Totally needs the not-yet-existing channel *waitforit - and *epic.

I first thought this was the jelly-effect from the rolling shutter - and no, it was definitely not.

Anti shake correction.. Rolling shutter.. World warping around the camera subject.. Getting queasy. But the music is awesome.









blurrrrghhhk






*promote

looks like rolling shutter distortion to me. possibly made worse with image stabilization.

The strings would not look like this if filmed with a CCD with a universal shutter. This effect is from the rolling shutter in almost all modern CMOS-based camera sensors.

It's sort of an illusion, but not due to the optics of the camera, rather the temporal effect of the sensors.

Yup - this is interference and a rolling shutter.
Hmm - gotta try this with my own camera and subwoofer.

>> ^MonkeySpank:

That video stabilizer is really warping the heck out of this video. Great fun in the mud though!


Nope - that's because of a rolling shutter, not a video stabilizer. Objects look skewed when panning sideways.

>> ^chingalera:

What's with the video edges warping as the guy tracks the dog??


It looks like he used image stabilization software on it, might of also been some rolling shutter thrown in there too.

Yes, the rolling shutter is part of the effect, but it won't produce the waves on it's own. Imagine the rotas turning so the axis is perpendicular to the horizon. Regardless of if the shutter was rolling or not you will get a perfectly flat horizon.

I take a lot of panoramic shots and if you aren't controlling the axis of rotation properly when taking the shots you'll get a curved horizon.

Are you sure the bending and waving isn't the result of a rolling shutter? No matter the speed or the angle of the rotor, the camera should still take frames with a correct perspective, unless there is said rolling shutter.

If you read two posts above your original one, I provided a link that describes the mathematical theorem behind this phenomenon.....suitable link, wouldnt you think?

>> ^MaxWilder:

>> ^charliem:
>> ^MaxWilder:
Why is nobody crying fake? C'mon! It looks fake! Are there other videos with this effect happening?

Because the phenomenon is a very well understood and documented real behavior of digital information systems?

Thanks for that illuminating response.</sarcasm>
How about actually saying something useful if you are going to respond to a question?
Like this: The reddit discussion about the video contains a number of interesting links with other examples of the Rolling Shutter phenomenon, including a video which shows how guitar strings actually oscillate.

>> ^charliem:

>> ^MaxWilder:
Why is nobody crying fake? C'mon! It looks fake! Are there other videos with this effect happening?

Because the phenomenon is a very well understood and documented real behavior of digital information systems?


Thanks for that illuminating response.</sarcasm>

How about actually saying something useful if you are going to respond to a question?

Like this: The reddit discussion about the video contains a number of interesting links with other examples of the Rolling Shutter phenomenon, including a video which shows how guitar strings actually oscillate.

rolling shutter + camera shake = vomit.

>> ^lucky760:

More info at this dupe.


Wow. What kind of coincidence is that? There are several stroboprop videos out there-Stranger things have happened-

More info at this dupe.

I don't know why they opted for a lens made of jelly on that nosegear camera. A solid one would have looked better.

Seriously, though, what's going on with the video? Is the camera subject to high-frequency vibration and the camera uses a rolling-shutter CMOS sensor? Makes for a disconcerting effect to be sure.