Red one, 4k/3K and wildlife shooting, stuttering shots : back with simple results

[Denis Buhot]

Sorry to be back. I'm just reporting my results, because I feel I had to contribute some input and not simply ask for other people's knowledge.

Now.. I've been around recently, bothering you people all about how to shoot fast moving animals with a red one, avoiding stutter... My specific issue was : how to shoot a golden eagle diplay flight, meaning high speed aerobatics, stooping, , etc., when either some background might be present (not totally out of focus), and/or framing has to be adjusted suddenly in order not to loose the subject because of unpredictable moves and very fast changes in direction, requiring quick reframing. No albatros/pelican/vulture gliding, no swan taking off, no linear move, but rather something like a cheetah after an antilope desperately trying to escape.

Shots had to go from wide to as close as consistent with keeping the eagle in the frame. I had hoped I'd be able to avoid fps higher than 50fps, because I wanted the 3k resolution, and because corresponding higher shutter speeds would require very good light conditions.

I got many replies to my posts, public or private, all interesting and valuable. Some suggesting 3k, 50 fps, shutter speed higher or lower than 180°, some suggesting I had to go 2K. Many implying my video background (50i/60i) had to be sort of emulated in order to get corresponding results.

So, things definitely had to wind up like me, my red one, 6 battery packs, tripod and 300m 2.8 plus water and food, all atop that huge cliff in the middle of nowhere. Actually, eagles were on my side that day, allowing me to repeat the actual shot and try different combinations. And the answer is : you simply can't shoot that kind of shot 4K, and you can't 3K either. As simple as that... I hear some say :*«* of course, just what I said... what else could you expect*?». Ok... Let's assume I'm just speaking to people that know quite a lot about wildlife, and maybe not quite so much about shooting techniques.

To these, it's enough to say that 50 fps won't suffice, shutter speed being either less than 1/100e in order to increase motion blur, or 180°, or up to 1/200e , whatever you might be willing to try. 3K image is just gorgeous, no question, but there are times when the relative speed of the subject/camera will inevitably cause some stuttering, occasionally ruining the shot. Playing slo-mo does not change a thing, of course, except making your suffering longer when you sit watching the dailies..

No surprise to many, then. However, more surprising may be, you won't be able to shoot the same eagle (vulture, bird, whatever) simply soaring/circling 3K, unless the very moment it's facing you, or unless you avoid any background (a totally blurred, or a very soft one, like water may be, will do, though), and unless you avoid any brisk reframing of the subject. Even against the sky and with no distinct background, if you happen to try to make up for being a bit back or ahead of your subject, your image will stutter, because the relative speed of the camera/subject move will exceed the acceptable limit. Naturally, if you should wish to convey the idea of the speed and power of the eagle and try to shoot very wide, camera steady, not following , just letting the bird fly across your frame.. then stutter will be terrible. Anyway, remember your camera moves will have to be absolutely smooth and match your subject's in such a way it will appear almost still in the frame.

What works perfectly if you go 50 or 60i in video, won't work with 50p. The only solution must be to shoot 2K, 120fps or so. I tried various output formats, for instance 10 bits 50i, only making the issue worse.

Of course, golden eagle is just an example, just happening to be my subject here. But there are a lot of wildlife/sports subjects that are equally or more demanding.

I'm reporting because anyone shooting wildlife, especially those with a video background, will face the issue, and will be in need of that one single, very simple answer : forget about 4K/3K, go 2K.. or wait for Epic X.

Red one is absolutely great for many things, and especially when it comes to wides, landscapes, reasonably still subjects. However, IMHO, when Epic X comes up with a reasonable booting time, with 125 fps 4K, 800 iso, it will be a totally superb, absolutely perfect tool for wildlife shooting.

 

[Elsie N]

Buhot, Sounds like you are getting some footage that's o.k. but the occasional "imperfection" is causing OCD for you. Can't you just edit the great footage and not show the imperfect footage? I've been shooting Sandhill cranes using Gibby's suggestions (48fps in 3k 2:1) and then speeding them up in post to normal speed and it is very video like. I also still have the option of showing the footage in slo-mo which is also very appealing.

Don't get me wrong... I support your right to criticize the camera. And I hope you support my right to defend it. Maybe you should just go back to using what you used before the RED One came out?

 

[Denis Buhot]

Christ !! Where did you take ...

Christ !! Where did you take ...

