During panning, only a thin strip on the left or right side of the screen actually contains new information. Of course, compression algorithm has to be smart and recognize that the remaining part of the image has to be shifted.
No, I won't. The problem is that I don't know what's actually been captured versus everything else that happens downstream, including YouTube or other transcoding.
What happens downstream can be seen by looking at individual frames. Nevertheless, if you want to get rid of those issues, there are online tools that use synthetic images to demonstrate that effect:
And that is 16:9, but Nikon FX sensors have the aspect ration of 3:2. Hence you need at least 7680
7680/1.5) = 7680:5120 or around 40MP.I don't think so - I've seen it in Imax films. In fact that's when I became aware of it. I was expecting to be wowed by the clarity of the film, but I wasn't - at all. Unless the camera and subject were relatively stationary, it was very blurry.
Just a clarification, it's in fact not just motion blur (i.e. the blur that is baked into each video frame) but also persistence blur which is created when eye track a moving object on a screen. Each video frame is stationary which creates a blur when eye is moving.
"...I wonder if there's an upper limit to what we can really comprehend."
I'm guessing that the ability to process certain types of visual information from video is increasing. My young engineering apprentices certainly find and extract data from a screen a lot faster than I can. They have the quickness of youth, but I suspect that playing video games since toddlerhood has molded their cortex differently than mine.
Having studying HD decision in a communications class, I can say America also choose poorly in Over-air and thru Pipes HD implementation vs. what Europe choose. America left out of its HD protocol a way to keep audio synced with video; which is why we Americans to frequently get to watch actor's and commentator's mouthing words, and us hearing different words. :-x
I’m not sure about that. Almost all fujis line up is based on that. For me it’s more of the manual dials experience and clean styling. It’s more fun to use and looks sleeker in general.The prospect of people demanding tech-y "bells and whistles" and a high-tech super-powers experience for an old-school camera is redolent with ineffable sadness.
I think it's more like 1/50 (2x frames per second - or half angle). But yes point taken.
Not universally, selectively. I dislike overly smoothed skin. But certain algorithms work better on larger files, and then I mask out the bits I don't want, or it gives a healing brush/clone stamp more to work with.
I think video games will lead the way here. People are used to 60fps in gaming.
Manual dials are good design. You can see this in the auto world as well with the blow-back against the (incredibly bad) touchscreen controls in cars for stuff like AC and speaker volume.I’m not sure about that. Almost all fujis line up is based on that. For me it’s more of the manual dials experience and clean styling. It’s more fun to use and looks sleeker in general.The prospect of people demanding tech-y "bells and whistles" and a high-tech super-powers experience for an old-school camera is redolent with ineffable sadness.
I wouldn’t mind a new take on it that isn’t based on old cams also.
A lot of music gear for instance still has manual dials for instance but isn’t retro.
I remember photographing high school baseball years ago with my D2h.
Yes, the D-Day invasion scene from "Saving Private Ryan" was shot 24fps with fast shutter speed, resulting in this look.
8 fps doesn't really cut it today. The Z6ii does 14 fps in slideshow mode and it captures the entire motion with spare. The Z9 does 20 fps but at that point I've got scared of how many frames it captures and filling up my card, so I dialed it down to 15 fps.
