Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Rolling shutter different for Scarlet?

U

Uli Plank

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
2,664
Reaction score
2
Points
38
Age
73
Location
Braunschweig, Germany
Website
www.hbk-bs.de
We all know that the Scarlet is slower regarding frame rates. But is there any difference regarding read-out times for the sensor – like more RS?

TIA
 
I don't believe so. From what I've seen rolling shutter issues are there but barely noticeable at all.
 
I'll check it tomorrow, we'll get an Epic to compare.
 
So, I tested both cameras, and there is a difference. Even the Scarlet is better than most other cameras, but the Epic is visibly better:

RS_Compare.jpg
 
Well, I think you just cleared up that question. Thanks for the test.
 
If there is a difference then it's negligible based on the two frame grabs...
 
Yeah, that seems odd...

I'd like to see some more test with other Epics/Scarlets to confirm this. RED has said that there isn't any difference on the same specs, it will be disappointing if more and more of this stuff starts show up.
 
Perhaps I don't know what to look for but I don't see a difference. For me, the non-uniform background makes it difficult to judge. The distant, dark windows of the buildings in the background match the "ghost" fan blades somewhat.
 
Glen Powell said:
If there is a difference then it's negligible based on the two frame grabs...
Click to expand...

Arnold F. said:
Perhaps I don't know what to look for but I don't see a difference. For me, the non-uniform background makes it difficult to judge. The distant, dark windows of the buildings in the background match the "ghost" fan blades somewhat.
Click to expand...

Pretty much what I was thinking - certainly not a HUGE or TERRIBLE difference based on this example. None of my clients (or end viewers for that matter) would ever notice or question this level of rolling shutter.
 
Is it actually blade shape I should be looking at? I appreciate the time Uli spent doing this but would love to see it against a uniform background and without the fan grilles. I'd also like to know the shutter speed/angle.
 
I had a RED representative reply earlier this month with "I have confirmed with our engineers that the read/reset rate for both EPIC and Scarlet will be the same." when I asked about the rate at which data is pulled from the sensor - but that doesn't look to the the case. The delay looks to my naked eye to be much larger on the Scarlet.

How is rolling shutter measured? Is there a way to determine the # of ms delay?

BTW - what shutter and frame size where you shooting with?
 
I dunno. On the SX grab, the fan blade on the right looks larger (implying more RS), but the two fan blades on the right look smaller than the ES shot (implying less RS.)

... Is there a more scientific RS test?
 
I too, really appreciate the side by side comparison Uli. However, I would argue that those 2 images look identical when comparing rolling shutter. Sure the blade on the right side of the fan looks "longer" on the Scarlet pic, but I would point out that the two blades on the left side of the fan are "longer" or "fatter" on the Epic pic. I think this is caused by the angle of fan in relation to the camera. They are not constant. There is a slight difference which I believe is the cause of the false conclusion that the Scarlet is different from the Epic with regards to rolling shutter. Notice the tabs on the outer ring of the fans cage? The Epic example has them against a white out of focus background, while the Scarlet example has them against whatever the darker out of focus portions of the frame are. Either the level of the camera or the level of the fan changed slightly. However, I will perform my own tests in order to confirm my hypothesis. Can someone explain if there is something I am not seeing, or if I am looking at the wrong thing? Maybe some moving image comparisons are in order. Thanks again Uli for posting this example for us to evaluate.

Edit: Mike beat me to it :)
 
We need a more scientific test. as many pointed out the angle of the fan to each camera is a factor for different results. Other factors include, assuming all other settings are equal (lens, shutter speed, distance, angle, etc...):
- fan speed may not be consistent
- the motor of the fan may not spin in a perfect single axis, meaning the blades could sway a tiny bit closer and farther from camera at random times.
- other factors...??

For those that aren't aware what to look for. Rolling shutter causes skew in objects in motion. So a straight vertical building moving fast across frame, will appear slanted. In this case, a fan blade rotating fast in a circle will be slanted in a circular distortion.
 
Zhibo Lai said:
We need a more scientific test. as many pointed out the angle of the fan to each camera is a factor for different results. Other factors include, assuming all other settings are equal (lens, shutter speed, distance, angle, etc...):
- fan speed may not be consistent
- the motor of the fan may not spin in a perfect single axis, meaning the blades could sway a tiny bit closer and farther from camera at random times.
- other factors...??

For those that aren't aware what to look for. Rolling shutter causes skew in objects in motion. So a straight vertical building moving fast across frame, will appear slanted. In this case, a fan blade rotating fast in a circle will be slanted in a circular distortion.
Click to expand...

I know what it is… I just don't see this as an egregious example of Rolling Shutter skew.
 
Sorry, was quite dark all day through. Shot at 1/400th, both 4K HD, same lens, the fan is quite constant, I use it for other cam tests too.
Of course this is not scientific, but a relative comparison. I don't think it will by anything noticed by our clients, but it may cause problems when you need 3D camera tracking.

BTW, the blades are same shape, same size, of course – or the fan would destroy itself in seconds…
 
Wouldn't a better test of this be to pan both cameras quickly?
 
If I had a double pan head, maybe ;-)

But this test is far more reproducible if you don't have a motorized head.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top