Solo Performance Settings For Optimal Gimbal Stabilization

[cameraguy]

In bright light an ND filter slows the shutter speed allowing one to get closer to the "180 degree shutter rule" which produces a more natural motion blur. The f- stop of these lens is also not adjustable.

Since the shutter can't be controlled directly on the GoPro the only options are ISO and ND filters to slow the shutter. With the lowest ISO at 400 one is probably not near 180 in most daylight scenes. Some suggest that in bright light a ND8 gets close; during the "Golden hours" a ND 4 may be enough.

Some don't care and just shoot. But in general use at least a ND4 unless shooting at twilight or later to get a more realistic motion blur. My ND 8 gets the most use.

Here for more: The 180 Degree Shutter Rule - The Camera Forum®

Outstanding. Thanks this helped me understand it better than I do.

Much appreciated!

 

[EyeWingsuit]

The filter slows down the shutter speed to something closer to 30fps with a higher f stop, which is more realistic and film like. Without one, which I did today, I find the video less pretty. Also, it removes all evidence of prop shadow and you are less likely to experience glare or blown out highlights.

Photographers that are new think everything can be done in post. I have to tell tell you, filters are an important part of video production, and professional still image department. At a minimum, but the Polar Pro 3 pack for your GoPro. For your still camera (where you still shoot video) work, a variable ND filter is a must and a circular polarizer. You will be amazed at how much more control you have over your final pictures and video.



{QUOTE=]
I found GoPro Studio on my Mac quite unusable, so abandoned it and use iMovie instead. By the sound of it, I'm may be missing out on the ability of the GoPro Studio software to correct fisheye etc.

Cheers!

I encourage you to give it another try. If you shoot in protunes, you are recording in a codec by the company Cineform. That is not a format you want to use in editing, or finishing. You need something to convert it. Now most macs will have the Cineform codec installed, but unless you pass it through GoPro studio twice, once to convert it from the Cineform codec, which also includes the step of removing the fisheye. Then, using the edit and export tab, you can select several presets, one called Protune that you can select and then tweak using the other controls. I've done it a lot on a Mac. There is no problem.

Hope this helps!

Happy and steady flying to all![/QUOTE]

Not so fast!?? Protune is a superior codec to *anything* in its package size. Period. ProTune (Cineform) is a broadcast-spec codec, one still used as a transport stream, supported by every pro NLE out there. Dave Taylor and company won National Association of Broadcasting accolades, and for several years, Apple was trying to match ProRes to Cineform for quality, consistency, and size of image.

Cineform was designed SPECIFICALLY for editing, and while it's not a delivery codec, many pros mastered (still master) to it for purposes of it's low lossy nature.
In this book, I extensively tested it vs Sheer, ProRes, Canopus, VP7, HDand other prolific codecs.

ProTune held up better than anything except for DnxHD (Avid) and ProRes 4:2:2, both of which were significantly larger, and again, neither of which are designed as delivery codecs, unless you're delivering to a K2 or MediaPool-type server.
No codec designed for delivery over standard mechanisms (internet, DVD, thumbdrive) is a proper editing codec.

The workflow you describe above throws away a LOT of information from a format that is already lacking information. Not something anyone looking for a crisp, clear end product wants to do. Working natively is nearly always best, unless the plan is to seriously shove color around more than a stop or so.

Rather than blame the codec, blame the choice of editing software. Premiere, Resolve, Vegas, Catalyst, Ulead, Corel, Media Studio, Movie Studio, Magix...all cut Cineform/ProTune like butter. If you have fisheye, that's also an "artistic choice" in this game. I you don't like fisheye, disable it in the camera, or use a tool to remove it in post.

It's all about choice. But for professional use of a GoPro camera, ProTune is the *only* option.

 

[pyrate]

So do you still feel it is a good idea to go through step one in gopro studio prior to adding it to a premier project?
Meaning do the conversion process to avi or mov prior to editing in Premiere?

