the rum soaked fist: internal martial arts forum

oragami_itto wrote:I'm pretty sure that "Frame rate" as you're using it is more applicable to analog film and dmitri is correct in that it doesn't apply to digital in the same way. With analog it's the number of complete still pictures being projected/drawn per second, but with digital it's how often it updates with changes. (Digital video compression generally only draws the parts of the image that have changed for a set number of frames and then re-draws the whole image every once in a while)

No, sorry, incorrect. Frame rate in digital video recording works exactly as I have described. We haven't been talking about compression at all.

So with analog, playback speed is a function of frame rate, but with digital, frame rate is a measure of resolution independent of playback speed.

Sorry, still incorrect.

If I watch the same digital video at 60fps vs 15fps, one is going to look shittier than the other.

And which one is "shittier" depends on the frame rate of the original recording. This is not rocket science.

I was only interested in his technique. I rewatched the first part of the video, and there are some places where his actions seem to accelerate differently from others. To my eye, it seems clear that the entire video has not been sped up. I think Dmitri's point about the drumming is valid. The drum beat sounds as if it's being played at a traditional pace. However, around the 8-12 second marks, there seem to be some type of slip. I have no idea of the mechanism.

0,12 to 0,30 there are no drums in the picture.

Gus Mueller wrote:

oragami_itto wrote:I'm pretty sure that "Frame rate" as you're using it is more applicable to analog film and dmitri is correct in that it doesn't apply to digital in the same way. With analog it's the number of complete still pictures being projected/drawn per second, but with digital it's how often it updates with changes. (Digital video compression generally only draws the parts of the image that have changed for a set number of frames and then re-draws the whole image every once in a while)

No, sorry, incorrect. Frame rate in digital video recording works exactly as I have described. We haven't been talking about compression at all.

So with analog, playback speed is a function of frame rate, but with digital, frame rate is a measure of resolution independent of playback speed.

Sorry, still incorrect.

If I watch the same digital video at 60fps vs 15fps, one is going to look shittier than the other.

And which one is "shittier" depends on the frame rate of the original recording. This is not rocket science.

If you change the playback speed of a video, yes, you might be seeing more frames per second you might not. The framerate has nothing to do with the playback speed.

Of course we're talking about compression. We're watching a compressed and transcoded video stream. Digital compression works as described, each frame only contains the information that has changed since the last frame until it's time to redraw the entire frame.

High speed film works off the frame rate idea, they take many more pictures than normal in the alloted time and play them back at a normal speed so it appears much slower.

Digital frame rate only refers to how often the image is refreshed. If you change the playback speed, depending on your transcoder it may or may not affect the frame rate at all. And vice versa, you can alter the frame rate without changing the playback speed. As mentioned, higher frame rates are intended to increase the quality and smoothness of the moving image and they have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the playback speed.

Yes, frame rate is relevant when shooting, but playback speed is in no way a function of frame rate due to transcoding.

This is a dumb argument. If it was sped up, somebody just altered the playback speed in their video editor and exported it to a standard frame rate which Youtube will adjust through transcoding to fit the device it's being played back on.

The initial frame rate is only relevant in that the initial pictures contain the information needed to build the playback frames so slow motion requires high speed capture to have all the information you'll need for quality results.

If we're talking raw video, sure, it's relevant. Rendered and streamed video? Not at all. I'm guessing this video was shot on a standard consumer camera with standard 24p or whatever, so to speed it up, raw frames would be discarded in transcoding to 24p output.

So like I said, both right, dumb argument.

oragami_itto wrote:If we're talking raw video, sure, it's relevant. Rendered and streamed video? Not at all. I'm guessing this video was shot on a standard consumer camera with standard 24p or whatever, so to speed it up, raw frames would be discarded in transcoding to 24p output.

You can create slow-mo or speed up effects in any standard editing program. What method you used to record the film does not matter.

Bao wrote:

oragami_itto wrote:If we're talking raw video, sure, it's relevant. Rendered and streamed video? Not at all. I'm guessing this video was shot on a standard consumer camera with standard 24p or whatever, so to speed it up, raw frames would be discarded in transcoding to 24p output.

You can create slow-mo or speed up effects in any standard editing program. What method you used to record the film does not matter.

Exactly. The only caveat being you need enough information to produce an image of sufficient quality for your purposes, which is where high-frame rate capture is helpful.

There are apps made only for creating effects with speed. Very easy to do, resulting in a professional look and they usually edit the sound separately. Here are just ten of many others:

https://www.iskysoft.com/video-editing/ ... ideos.html

Bao wrote:0,12 to 0,30 there are no drums in the picture.

The drum beat/"theme" never slips, it's a continuous flow. And they're completely in sync with their visual representation before and after the section (second camera) when they're not in the picture. The visuals from the two cameras are stitched together to have a continuous flow, and the visuals (technique transitions) reflect that flow.

But forget even the drums; watch the bit between 0:04 and 0:06 -- he moves just about as fast as in other parts of the performance later on, and you can clearly see people in the background shift about at the exact same time/in the same frame without any unnatural changes of speed in their movement.

If they're messing with the speed, they're being very selective. He falls at a normal speed at 0:07 and the speed that his clothes are swinging looks normal to me. Clapping and fidgeting in the crowd, the sway of the heavy bag, all looks pretty natural to me.

He's just quick as hell.

Bao, do you think maybe you're picking up on some slight strobing?

This must have been sped up as well...

This clip has been around for ages - it's not new. It's not speeded up either.

Either way it's an excellent demo.

Dmitri wrote:The drum beat/"theme" never slips, it's a continuous flow. And they're completely in sync with their visual representation before and after the section (second camera) when they're not in the picture. The visuals from the two cameras are stitched together to have a continuous flow, and the visuals (technique transitions) reflect that flow.

The sound can be edited separately, that "flow" has nothing to do with the picture. Syncing sound to the picture is easy. You can also take out beats easily and put the sound together.

But as I said, you don't need to take any notice of me. I am no expert on digital editing as my film education is mostly analog and I have only done a few thousands hours of editing.

oragami_itto wrote:If they're messing with the speed, they're being very selective.

Of course they are.

He's just quick as hell.

If it's all in his natural speed, he is a fucking genius. The speed in many of the parts doesn't bother me. But as the vid is now, he never slows down or take any slower break. Going on like that without showing himself tired and making no mistake that slows down the performance is absolute incredible. Keeping up the speed for that long time, incredible. Super human material. I bet he can throw qi balls as well. Wouldn't surprise me a bit.

Bao, do you think maybe you're picking up on some slight strobing?

First I watched it in my old macbook. Then I watched it in my new, upgraded iMac. It looked better there. Still there are parts there are obviously up speeded.

Dmitri wrote:This must have been sped up as well...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUw_dVZRplQ[/youtube]

Lee had to speed down some of his strikes so the audience could se what he actually did. Jackie Chan movies have also been accused of being up speeded. In one or two of his latest movies in the last ten years there are these effects occasionally. But his earlier films are all natural speed. Just look at Rumble in the Bronx or any of the more funny movies. The speed they are fighting with is completely insane.
... But nothing beats the old Samurai movies where they fought and filmed with real sharp swords. Toshiro Mifune for instance was an excellent old school swordsman.

---

... Of course Steve

Bao wrote:... But nothing beats the old Samurai movies where they fought and filmed with real sharp swords. Toshiro Mifune for instance was an excellent old school swordsman.

I wouldn't know anything about those...

The most important aspect is how the flavor of the movement changes when they need to it an object.
And that's the problem with forms which favor performance over reinforcing the right movement to transmit power into an object.

Alex