Redcode: Can we make it stutter just a little more?

[jaadgy akanni]

Now, I consider myself to be way behind a layman, in fact, in matters cinematographic or videographic, I'm a certifiable idiot. With that in mind, here's my thought. When I look at any footage coming from any digital sensor, one thing that always hits me and which I blame for the footage always falling a little short of that look we call "filmic" is that somehow the 24 progressive frames per second of digital camera is some x/fraction faster and therefore less stuttery than film, while still being 24fps, just like film. I was wondering if it's possible to somehow make the speed at which each 24pfs are scanned, a fraction of a second slower, but still fast enough to never add up to more than 24fps and mess things up. Can we possibly make digital 24fps a little more stuttery? I'm having difficulty expounding what I'm thinking, 'cause like I said, I don't know jack about the technical intricacies of a digital camera, but if any of you find this a valid question, please respond. Thank you.

[Martin Drew]

"Stutteryness" is controlled by the shutter speed (shutter angle in film cameras) control, so it should be totally adjustable without affecting the frame rate.

M

[Andreas Fernbrant]

Jaadgy, Did you see the footage posted?

I consider myself very picky about stuff like motion, stutter and so on.
I'm very pleased with how the demo film looked and how the Mysterium and codec handled motion and stutter.

I'd say the Mysterium is as close you can get to film without being actual film. It can look like film if you want to but in all other cases, it just looks like RED footage :)

[Joe Vinson]

From what I've heard, the New Zealand footage was shot in very bright, oppressive light. To me, that means they probably already had a very fast shutter speed. I didn't notice any of the "soap opera look" that usually betrays video footage.

My biggest beef with the clip was the uncentered opening title, with the goofy fonts and uncurled quotation marks. :)

[Andreas Fernbrant]

I think the sutter was set at a fixed "180" degrees.
The PJ cams only feature was "Record" and "Stop" :)

[Joe Vinson]

Andreas, are you using terms of shutter angle as reference, or does the RED actually have a rotating shutter?

[Eirik Tyrihjel]

Andreas, are you using terms of shutter angle as reference, or does the RED actually have a rotating shutter?

No moving parts as far as I know...

A 180 degree shutter would translate to 1/50 seconds I beleive.

[Simon Dean]

or 1/48 at 24 fps!

[jaadgy akanni]

Andreas, are you using terms of shutter angle as reference, or does the RED actually have a rotating shutter?

AKABAKA can you expand on that, what if it did have a rotating shutter, and is it or was it ever an option with the RED?

[tomf]

hi jaadgy,

camera shutter and its effects have also been covered in these threads (among others):

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1983
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1831
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1955

[Stuart English]

Shutter Angle is just one more of those terms that mean little to nothing in an all electronic implimentation, but are very useful shorthand for those coming from a film background.

So at 24 fps, 50% of the frame time = 180 degrees = 1/48th sec. All three parameters could be used to describe the same resulting exposure and hence motion blur characteristic.

This value is what the NZ tests were shot at, at that time no other frame rate or shutter values were available.

[jaadgy akanni]

Jaadgy, Did you see the footage posted?

I'm very pleased with how the demo film looked and how the Mysterium and codec handled motion and stutter.
I'd say the Mysterium is as close you can get to film without being actual film. It can look like film if you want to but in all other cases, it just looks like RED footage :)

I totally agree with you on that. In fact, I'm of the opinion that the RED footage possesses it's own unique, and depending on how subjective one gets, superior look as compared to film. I for one, will embrace it with all my heart. Nevertheless, I guess what I was trying to suggest at the beginning of this thread was that perhaps there's a way to affect an exact mimic of the mechanical workings of a conventionall (analog?) film camera shutter-down to the smallest Nth of a second.

[Nick Shaw]

Shutter Angle is just one more of those terms that mean little to nothing in an all electronic implimentation, but are very useful shorthand for those coming from a film background.

Presumably also using the shutter angle notation, rather that 1/Nth of a second is more useful for a camera that shoots variable frame rates, as a shutter angle value has the same meaning in terms of motion blur characteristic, whatever frame rate you are shooting at.

[Leo Ticheli]

There is a small difference between an electronic "shutter" and a rotating mirror shutter when the camera or subject is moving while shooting a subject with pronounced straight lines; e.g., a picket fence.

The rotating mirror moves the opening so the straight lines in a subject are exposed at slightly different times and locations in the frame during the exposure.

An electronic "shutter" is simply turned off for a period equal to the blanking period of whatever shutter angle would dictate.

Granted this is a very fine distinction, but it is there. Perhaps that's why some very high-end HD cameras have chosen to use spinning mirrors rather than electronic "shutters."

I'm not sure if a chip could be designed so that the pixels were turned on and off in a sweep pattern rather than all at once, or even if the rotating mirror shutter is actually more aesthetically pleasing.

I guess we're really putting the "b" in subtle with this one!

Good shooting and best regards to all,

Leo

[Andrew M.]

I'm not sure if a chip could be designed so that the pixels were turned on and off in a sweep pattern rather than all at once, or even if the rotating mirror shutter is actually more aesthetically pleasing.

I guess we're really putting the "b" in subtle with this one!

Good shooting and best regards to all,

Leo

Theoretically the CMOS sensors, especially the new once could be read in any order and direction.
Also the photo-sensors charge could be cleared (shunted) in any direction or order.
These design lends itself to emulate any mechanical shutter action, even the one that doesn’t exist in the real world because of mechanical constrains.

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Stuart can we expect any special effect >360* shutter effects in the retail red?

[Evin Grant]

ASFAIK 360º shutter will be possible.

[Nick Shaw]

360 degree, yes, but what about an accumulator type shutter for greater than 360 degrees, or is that best left for post?