 

[EyeWingsuit]

Douglass, I met and worked with Dave Taylor and his team when the JVC HD cameras were introduced. That was well before you knew what HD, let alone 4K was about. I sold his product, promoted his product and taught people how to get the most out of his product. I developed training DVD's for him and JVC.

If you are unhappy thatI didn't sing his accolades in this simple explanation, I'm sorry. It just wasn't required at this level.

Where did I say Protune wasn't required, or the best thing GoPro ever did - no where. You're just jumping up and down so you can promot your company. Cheap, sleepy advertising that you are famous for.

Your company would not have been possible without the work I did with these Pioneers, B&H, JVC, Sony, etc.

I don't need your crap. I've promoted you on this forum, and others. So, give me a break and piss off.

A-I'm likely as old as you . Note my first book on the topic of media was in the days of Umatic, and my first piece of industry tin was Beta SP. Cineform was 2003. My first bit of industry tin was in 1992, and Beta had been around for approximately a decade. In my youth I worked for Dr. Tom Stockham in SLC, Utah. Did you pioneer the way for him, too? Because I assure you without him, NONE of the people in this forum would be here together. It's likely not a soul here has heard of him. It's unfortunate I touched some sort of historical nerve; it was not my intent.

This article makes it clear that Cineform (now ProTune) is designed as a read/decode codec, designed ENTIRELY for the purpose of editing. Only one camera system chose it as an acquisition. So, if it's not an acquisition format and not a delivery format, what is left besides an editing/transport format?


B-I was around writing books and doing work for Sony BPSD long before Cineform was a glimmer in either Dave's eye. I'm surprised then, that we've not met as my company (with me as the spokesperson on camera) also developed a tremendous amount of training for Dave & Dave, B&H etc. I'm advertising nothing. Anyone buying my very old, outdated books would be foolish, unless they were interested in the history of codecs. I didn't realize I was famous for "sleazy whatever advertising." VASST closed its doors three years ago when I retired from developing software with Sony Creative (who was last week sold to Magix; they lasted longer than I expected).

C-I'm not giving you "crap." But to suggest that Cineform isn't an editing codec is 180 degrees from the truth. It certainly wasn't my intent to press your buttons and it's unfortunate if you felt I was "poking" you.
That said, I do appreciate whatever contributions you may have made to my career working as a contractor to Sony, JVC, Canon, Panasonic, Avid, Canopus, Matrox, Ulead, Adobe, Apple, Sonic Foundry, etc. I'm grateful. Seriously.

###

Pyrate, I don't ever use GoPro studio. The extra render is not only time consuming, it's not a good transcode. A lot of detail is lost in the process.
Here's an easy way to tell. Render a short bit of footage, and extract a still.
Drop the still into Photoshop or similar.
Grab a still from the original clip at the same frame as the original extract.
Put the upper image into Difference mode.
The level of difference is displayed in how well you can see any portion of the image. In this comparison, it's apparent that Photoshop is a better compression agent than ACDsee (more black is better) However, neither Photoshop nor ACDsee allow for an explicit value relevant to any outside measurement, so it could be that they're similar, but their presets are quite different.

If it's entirely black, it's a great encode. That said, it's *entirely* unlikely that you'll find a completely black image. Here is a difference comparison, very roughly assembled.

 

[LuvMyTJ]

Lets keep calm in here and keep it on topic. We are all here for the love of the aerial platform right? Lets not belittle each other. Thread cleaned. Thanks.

​

 

[cameraguy]

A-I'm likely as old as you . Note my first book on the topic of media was in the days of Umatic, and my first piece of industry tin was Beta SP. Cineform was 2003. My first bit of industry tin was in 1992, and Beta had been around for approximately a decade. In my youth I worked for Dr. Tom Stockham in SLC, Utah. Did you pioneer the way for him, too? Because I assure you without him, NONE of the people in this forum would be here together. It's likely not a soul here has heard of him. It's unfortunate I touched some sort of historical nerve; it was not my intent.

