Peter S Posted September 30, 2008 Report Share Posted September 30, 2008 The Canon EOS 5D MK2 has some stunning video capabilities see http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?ac...;articleID=2127.Will this provide some new opportunities for AVs as we will be able to "extract" much higher quality images from video than was perviously possible?Any thoughts from those who understand these things would be most interesting. The concept of mixed AV/Video must surely gain more attention?Kind regardsPeter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lin Evans Posted September 30, 2008 Report Share Posted September 30, 2008 Hi Peter,In practice, not a lot different from what has been available at 1080p for some time with videocams. The larger sensor and replaceable lenses primarily gives additional control of depth of field previously limited to very expensive professional video equipment and some advantages in low light. The actual image quality aside from depth of field considerations is not much different from that available with ordinary HD handycams and is still only about two megapixel resolution. On the other hand, the Red One video camera can do 11.4 megapixel frames at 60 FPS so that's really where the true video innovation is at present. Remember, neither the 5D Mark II nor the D90 have built-in body image stabilization so to really make any serious quality video it would be necessary for the user to purchase Canon, Nikon or Sigma stabilized lenses or be limited to tripod based photography.Both the Nikon D90 and new Canon 5D Mark II produce very nice video but to include more than a tiny amount of video at these resolutions would overwhelm the 2 gigabyte limitation of a PTE slideshow. I'm not certain how this capability with the 1080p video in the 5D Mark II will impact presentation slideshows. It certainly takes a tremendous amount of resources and other than enhancing certain animations it's really more a product for presentation video than for presentation slideshows. There are a number of very good video programs which also can do stills so perhaps the impact might be greater there than in PTE. As for extracting frames, yes that's a possibility but the problems of file size inflation remain.Best regards,Lin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jfa Posted October 1, 2008 Report Share Posted October 1, 2008 Peter you raise a number of interesting points in your post. Lin has already addressed the technical comparison very well so I will look at the others.There is a debate raging at the moment in AV, or more correctly Digital Image and Audio Presentation DIAP, circles here on the question of mixing the type of shows we currently make with PTE and video/movies. It runs something like this--When a DIAP made of still digital images, (with PZR effect if desired), and audio contains a section of video it becomes a different medium, in effect a movie with still images. This is then a different area in the AV spectrum and the two should not be mixed.On the other hand a artist/maker should be able to display their work in any form they wish and this mix should be allowed to sit beside the current style of show.I will not comment on either side of the debate at present but would be interested in what others think.The other question, the modification of PTE to allow adding/editing of video, is also interesting. There are a number of very good products on the market that currently allow this, two I am familiar with are Pinnacle and Sony Vegas. I'm not sure if PTE should venture into this field, maybe if the demand is big enough, what do others think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ADB Posted October 1, 2008 Report Share Posted October 1, 2008 I think this is another one of those cases of technology slowly but surely is edging its way into the main stream, I remember when camera clubs sort of scorned upon images taken with a digital camera and in fact set up a whole new category just for Digital Images in competitions, I think most now have dropped that and its free for all.I wonder how this issue would be viewed today if for the last 20 years every PC/Mac owner had the ability to effortlessly encorporate Video and Stills into an AV presentation? I suspect there would be no issue at all and people would accept its not the technology that categorises the Photographers work but the final on screen result and the impact of that work to the viewer.Just look at Youtube, anything goes and millions of viewers are entertained with all types of media presentations with little concern (I imagine) for whether the presentation is a mix of stills and video or not, its the final impact that matters.In todays world this fluidness of media seems to be more and more accepted (and expected) and in future we can only wonder (and embrace!) what clever software developers can engineer to allow us to produce versatile, entertaining media presentations with increasing ease and flexibility. CheersAndrew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry Beckham Posted October 1, 2008 Report Share Posted October 1, 2008 When a DIAP made of still digital images, (with PZR effect if desired), and audio contains a section of video it becomes a different medium, in effect a movie with still images. This is then a different area in the AV spectrum and the two should not be mixed.Where have I heard this before, isn't the word BAN usually in there somewhere I think we have an exiting future when we can mix video and stills where the quality of the two remains the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.