Buhot, Sounds like you are getting some footage that's o.k. but the occasional "imperfection" is causing OCD for you. Can't you just edit the great footage and not show the imperfect footage? I've been shooting Sandhill cranes using Gibby's suggestions (48fps in 3k 2:1) and then speeding them up in post to normal speed and it is very video like. I also still have the option of showing the footage in slo-mo which is also very appealing.

Don't get me wrong... I support your right to criticize the camera. And I hope you support my right to defend it. Maybe you should just go back to using what you used before the RED One came out?

... I'm criticizing the camera !!! I own one, I'm incredibly happy with it, I'm saying it, again, and again... What's the need for defending the camera, I'm a supporter myself. Why do you want me to go back to video, when I'm just eager to get an epic-X... I'm just trying to share my experience for people in similar situations ! That's what' s this forum was set up for, I thought. As for the Red one, it speaks for itself, and one should be allowed to say " it cannot do this, or that", without being suspected to "criticize", in the bad sense.

However, I'm quite interested in your results. Were your cranes in flight ? background present ? What was the approximate framing ? That kind of details is interesting, because I'm not questioning your results. Just wondering about the exact situation.

P.S. I don't post footage, no time.

 

[Dan Hudgins]

Hard edge and Sharpen

Hard edge and Sharpen

The rolling shutter has a hard edge and the OLPF compensation and sharpen all tend to make the "shutter" edge sharper than it would be in a film camera with the shutter close to the back of the lens like an ARRI.

With CCD cameras the "snap" shutter makes the motion blur have a sharper edge than in a movie camera also maybe, with the CMOS the shutter moves, that is what gives the jello effect.

Using wider f/ stops can blur the background more and using less OLPF compensation and sharpen can also help reduce the detail in the edges that get blured so they look softer maybe.

It can be good to not have the image too sharp, since when they get to a HD TV it will sharpen them and make the "picket fencing" and shutter artifacts stand out more.

Using "360" degrees will reduce the bands in the backgroun blur, but will not look so much like a movie camera. Try setting the camera to 360 degrees and pan over various backgrounds, then look at the results, if you see bands rather than just streaks without detail then something odd is going on?

 

[Elsie N]

... I'm criticizing the camera !!! I own one, I'm incredibly happy with it, I'm saying it, again, and again... What's the need for defending the camera, I'm a supporter myself. Why do you want me to go back to video, when I'm just eager to get an epic-X... I'm just trying to share my experience for people in similar situations ! That's what' s this forum was set up for, I thought. As for the Red one, it speaks for itself, and one should be allowed to say " it cannot do this, or that", without being suspected to "criticize", in the bad sense.

However, I'm quite interested in your results. Were your cranes in flight ? background present ? What was the approximate framing ? That kind of details is interesting, because I'm not questioning your results. Just wondering about the exact situation.

P.S. I don't post footage, no time.

Cranes were shot with a 60-300mm Tokina. Normally shoot using a 50-300 Nikon but didn't have it mounted when the shots materialized. I shot some footage recently at 23.98 of cranes coming in for a landing. They very much resembled the Concorde when it would come in, landing gear extended, nose pointed slightly forward. They came from a grey sky onto a tan stalk field that is surrounded by trees. I think the trees were green at the time. There wasn't much wind and the trees in the frame were at least a quarter mile away, so tree movement would not have been a problem.

The most recent footage I shot with the 48 fps setup wasn't as close and was probably mostly cranes lifting off from the ground. Again, from a stalk field up and across the trees and finally into a mid-morning sky. Beautiful in slo-motion.

As do your eagles, cranes often act acrobatically as I remember from my shooting days with an XL-1 and a GL-1. I distinctly remember shots using those cameras taken on a windy day when the cranes would come in to land and a gust of wind would catch their wings the wrong way and almost instantaneously one wing would go perpendicular to the ground while still outstretched and the bird would slightly over compensate and finally right itself and settle in for a hard landing. This would happen in a stalk field but to my eye, at least, there was no problem with the standard definition footage.

Like you, I post no footage. (Dial-up internet)

Sorry if I took your meaning wrong. Not defending the Red Digital Cinema whatever; but it seemed you were disrespecting MY camera. I know it is an inanimate object (at least when it's not turned on) but it has become a part of me. I could never understand why so many cameramen were killed during WWII, until I started shooting one myself. When you are recording a scene, it's as though nothing else is going on except what's coming through the lens. Camera and cameraperson become one.

edit: just re-read your post and it is as you said, for informational purposes only. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

 

[Denis Buhot]

Nice post, Elsie, don't worry...

