Jump to content

Sony A7s ii 240 Fps Slow mo with davinci 12 optical flow

boji

By boji,
in Video Showcase

 Share

Recommended Posts

boji Apprentice

boji

Posted
Posted

i made the 120 fps to 240 fps using the optical flow in davinci resolve 12

overall with optical flow the result is fare enough in most of the cases but when the movement is faster and more rough things are getting harder there...

thats why i took a parkour guy to see how much the optical flow can handle with that kind of complicated and fast action

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FySeSXyqLi8

Link to post
Share on other sites
luboyanev Newbie

luboyanev

Posted
Posted

I just viewed it on my phone and it looked great. Im paying monthly for Adobe CC, but will have to download this and try it. Thanks for sharing the technique and short movie.

 Oneand0, the new Adobe CC also comes with a new and improved slow-motion. It would be interesting to see a comparisson of the davinci and adobe versions of the slow-mo

Link to post
Share on other sites
oneand0 Contributor

oneand0

Posted
Posted

 

Thanks for the info. I barely know enough to just put together a video with no effects. I have some footage of my dog in the snow chasing down balls kicking up powder at 120 fps at 250 shutter speed. Is there any reason you used 8000 shutter speed? I figured I would need to run it at 500th of a sec if end result was going to be 240 fps? Once I figure it out, I will post a clip.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • felipe
      Sony 16 mm f/1.8 G: Vea las primeras fotos tomadas

      By felipe · Posted

      Hola, parece que estan agotados, saludos Felipe 
    • XKAES
      JPEG options?

      By XKAES · Posted

      I'd suggest you start by running a simple test.  Take pictures of a typical scene/subject and each of the JPEG settings your camera offers.  Then compare them in the output that you normally produce.  You may or may not see a difference.  I normally shoot at the highest JPEG level and save that file -- but make a smaller file (lower resolution) for normal/typical use. There's plenty of editing that you can do with JPEGs on your computer -- depending on your software -- and there are features in your camera that can help out, as well.  That depends on your camera.  Put them together, and it might meet your needs.  For example, your camera probably has several bracketing features that will take the same shot with different settings with one press of the button.  Then you can select the best JPEG to work with on your computer.  I frequently use this feature to control contrast.
    • Cameratose
      JPEG options?

      By Cameratose · Posted

      If you set up some basic presets in your processing software and use batch processing, you don't need jpeg at all. I shoot RAW only, use (free) Faststone Image Viewer which will view any type of image file to cull my shots, and batch process in Darktable. I can start with 2000-3000 shots and in a matter of a few hours have them culled, processed, and posted. A handful of shots, say a couple hundred from a photo walk, are done in minutes.  This saves card space, computer space, and upload time.  The results are very good for posting online. When someone wants to buy one or I decide to print it, I can then return to the RAW file and process it individually for optimum results.  I never delete a RAW file. Sometimes I'll return to an old shot I processed several years ago and reprocess it. I have been very surprised how much better they look as my processing skills improved.  

  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...