This article makes it clear that Cineform (now ProTune) is designed as a read/decode codec, designed ENTIRELY for the purpose of editing. Only one camera system chose it as an acquisition. So, if it's not an acquisition format and not a delivery format, what is left besides an editing/transport format?
View attachment 3497

B-I was around writing books and doing work for Sony BPSD long before Cineform was a glimmer in either Dave's eye. I'm surprised then, that we've not met as my company (with me as the spokesperson on camera) also developed a tremendous amount of training for Dave & Dave, B&H etc. I'm advertising nothing. Anyone buying my very old, outdated books would be foolish, unless they were interested in the history of codecs. I didn't realize I was famous for "sleazy whatever advertising." VASST closed its doors three years ago when I retired from developing software with Sony Creative (who was last week sold to Magix; they lasted longer than I expected).

C-I'm not giving you "crap." But to suggest that Cineform isn't an editing codec is 180 degrees from the truth. It certainly wasn't my intent to press your buttons and it's unfortunate if you felt I was "poking" you.
That said, I do appreciate whatever contributions you may have made to my career working as a contractor to Sony, JVC, Canon, Panasonic, Avid, Canopus, Matrox, Ulead, Adobe, Apple, Sonic Foundry, etc. I'm grateful. Seriously.

###

Pyrate, I don't ever use GoPro studio. The extra render is not only time consuming, it's not a good transcode. A lot of detail is lost in the process.
Here's an easy way to tell. Render a short bit of footage, and extract a still.
Drop the still into Photoshop or similar.
Grab a still from the original clip at the same frame as the original extract.
Put the upper image into Difference mode.
The level of difference is displayed in how well you can see any portion of the image. In this comparison, it's apparent that Photoshop is a better compression agent than ACDsee (more black is better) However, neither Photoshop nor ACDsee allow for an explicit value relevant to any outside measurement, so it could be that they're similar, but their presets are quite different.

If it's entirely black, it's a great encode. That said, it's *entirely* unlikely that you'll find a completely black image. Here is a difference comparison, very roughly assembled.
View attachment 3496

I stand corrected and extend my full apology. Too much time shooting in the hot sun.

 

[SurfnSkate81]

I encourage you to give it another try. If you shoot in protunes, you are recording in a codec by the company Cineform. That is not a format you want to use in editing, or finishing. You need something to convert it. Now most macs will have the Cineform codec installed, but unless you pass it through GoPro studio twice, once to convert it from the Cineform codec, which also includes the step of removing the fisheye. Then, using the edit and export tab, you can select several presets, one called Protune that you can select and then tweak using the other controls. I've done it a lot on a Mac. There is no problem.

Hope this helps!

Happy and steady flying to all!

Not so fast!?? Protune is a superior codec to *anything* in its package size. Period. ProTune (Cineform) is a broadcast-spec codec, one still used as a transport stream, supported by every pro NLE out there. Dave Taylor and company won National Association of Broadcasting accolades, and for several years, Apple was trying to match ProRes to Cineform for quality, consistency, and size of image.

Cineform was designed SPECIFICALLY for editing, and while it's not a delivery codec, many pros mastered (still master) to it for purposes of it's low lossy nature.
In this book, I extensively tested it vs Sheer, ProRes, Canopus, VP7, HDand other prolific codecs.

ProTune held up better than anything except for DnxHD (Avid) and ProRes 4:2:2, both of which were significantly larger, and again, neither of which are designed as delivery codecs, unless you're delivering to a K2 or MediaPool-type server.
No codec designed for delivery over standard mechanisms (internet, DVD, thumbdrive) is a proper editing codec.

The workflow you describe above throws away a LOT of information from a format that is already lacking information. Not something anyone looking for a crisp, clear end product wants to do. Working natively is nearly always best, unless the plan is to seriously shove color around more than a stop or so.

