Hyper vs. Sped up video

[DebianDog]

other than convenience I can't think of a good reason to use Hyperlapse over just speeding up the video 1500% or so. Can anyone convince me otherwise? Clip shows both and I am hard pressed to tell the difference. Hyper vs. Sped Up

• you get only 1080P
• your time/video length seems limited
• waypoints are fussy

 

[RadioFlyerMan]

Heres how I see it...

Hyperlapse captures compound motion at two different speeds. The main two are 1) Objects within the scence moving at a very fast rate, 2) movement of the scene as a whole at a normal rate.

A good example is the beginning scenes of House of Cards. Clouds move quickly, but the scene moves slowly (or normally) as it transverses the buildings.

If you just speed up a video, the whole scene will move too quickly. And using waypoints allows the drone to move at a very low, consistent speed while taking timed shots. It's almost impossible to maintain a slow speed over a long distance manually.

The alternative is to have a scene with only one dimensional movement. Hover in one place while taking timed shots, or hover and do what you say.. just speed up the video.

 

[DebianDog]

Mmmmm But if you are taking a picture every 2 seconds (hyperlapse) or speeding up progressive frame footage, the video program is not going to merge 25 frames it will pick one or 2 and move on. Maybe i will do some cloud footage as a test.

 

[webvan]

other than convenience I can't think of a good reason to use Hyperlapse over just speeding up the video 1500% or so. Can anyone convince me otherwise? Clip shows both and I am hard pressed to tell the difference. Hyper vs. Sped Up

• you get only 1080P
• your time/video length seems limited
• waypoints are fussy

Was wondering about that too, can't seem to open your link ?

 

[DebianDog]

Was wondering about that too, can't seem to open your link ?

mmm... dunno works on all my devices and browsers can't think of anything that would block it. Are others having this issue? anyone...

 

[webvan]

Working now !
The first video is hyperlapse ? I find the second one a bit more "jittery".

 

[DebianDog]

Working now !
The first video is hyperlapse ? I find the second one a bit more "jittery".

yes agreed it is but it was 60 FPS footage I am going to try with 24 today

 

[JAW]

Working now !
The first video is hyperlapse ? I find the second one a bit more "jittery".

Agreed, especially the trees.

 

[DebianDog]

OK I could not wait. To answer my own questions

1. Camera movements of sped up video are MUCH more noticable
2. You have to have the patience of a saint to fly from point A to point B super slow. I tried to match the Mavic speed of 7 mins 30 secs it took at do the Hyperlapse. I took like 4 manually flying.
3. There are more frames in the sped up video. I put 2 vehicles passing in this clip and slowed down the time lapse and sped up the other
4. Still sad about the 1080P limitation. Must be the CPU on the aircraft cant handle larger in a timely manner?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[DebianDog]

To answer my own 1080P question I guess I could just set the camera to auto fire every 2 to 5 seconds, fly slow, then use Photoshop to stitch them together into a movie.

 

[Umgapa Sky]

I am betting the. M2P is doing more than just snapping an image at regular intervals because of the smooth result. Wind accounts for the jitters in sped up video, but by shooting in 4K and then processing down to 1080, the M2P can eliminate that jittering.