Nice post, Elsie, don't worry...

you got my meaning right this time ! Besides, I understand your feeling. Thanks for the details. I'm really interested in understanding properly what the situation was, and why you got good results when some of mine will result in useless shots or will cause me to cut severely.

E.g : were the cranes coming facing you ? or rather perpendicular to the lens axis ? how wide were the shots ? lots of sudden reframing to follow erratic moves ? All the details matter and again, the question is not to criticize, but should be : how to use my red one at the best it can do and learn how to deal with various real situations, until we get some even better tool.

Please feel free to PM me if you feel such details are of no public interest. As a matter of fact, I think they are to anyone in our particular field.

All the best, DB

 

[Lauri Kettunen]

Hi Buhot, I've been testing similar things as you. For the very reason that if I pan slowly or quickly 25p with shutter speed 1/50s, the outcomes look pretty bad when opening the file in Redcine or other program. Find the same effect altough the pan is made by a motor with very smooth motion. Never had such problems with XL H1 or XL2 and thus have wondered what causes it. Panning 25p, 1/60s looks ok.

Now, there seem to be two things that matter. First of all, in Europe we prefer 25p but the refresh rate of computer displays is 60Hz. This seem to be one source of confusion. Second, if I export a file properly from After Effects say to a Cineform HD file and then view it on the computer, the exported file looks just ok and even better when make a dvd and view it from the TV. Have you tried to process the files properly before making conclusions?

What comes to big birds, such as cranes or swans, 2K, 50p (100p) and shutter speed 1/120s (1/240s) seems wo work out nicely. I've also tested 3K, 50p and 1/120s and found this to produce natural feeling of the motion of wings. In some cases in lack of light been forced to use 4K, 25p and 1/25s or 3K, 50p and 1/50s and, again, the motion of wings does not attract the eye but instead appears natural.

 

[Elsie N]

you got my meaning right this time ! Besides, I understand your feeling. Thanks for the details. I'm really interested in understanding properly what the situation was, and why you got good results when some of mine will result in useless shots or will cause me to cut severely.

E.g : were the cranes coming facing you ? or rather perpendicular to the lens axis ? how wide were the shots ? lots of sudden reframing to follow erratic moves ? All the details matter and again, the question is not to criticize, but should be : how to use my red one at the best it can do and learn how to deal with various real situations, until we get some even better tool.

Please feel free to PM me if you feel such details are of no public interest. As a matter of fact, I think they are to anyone in our particular field.

All the best, DB

I think I'm getting an even better idea of which you speak. And if I'm correct, i.e. that you shoot close in and then zoom out and refocus when the eagle takes an unexpected turn or dive on you, then all I can say is... I can't do that very well and that is perhaps why I haven't experienced your problem.

Only a few minutes ago I tried to follow a hawk off a highline pole as it dove on a mouse or something. Tried to follow with full zoom and lost the animal immediately. Got a second chance when the hawk went back to its perch and zoomed out just a smidge. Got the next shot very nicely when it dove.

The way I can make something like this work is because of 4k when I shoot that... and with a more user friendly PC version of Redcine X that's supposed to be coming very soon, I hope to do even better with a 4.5k setting.

That is, I shot some footage of a girl on a Seadoo putting on quite a Seadoo skating performance for my camera over the Labor Day Weekend. Never knew which way she would go next since she was performing freestyle, so I backed off my lens just enough so I could still judge her head, and thus her eye, movement. Was able to get almost every axle and turn she threw at me. Then, in post I simply cropped and zoomed while still at 4k and then down sampled or re-encoded in Media Encoder to go out to DVD.

Not saying this in any way fits your situation, but just in case thought I would throw it out anyway.

As for the crane shots, there was no changing of the framing during any of the shots. The cranes generally came from behind me and would glide in to the field in front. Often they would veer to my right and come back in to touch down from right to left. Take-offs were usually in an oblique path from somewhere in front to a point off my right shoulder. But sometimes perpendicular to my line of sight.

edit: after reading Lauri Kettunen's post, thought I should mention that the Seadoo footage was shot at 4k 2:1, 23.98 framerate and shutterspeed of 1/48. When viewing in Premiere on the computer at 23.98 framerate or on the DVD converted to 30 fps, there was no stutter any visual anomaly.