Rather than blame the codec, blame the choice of editing software. Premiere, Resolve, Vegas, Catalyst, Ulead, Corel, Media Studio, Movie Studio, Magix...all cut Cineform/ProTune like butter. If you have fisheye, that's also an "artistic choice" in this game. I you don't like fisheye, disable it in the camera, or use a tool to remove it in post.

It's all about choice. But for professional use of a GoPro camera, ProTune is the *only* option.[/QUOTE]

@EyeWingsuit where can I find your book? Have you got an updated version for UHD & HDR?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pyrate]

A-I'm likely as old as you . Note my first book on the topic of media was in the days of Umatic, and my first piece of industry tin was Beta SP. Cineform was 2003. My first bit of industry tin was in 1992, and Beta had been around for approximately a decade. In my youth I worked for Dr. Tom Stockham in SLC, Utah. Did you pioneer the way for him, too? Because I assure you without him, NONE of the people in this forum would be here together. It's likely not a soul here has heard of him. It's unfortunate I touched some sort of historical nerve; it was not my intent.

This article makes it clear that Cineform (now ProTune) is designed as a read/decode codec, designed ENTIRELY for the purpose of editing. Only one camera system chose it as an acquisition. So, if it's not an acquisition format and not a delivery format, what is left besides an editing/transport format?
View attachment 3497

B-I was around writing books and doing work for Sony BPSD long before Cineform was a glimmer in either Dave's eye. I'm surprised then, that we've not met as my company (with me as the spokesperson on camera) also developed a tremendous amount of training for Dave & Dave, B&H etc. I'm advertising nothing. Anyone buying my very old, outdated books would be foolish, unless they were interested in the history of codecs. I didn't realize I was famous for "sleazy whatever advertising." VASST closed its doors three years ago when I retired from developing software with Sony Creative (who was last week sold to Magix; they lasted longer than I expected).

C-I'm not giving you "crap." But to suggest that Cineform isn't an editing codec is 180 degrees from the truth. It certainly wasn't my intent to press your buttons and it's unfortunate if you felt I was "poking" you.
That said, I do appreciate whatever contributions you may have made to my career working as a contractor to Sony, JVC, Canon, Panasonic, Avid, Canopus, Matrox, Ulead, Adobe, Apple, Sonic Foundry, etc. I'm grateful. Seriously.

###

Pyrate, I don't ever use GoPro studio. The extra render is not only time consuming, it's not a good transcode. A lot of detail is lost in the process.
Here's an easy way to tell. Render a short bit of footage, and extract a still.
Drop the still into Photoshop or similar.
Grab a still from the original clip at the same frame as the original extract.
Put the upper image into Difference mode.
The level of difference is displayed in how well you can see any portion of the image. In this comparison, it's apparent that Photoshop is a better compression agent than ACDsee (more black is better) However, neither Photoshop nor ACDsee allow for an explicit value relevant to any outside measurement, so it could be that they're similar, but their presets are quite different.

If it's entirely black, it's a great encode. That said, it's *entirely* unlikely that you'll find a completely black image. Here is a difference comparison, very roughly assembled.
View attachment 3496

Ok forgive my grasshopper questions, the raw footage off gopro direct into Preimeire Pro CC 2015 windows.
Is that still the best work flow?
Is there anything specific we need to do with it prior to editing?

 

[EyeWingsuit]

@EyeWingsuit where can I find your book? Have you got an updated version for UHD & HDR?

I'm sure there are used copies floating around the web. NAB had a few copies in their bookstore this year. It's been out of print for 3 years. I'd started on a UHD/HDR/SHV edition, but decided that there is so much info now available on the web, it's not really worth the effort.

@pyrate, my recommendation for Premiere/GoPro is to copy the GoPro footage to your HDD, and populate your bins from there. There is no need any longer, to do anything to the video prior to editing. Save your time.
The upside to converting first is that all processes are equal prior to editing.
The downsides to converting first is that you lose color, sharpness, and a fair amount of time. You also will weaken the overall structure of the content. Think "adding sand to concrete." Doing so may make it more moldable, but weakens the overall strength.

