| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Editing photos for video media rules.
Alex Boyce, Photographer
 |
Florence | EU | Italy | Posted: 10:04 AM on 12.09.10 |
->> I was able to do this recently, but as it was done with a photocamera it is ok, If you do Motogp work you have to pay to do a "video". Unless it is photos put together... what happens with new combo cams.... strange rules need updating, anyone else have this problem?
http://tinyurl.com/2vl3279 |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 10:24 AM on 12.09.10 |
| ->> Alex, it's not video. Although it shows "motion" it's still made up of individual photos. I don't think the rules are or will be updated. Venues and organizations which prohibit video aren't going to ban DSLR's that shoot video. Photographers will just be prohibited from using them to shoot video. It will be no different than anything else. Break the rules and you'll probably face some kind of penalty. |
|
Alex Boyce, Photographer
|
Florence | EU | Italy | Posted: 10:42 AM on 12.09.10 |
| ->> Yes i was under that understanding that it wasnt video, but it's an interesting concept with the modern cameras. |
|
Steve Ueckert, Photographer
|
Houston | TX | | Posted: 11:03 AM on 12.09.10 |
->> If you want to take the concept even further go into Final Cut Pro and start doing some of the "Ken Burn's Effects" such as panning across a still frame or rotating images within the video frame.
I can understand having to pay to do video of the actual event due to potential conflicts with those who have paid a sponsorship fee and expect exclusivity or at least control of the event. But does this apply even within the garage/paddock away from the track? |
|
Alex Boyce, Photographer
|
Florence | EU | Italy | Posted: 7:56 PM on 12.13.10 |
| ->> yes it even applies to the sound of the engines... |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 8:02 PM on 12.13.10 |
->> Alex,
You're right, the rules are outdated. The sequence you pointed to is about three or four fps. Full-motion video is 24 or 30 fps. I've posted some of my videos at 15 fps.
The equipment that can be used to capture motion is becoming nearly undefinable.
It's no longer either/or. It's a continuum.
--Mark |
|
Jim Colburn, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
McAllen | TX | USA | Posted: 9:56 PM on 12.13.10 |
->> "it's not video. Although it shows "motion" it's still made up of individual photos"
So is video... Put lots of them together, run them fast enough and SHAZAM! it looks like it's moving! |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Denver | CO | USA | Posted: 10:54 PM on 12.13.10 |
| ->> The sequence referenced in the original posting isn't new. Timelapse like this has been possible for decades. If a group wanted to ban timelapse photography, they probably would have done it by now... |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|