 

[Denis Buhot]

Elsie and Laurie..

Elsie and Laurie..

I think I'm getting an even better idea of which you speak. And if I'm correct, i.e. that you shoot close in and then zoom out and refocus when the eagle takes an unexpected turn or dive on you, then all I can say is... I can't do that very well and that is perhaps why I haven't experienced your problem.

Thanks for your posts

Elsie, as a matter of fact, I don't zoom out/refocus.. because it ruins the shot. I do it only when forced to do it. Whether you subject appears "big" or "small" in the frame does matter a lot. Except when the eagle is flying across full speed with my camera still, I don't experience anything unusual with wide shots.

Laurie. I've been suspecting that encoding/monitoring could be part of my problem. I've been asking here about that. I got no specific answer like yours, however simple it was to close the subject just answering. Great post for me, then. I'll perform tests, and be back to correct possibly undue conclusions asap.

 

[Pietro Impagliazzo]

This thread got me thinking... Would RED cameras benefit from having interlaced capture?

Sensor read out would be improved, stutter would be reduced and 60i is still a standard out there.

 

[Craig Parkes]

Buhot, one thing you don't say - what timebase where you shooting at and how are you processing the footage in post, what sort of timeline are you working on when editing in post?

 

[Denis Buhot]

yes, Craig

yes, Craig

Buhot, one thing you don't say - what timebase where you shooting at and how are you processing the footage in post, what sort of timeline are you working on when editing in post?

quite right. I'm shooting 25fps as a time base (I'm based in France), 50fps varispeed. I've tried some output formats (e.g 10 bits, 50 i) with no success. And my computer monitor is running 60 hz. Believe me, the only thing I wish is to be told : "what you see is pure monitoring artifact, and improper processing, here is the codec you should use to watch your dailies". Laurie suggested very much the same (see post above). Because, at present, I'm sort of working "blind". Obviously, post is not my primary concern now, but rather basic footage acquisition, because my project is in the (very) long run, say 5 years. I concentrate on shooting, just wanting to be sure that my hard work is not in vain, because of improper settings of the camera. Thanks for any input .

 

[paul engstrom]

Hi Buhot -- I'm not sure if you've followed Laurie's posts elsewhere but I think you very much want to keep connecting with him; he's certainly the guy I'd be talking to if I had your types of questions. Does a lot of wildlife footage and knows the camera extremely well.

Good luck with this and keep posting what works well for you. Thanks.

 

[Denis Buhot]

Paul, thanks for advising ...

Paul, thanks for advising ...

Hi Buhot -- I'm not sure if you've followed Laurie's posts elsewhere but I think you very much want to keep connecting with him

and yes, I'm in touch with Laurie ! The man to be in touch with, indeed... He has faced the same issue, and apparently found it to be no real issue... It seems I'm experiencing problems that could derive only from lack of proper post processing plus monitoring bias. My footage might be perfectly ok, and just "look" badly stuttering... I might have drawn hasty conclusions.

Anyway, with the help of Laurie and others, I'll be back as soon as I can with more grounded input, and hopefully the end of the story will read like this : "when using the red one, just don't simply sit and watch your priceless dailies on redrushes/red cine... keep cool, and rather process them this/that way before you make conclusions". Some routine I was not used to. Worth the time !

Strangely enough, I don't remember reading this very simple rule !

 

[Craig Parkes]

Buhot - if you are shooting 50 Varispeed, and delivering high def, you should export a quicktime as progressive 50 frames per second and then treat it as such.

That way you will get smoother motion on playback, and no 'slowmo' at 50 because you will be playing back at 50, and able to deliver to 720p50 HD (an acceptable HD deliverable in much of Europe) or 1080i50 by applying interlacing, or even 1080p50 at a later date if that becomes a usable delivery format.

If you are capturing at 50 frames per second, playing back at 50 frames per second, and have an appropriate shutter angle, then you will pretty much identical motion characteristics as interlaced video, except with a higher perceptible resolution, and you'll also be able to create an IDENTICAL information stream to 50i footage.

However, to get to an SD or even HD interlaced output from your original progressive frame rate requires down conversion and correct processing to generate the interlaced footage, and if this is done incorrectly (footage is interlaced before down conversion, or is interlaced from a 25FPS timeline rather than a 50FPS timeline etc.) you will potentially get unacceptable artifacting.