HDRx motion interpolation

[Ruairi Robinson]

If this "more natural motion blur" thing is a computer interp/best guess, will there be situations where it breaks down and guesses wrong? From my experience, every attempt at this, ever, has broken down in difficult situations.

like say.. fields of grass blowing in wind. translucent objects. Etc. Stuff that has rapid subframe motion... light streaks on rapid/jagged camera movement.

Actually it doesn't take much to crash into the limits of computer interpolated vector mblur. So I am pretty skeptical.

Has the hard stuff been tested? Does the short snapshot frame use the longer exposure as a guide for vector motion or some other new fangled magicnology?

R.

[Jannard]

If this "more natural motion blur" thing is a computer interp/best guess, will there be situations where it breaks down and guesses wrong? From my experience, every attempt at this, ever, has broken down in difficult situations.

like say.. fields of grass blowing in wind. translucent objects. Etc. Stuff that has rapid subframe motion... light streaks on rapid/jagged camera movement.

Actually it doesn't take much to crash into the limits of computer interpolated vector mblur. So I am pretty skeptical.

Has the hard stuff been tested? Does the short snapshot frame use the longer exposure as a guide for vector motion or some other new fangled magicnology?

R.

If you shoot HDRx properly (normal exposure and under exposure) you have lots of options with two tracks of conjoined images. My bet is that you can find a way to break anything if you look hard enough. So what are your options?

If the standard HDRx blend doesn't give you the "look" you are after (Magic Motion), even with the slider control to use as much or little of the under exposure you want/need... then you have The Foundry's MNMB (More Normal Motion Blur) to work with.

If you have shot something that breaks that, and a small percentage of situations might, then turn off HDRx and live with 13 stops you get natively from EPIC.

Lots of options here. Remember that, just as with shooting RAW or a film negative, processes improve over time. My expectation is that motion estimation will also, particularly since there is now a good reason to focus more on it.

Jim

[Peter Matthes]

Lots of options here.
Jim

[Philipe Ratton]

nice !

[Ruairi Robinson]

If you shoot HDRx™ properly (normal exposure and under exposure) you have lots of options with two tracks of conjoined images. My bet is that you can find a way to break anything if you look hard enough. So what are your options?

If the standard HDRx™ blend doesn't give you the "look" you are after (Magic Motion), even with the slider control to use as much or little of the under exposure you want/need... then you have The Foundry's MNMB (More Normal Motion Blur) to work with.

If you have shot something that breaks that, and a small percentage of situations might, then turn off HDRx™ and live with 13 stops you get natively from EPIC.

Lots of options here. Remember that, just as with shooting RAW or a film negative, processes improve over time. My expectation is that motion estimation will also, particularly since there is now a good reason to focus more on it.

Jim

Sure. Just the words "motion estimation" give me cause for concern. A lot of little things that happen subframe, are things that really bring an image to life. Can't fake that.

R.

[Jannard]

Sure. Just the words "motion estimation" give me cause for concern. A lot of little things that happen subframe, are things that really bring an image to life. Can't fake that.

R.

Ruairi,,, did you actually read my post? Just curious. Have you seen the Magic Motion clip? If you are worried, why not shoot without HDRx? Or try it and ignore it if you can't get the results you want? I'm not sure what your point is... I'm all ears.

Jim

[Ruairi Robinson]

Ruairi,,, did you actually read my post? Just curious. Have you seen the Magic Motion clip? If you are worried, why not shoot without HDRx™? Or try it and ignore it if you can't get the results you want? I'm not sure what your point is... I'm all ears.

Jim

My point is that you are screaming 18 stops 18 stops, and the fact that it may come at a cost to motion quality is going to get lost in the hype. Because "most people won't notice the difference". And maybe they won't but this is something I look very carefully at. And it's not a tradeoff I find thrilling. Great dynamic range or accurate motion? Pick any one! you make this choice sound much easier than it may end up being. Who wants to give up one over the other?

Or maybe it will look awesome, but the clips posted thus far hardly put it through its paces. I look forward to seeing footage that proves me wrong.

I want to be wrong.

Yours cautiously optimistic,

R.

[I Bloom]

My point is that you are screaming 18 stops 18 stops, and the fact that it may come at a cost to motion quality is going to get lost in the hype. Because "most people won't notice the difference". And maybe they won't but this is something I look very carefully at. And it's not a tradeoff I find thrilling. Great dynamic range or accurate motion? Pick any one! you make this choice sound much easier than it may end up being. Who wants to give up one over the other?

You can't really blame Red for marketing their products as best they can. I'm glad they are excited.

I look at it this way. It seems the camera has great DR already, enough to make the cost benefits analysis move many productions toward Red. I also have questions about HDRx but I think of it like this, which looks worse:

--some different motion blur in parts of the image, that may or may not be noticeable or even undesirable.

or...

--blown out highlights.

I think in most cases one will do everything in there power to control highlights within the normal track. But in situations where there is a huge uncontrolled loss of detail its nice to know that repair is possible and maybe kind of easy. I think I even saw some of this loss in a movie that's probably winning best picture this year, so I guess it happens to the best of us.

Regarding monitoring paths for HDRx:
Seems like the best and probably obvious thing is just to make a user programmable button that switches the view between the normal and highlight track, just as we now often switch from Redcolor to Raw. I think I would prefer that to an in camera combination of some kind. I guess I'm hoping the design of the camera reflects the fact that many of us would like to keep track of exactly what parts of the image are augmented by this technology.

IBloom

[Jannard]

... you are screaming 18 stops 18 stops.

R.

We think 18 stops is pretty significant news regardless of whether or not it is perfect for every situation.

Jim

[Cüneyt Kaya]

hi ruairi, i like your work and the humorous posts you make, very entertaining.
but this one simply wasnt nice (the way how...)
what about waiting and just see for yourself if it works when its in your hands and if its fits your needs.
if not, you still get the best digital cam on the planet.
not a bad situation at all for filmakers.
be positive :)