 

[SurfnSkate81]

I'm sure there are used copies floating around the web. NAB had a few copies in their bookstore this year. It's been out of print for 3 years. I'd started on a UHD/HDR/SHV edition, but decided that there is so much info now available on the web, it's not really worth the effort.

@pyrate, my recommendation for Premiere/GoPro is to copy the GoPro footage to your HDD, and populate your bins from there. There is no need any longer, to do anything to the video prior to editing. Save your time.
The upside to converting first is that all processes are equal prior to editing.
The downsides to converting first is that you lose color, sharpness, and a fair amount of time. You also will weaken the overall structure of the content. Think "adding sand to concrete." Doing so may make it more moldable, but weakens the overall strength.

@EyeWingsuit I'm guessing as you've also mentioned before that it's exactly the same for FCPX?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[EyeWingsuit]

@EyeWingsuit I'm guessing as you've also mentioned before that it's exactly the same for FCPX?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

FCPX is the same *if* you have a fairly recent system. Not Final Cut Studio. Older systems with FCPX can choke down on the edit, and the experience may be frustrating, at which point I'd convert to ProRes. Most anything newer running ElCap, should be butter smooth with anything except 4K.

 

[SurfnSkate81]

@EyeWingsuit I'd pay for your detailed breakdown of workflows for FCPX, Premiere and any other formats. You have mentioned that you will be going over these on your roadshow tour. For all of us that live in other parts of the world who can't get there.

Your wealth of knowledge on the subject is second to none here at 3DR Pilots.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SurfnSkate81]

And a breakdown of the workflows for newer and older systems.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[EyeWingsuit]

@EyeWingsuit I'd pay for your detailed breakdown of workflows for FCPX, Premiere and any other formats. You have mentioned that you will be going over these on your roadshow tour. For all of us that live in other parts of the world who can't get there.

Your wealth of knowledge on the subject is second to none here at 3DR Pilots.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In today's world, they're pretty much all the same. Edit source footage in your NLE when possible. If not possible, learn the best codec for your particular NLE choice. ProRes and XDCam formats are by far the most transportable/compatible with everything out there.

In today's world, the camera codec/format and NLE choice truly are hand-in-hand decisions. It's foolish for example, to choose to shoot Blackmagic Design but want to edit in Canopus, while wanting a fast turnaround. A transcode is required. Transcodes are almost never in the best interests of the footage/quality. The question becomes how much of a loss are you OK with?

 

[SurfnSkate81]

In today's world, they're pretty much all the same. Edit source footage in your NLE when possible. If not possible, learn the best codec for your particular NLE choice. ProRes and XDCam formats are by far the most transportable/compatible with everything out there.

In today's world, the camera codec/format and NLE choice truly are hand-in-hand decisions. It's foolish for example, to choose to shoot Blackmagic Design but want to edit in Canopus, while wanting a fast turnaround. A transcode is required. Transcodes are almost never in the best interests of the footage/quality. The question becomes how much of a loss are you OK with?

Answer would always be as least as possible.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Leigh]

Does adding a ND Filter create any balance issues with the Gimbal? do you have to compensate for the filter weight by adding one of those small weights people use with the Hero 3+ or Hero 4 Silver? or is it you just stick it on and away you go?

 

[SurfnSkate81]

Check out the balance kit from Backbone. I use it with the PolarPro filters works great once you work out the optimal position of the weights.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SurfnSkate81]

You could fart around with the weights that come with the gimbal but it's a PITA.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Leigh]

Thanks I'll take a look

 

[pyrate]

the IMP concepts balancer is good too.
Living in the states shipping on the backbone was more than the balance kit
Got mine from Ian and it works great, good price and no outrageous shipping