 42-45 fps. If you shoot a video at 60fps it is actually going to look unnatural. Most that shoot 60fps do so only because they intend to slow it down to 30fps in post production.
30fps is the standard and it is rare to shoot video at higher frame rates. In fact, shooting at 60fps would reduce your shutter speed requiring more light to get a quality video.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know about your source, but the human eyes are seeing the world at arround 2000fps.
PS: you can clearly see the difference between 30vs60 and you can see a little difference at 120fps
I think that poster is either a troll or a moron - or has been reading console forums (because anyone with half a brain knows that what they said is a complete lie)
Me thinks they didn't read before spewing garbage. Shame really...
marcoruzza said:
I'm very very interested to this discussion! The last nexus 6 was 100% capable of recording fullhd videos @60fps but Google disable that function and nobody know why, I was absolutely sure that in this nexus 6p that record mode would be present! There are no reason why it should be disabled, who cares if I can record a bird at 240fps (in slow motion), how many times somebody use this functions? One in a month?
How many instead make some (normal) videos? Maybe two/three times a week or even more and recording @ 60fps instead of 30fps is like day and night! Damn Google.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
nonnasmyladie said:
Why would you ever want to record 1080p videos @ 60fps? You would never be able to tell the difference from from 30fps. The human eye can only see about 42-45 fps. If you shoot a video at 60fps it is actually going to look unnatural. Most that shoot 60fps do so only because they intend to slow it down to 30fps in post production.
30fps is the standard and it is rare to shoot video at higher frame rates. In fact, shooting at 60fps would reduce your shutter speed requiring more light to get a quality video.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
iRub1Out said:
Because 60fps looks a lot better - obviously.
I don't know how you, or anybody can even come close to thinking the 30 frames per second is OK when you have the option of 120 and 240.
Have you never seen a YT video with 60fps!? Yeah... You're blind if you can't see the difference. It makes no sense for Google to have those very high frame rate options but still not have 60 frames per second at 1080p.
Also, no, you are wrong about people slowing down 60 frames per second video. You would slow down 120 or 240, yes, but nobody in their right mind would use 60 frames per second down to 30 in today's world. You would just use the 60 frames per second video because it looks a lot smoother.
You sound very ignorant in your post. Nearly all of what you said is bull****.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
warplane95 said:
I don't know about your source, but the human eyes are seeing the world at arround 2000fps.
PS: you can clearly see the difference between 30vs60 and you can see a little difference at 120fps
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
iRub1Out said:
I think that poster is either a troll or a moron - or has been reading console forums (because anyone with half a brain knows that what they said is a complete lie)
Me thinks they didn't read before spewing garbage. Shame really...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can definitely say that I can see it. Between 30fps and 60fps. Soooo much smoother and crisp. If you look a sample on youtube. You only want 60 fps.
Send with the App Tapatalk
The human eye does not "view" at around 2000fps, it doesn't actually see in any fps while viewing the natural world. The human eye sees things live, as in ~fps. Those of us with good eyesight can definitely see the screen refresh on lower rates like 60fps. My TV is 1080p hd @ 50hz (which is not fps) & its gotten so painful to watch it, that I am considering a new TV. When you watch a 60fps video on a 50hz TV, the refresh rate & the frames of the video don't coincide & make the experience jumpy. 30fps looks better because the fps is slower than the refresh rate.
On our 2k phone screens however 30fps looks jumpy because the resolution is higher & our eyes are trying to view it in the same manner as we view the natural world.
iRub1Out said:
I think that poster is either a troll or a moron - or has been reading console forums (because anyone with half a brain knows that what they said is a complete lie)
Me thinks they didn't read before spewing garbage. Shame really...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I actually studied photography and film extensively in college as it was my major. It is true that 30fps is standard and 60fps would look awkward. There are some human eyes that notice changes up to 200fps but those are basically jet pilots, the exception not the rule. No human eye would be able to notice 2,000 fps. That is not possible. Lastly, set your camera to 240 fps and see how everything gets darker. That isn't a lie. It is a fact that high frame rates will result in darker, noiser videos because they require more light.
60 fps is not a good speed to shoot at. Especially in a sensor without IS. You will get more jitter in your video. I produce video for a living, as In it is my job and I do it daily. You dont EVER record in 60 fps unless you are capturing very fast action or are intending to slow it down. And when you record in 60 FPS, you always export it at 30 fps or 25 fps from Premier pro of Final cut, whatever you use.
All I know is that on my Note 4, I only record at 60fps 1080p and wow does it ever look better then anything I've ever recorded in 30fps.
Delete.
Photography and videography are not the same.
60fps is better than 30fps for any and all reason regardless of whatever you think you know - nobody agrees with you if they've seen 60fps video. It's day and night, and if you read anything from YT users, gamers, normal humans, they all say 60fps is better - in any scenario.
Back on point, however, still mind blown that this wasn't included with the camera.
I use Premier Pro and After Effects, and 60fps is my only export option - I wouldn't even consider lower unless it was SHOT lower, but never is. Look at my YT page. Nothing under 60fps once I had my hands on a camera capable of 60fps. I practice what I preach.
I would NEVER shoot 60 fps video with an intention to slow it down, that's stupid - that's what 120/240fps are for - those are to be slowed down.
60 fps is for normal viewing speed - anything higher is OK to slow down, but 60 down to 30 - no thanks. That's just a waste of good 60fps footage.
Any one tried snap camera on N6P yet? http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2055140
nonnasmyladie said:
Why would you ever want to record 1080p videos @ 60fps? You would never be able to tell the difference from from 30fps. The human eye can only see about 42-45 fps. If you shoot a video at 60fps it is actually going to look unnatural. Most that shoot 60fps do so only because they intend to slow it down to 30fps in post production.
30fps is the standard and it is rare to shoot video at higher frame rates. In fact, shooting at 60fps would reduce your shutter speed requiring more light to get a quality video.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure if you were being sarcastic or not , but I can tell you 100% that a human eye can see beyond whatever you have stated. I game on a 144hz monitor , and yes I could tell and feel the difference between 30/60/144.
Back on topic , I found it very weird already when the Galaxy s6/note 5 with the fast processor not being able to record in 240fps . Also , I've noticed slow motion inconsistencies regarding the 6p's 240fps , some youtube videos look buttery smooth , some looks like some slideshow. No idea what's causing this , any thoughts?
nonnasmyladie said:
I actually studied photography and film extensively in college as it was my major. It is true that 30fps is standard and 60fps would look awkward. There are some human eyes that notice changes up to 200fps but those are basically jet pilots, the exception not the rule. No human eye would be able to notice 2,000 fps. That is not possible. Lastly, set your camera to 240 fps and see how everything gets darker. That isn't a lie. It is a fact that high frame rates will result in darker, noiser videos because they require more light.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't assume what others would find awkward. Guessing a lot like it since Google allows those to see it on Youtube. Even besides that, you say you can't see it or its "awkward". Okay. Me and plenty of others like it and can see the difference. Videos are not dark looking when I record ALL my videos with my iPhone.
Sad to see Google didn't include this with this latest Nexus device.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk