Photo Video

Discussion in 'Mountain Bikes' started by Pete Rissler, Jan 25, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Pete Rissler

    Pete Rissler Guest

    Tags:


  2. Geedubb

    Geedubb Guest

    Pete Rissler wrote:
    > Here's a link to a photo montage video of a ride I did last summer up at Lake Tahoe. It's a bunch
    > of photos using some pan and zoom effects. I'm curious on what people think of something like
    > this. The download is pretty large for the video time (26.5 MB, 2.5 mins).
    >
    > http://www.tccycling.com/videos/stanford-paige.mpg

    very large file as the download speed was rather slow this afternoon.

    Nicely done and I wasn't hammered by the tunes which was well done for the effect.

    Gary
     
  3. Bb

    Bb Guest

    On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 14:36:18 -0800, Pete Rissler wrote:

    > http://www.tccycling.com/videos/stanford-paige.mpg

    I gave up at about 13%; it downloads VERY slowly. That's too much bandwidth just to look at
    still photos.

    --
    -BB- To reply to me, drop the attitude (from my e-mail address, at least)
     
  4. Zilla

    Zilla Guest

    Pete Rissler wrote:
    > Here's a link to a photo montage video of a ride I did last summer up at Lake Tahoe. It's a bunch
    > of photos using some pan and zoom effects. I'm curious on what people think of something like
    > this. The download is pretty large for the video time (26.5 MB, 2.5 mins).
    >
    > http://www.tccycling.com/videos/stanford-paige.mpg

    I thought it was done well, especially the background music, which fit the show perfectly! The
    photos were getting grainy as you used the panning and zoom effects. There has to be a better format
    than mpeg rendering for this type of application.

    --
    - Zilla Cary, NC (Remove XSPAM)
     
  5. Slacker

    Slacker Guest

    Pete Rissler wrote:
    > Here's a link to a photo montage video of a ride I did last summer up at Lake Tahoe. It's a bunch
    > of photos using some pan and zoom effects. I'm curious on what people think of something like
    > this. The download is pretty large for the video time (26.5 MB, 2.5 mins).
    >
    > http://www.tccycling.com/videos/stanford-paige.mpg

    Pretty cool, except :^ ( for that tune, and different.

    There seems to be a lot of fuzziness on many of the shots as they pan in. I ran it under both MS
    MP and QT.
    --
    Slacker
     
  6. Zilla

    Zilla Guest

    BB wrote:
    > On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 14:36:18 -0800, Pete Rissler wrote:
    >
    >> http://www.tccycling.com/videos/stanford-paige.mpg
    >
    > I gave up at about 13%; it downloads VERY slowly. That's too much bandwidth just to look at
    > still photos.

    Try using a download accelerator like Star Downloader or Download Accelerator (do a google)...

    --
    - Zilla Cary, NC (Remove XSPAM)
     
  7. Slacker

    Slacker Guest

    BB wrote:
    > On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 14:36:18 -0800, Pete Rissler wrote:
    >
    >> http://www.tccycling.com/videos/stanford-paige.mpg
    >
    > I gave up at about 13%; it downloads VERY slowly. That's too much bandwidth just to look at
    > still photos.

    I just averaged 180 kb/s using LeechGet. Thank you SBC!

    --
    Slacker
     
  8. On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 21:27:27 -0500, "Zilla" <[email protected]> wrote: There has to be a
    better format than mpeg
    >rendering for this type of application.

    It's not an mpeg issue it's an editing issue.

    There is no fuzzy/pixelation if it's done right in a program such as Premiere.
     
  9. On 2004-01-25, Pete Rissler penned:
    > Here's a link to a photo montage video of a ride I did last summer up at Lake Tahoe. It's a bunch
    > of photos using some pan and zoom effects. I'm curious on what people think of something like
    > this. The download is pretty large for the video time (26.5 MB, 2.5 mins).
    >
    > http://www.tccycling.com/videos/stanford-paige.mpg
    >

    I like! In fact, I think I like this better than the videos I've seen.

    The style reminds me very much of ninjai ( www.ninjai.com ) ... is there a name for this sort
    of approach?

    --
    monique
     
  10. Pete Rissler

    Pete Rissler Guest

    > There has to be a better format than mpeg
    > >rendering for this type of application.
    >
    > It's not an mpeg issue it's an editing issue.
    >
    > There is no fuzzy/pixelation if it's done right in a program such as Premiere.

    I'm not familiar with Premiere. I'm using Ulead's MediaStudio Pro. The photos I were using were 5 MP
    in size. The major problem for MSP was the large downsampling required when zooming out. When I
    zoomed in the flickering would go away. If I were to do something like this again I would do the
    initial downsampling in Adobe PhotoShop before importing into MSP.
     
  11. On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 21:00:49 -0800, "Pete Rissler"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >> There has to be a better format than mpeg
    >> >rendering for this type of application.
    >>
    >> It's not an mpeg issue it's an editing issue.
    >>
    >> There is no fuzzy/pixelation if it's done right in a program such
    as
    >> Premiere.
    >
    >I'm not familiar with Premiere. I'm using Ulead's MediaStudio Pro.
    The
    >photos I were using were 5 MP in size. The major problem for MSP was
    the
    >large downsampling required when zooming out. When I zoomed in the flickering would go away. If I
    >were to do something like this again I
    would
    >do the initial downsampling in Adobe PhotoShop before importing into
    MSP.

    With Premiere you don't need to downsample, you can use the full resolution image and avoid
    pixelation issues if you pan and zoom.
     
  12. Pete Rissler

    Pete Rissler Guest

    > >I'm not familiar with Premiere. I'm using Ulead's MediaStudio Pro.
    > The
    > >photos I were using were 5 MP in size. The major problem for MSP was
    > the
    > >large downsampling required when zooming out. When I zoomed in the flickering would go away. If I
    > >were to do something like this again I
    > would
    > >do the initial downsampling in Adobe PhotoShop before importing into
    > MSP.
    >
    > With Premiere you don't need to downsample, you can use the full resolution image and avoid
    > pixelation issues if you pan and zoom.

    I'll download the Tryout version of Premiere and check it out.

    Thanks
     
  13. Pete Rissler

    Pete Rissler Guest

    "Monique Y. Herman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > On 2004-01-25, Pete Rissler penned:
    > > Here's a link to a photo montage video of a ride I did last summer up at Lake Tahoe. It's a
    > > bunch of photos using some pan and zoom effects. I'm curious on what people think of something
    > > like this. The download is pretty large for the video time (26.5 MB, 2.5 mins).
    > >
    > > http://www.tccycling.com/videos/stanford-paige.mpg
    > >
    >
    > I like! In fact, I think I like this better than the videos I've seen.
    >
    > The style reminds me very much of ninjai ( www.ninjai.com ) ... is there a name for this sort of
    > approach?
    >
    > --
    > monique

    I don't know if there is an official name. It's just a bunch of pan and zooms. Unofficially the
    method is called the Ken Burns effect.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...