Timeline for What do you call it when the footage has a rippling effect?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2014 at 2:20 | comment | added | AJ Henderson♦ | @JasonConrad - good point. Updated my comment to be more clear. Are you sure that frame rate actually impacts it though? I'd expect that the maximum readout rate is always used, so I wouldn't expect frame rate to make a difference either. | |
| Jun 17, 2014 at 1:29 | comment | added | Jason Conrad | Rolling shutter is independent of shutter speed. dvinfo.net/forum/canon-eos-crop-sensor-hd/… and from dvxuser.com/jason/CMOS-CCD "Skew and other rolling shutter artifacts aren't affected by shutter speed, they're affected by the frame rate." | |
| Jun 16, 2014 at 12:43 | comment | added | AJ Henderson♦ | @connersz no that's the exact opposite of what you want. You need fast shutter, not slow. | |
| Jun 16, 2014 at 11:08 | comment | added | connersz | I read that using an ND filter might help by causing a slower shutter speed. Do you agree with that @AJHenderson? | |
| Jun 15, 2014 at 18:28 | comment | added | AJ Henderson♦ | Hmm, good point. Either way, physical stabilization and/or faster shutter speed is still the answer though. Even with rolling shutter compounding it, the problem is lessened with reduced vibration. | |
| Jun 15, 2014 at 18:27 | comment | added | timonsku | I just imagine a fast ride on a motorcycle or something similar where you can get high frequency vibrations together with a rolling shutter effect when shooting from the side of the moving object. Could be a mixture of both with a result of passing objects jiggling all over the place. | |
| Jun 15, 2014 at 18:24 | history | edited | AJ Henderson♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 9 characters in body
|
| Jun 15, 2014 at 18:23 | comment | added | AJ Henderson♦ | @ProfessorFartSparkle - true, I took that from "affected by vibrations". It's a typical action cam problem. I'm making an assumption in my answer that it was being stabilized (either in software or in camera), but it seems to fit the description a lot more than rolling shutter since that would be "slugish" rather than "vibrations". | |
| Jun 15, 2014 at 18:20 | comment | added | timonsku | He didn't say that the footage got stabilized in software. The effect that gets described could also be a rolling shutter effect. | |
| Jun 15, 2014 at 18:15 | history | answered | AJ Henderson♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |