Time Lapse Photography

[russy01]

Afternoon,

I need to shoot a time lapse video of somebody painting a picture. It will be done indoors on a table and will take a couple hours. Id like the finished file to be at least 720p (1080p ideally) and 2-4mins long.

I have:

- Canon 70d
- Canon Legria R67 HD Camcorder
- GoPro Hero 3 Black Edition
- Several 64gb cards.

I have never done a time lapse before, whats the best equipment to use? Concerns are files sizes and power?

GoPro & Camcorder can be charged via cable & port - so I assume these would be most suitable as they can be plugged in for the duration?

Any feedback or tips for such a project?

Thanks.

[Tuna]

It certainly used to be the case that all Canons can be controlled in 'tethered' mode from a PC or Laptop. Download the official Canon software and you can control timelapse (interval) photographs, storing them to your PC. Then you can stitch them together into a film with VirtualDub or other software. Your biggest challenge is ensuring you don't have to go back to the camera once it's set up. That means remote power (you can get a battery adaptor for that), a sturdy tripod that's placed so it's not going to get knocked or obstruct things, and a bit of thought about how you're going to frame the film.

Unless you're completely indoors, changes in daylight can have quite a big effect on filming (a flicker effect as clouds go by and the camera compensates in it's exposure, or doesn't). It's worth doing a practise shoot in the location and with a similar activity so you can see what works.

[russy01]

Ok thanks for your help. I would have liked to do the shoot in Video, that way the result should be smoother and actually capture the artists movement and actions when doing the piece.

But Im assuming then I get into issues with trying to store, process and large video files?

I might look later and see what the Camcorder does? Simply hooking it up to the mains with my largest card and see how long it will record for in say 720p.

[FunkyNige]

russy01 said:

Ok thanks for your help. I would have liked to do the shoot in Video, that way the result should be smoother and actually capture the artists movement and actions when doing the piece.

But Im assuming then I get into issues with trying to store, process and large video files?

I might look later and see what the Camcorder does? Simply hooking it up to the mains with my largest card and see how long it will record for in say 720p.

The normal way of doing time lapse (and almost certainly the method used for most time lapse videos you see on Youtube) is to take a series of photos then use those photos as the frames in the video. For example if you wanted your video to play at 30 frames per second, you could take a series of 30 photos 2 seconds apart, create a 1 second video from it and you have compressed 1 minute into 1 second. Does that make sense?

[russy01]

Yea I understand that. I'll have a play about later on.

Its for a family member, so its not time sensitive. I'll get it right before we do it for real...

[Tuna]

russy01 said:

Ok thanks for your help. I would have liked to do the shoot in Video, that way the result should be smoother and actually capture the artists movement and actions when doing the piece.

If you want to show two hours work in five minutes worth of video, that's approximately one frame a second. You don't get any more sense of movement speeding up video that amount than you do by taking photos. In fact, you can get more artistic effects by taking long(er) exposure photos and making a video than you will by speeding up a conventional video recording.

For example: https://vimeo.com/22755459

[russy01]

Yea I see what you mean. Cant say I have ever thought about it, but it makes sense. I'll piss the Mrs off tonight and do a time lapse of her dinner plate as she eats - Will be a similar subject!

[Simpo Two]

120 mins into 3. At 25 fps that's 180,000 frames into 4,500.

You could shoot live video (25fps), then take every 40th frame and edit together.

[The_Jackal]

Doesn't the Hero 3 Black have a timelapse option, then you can use the GoPro Studio software to compile the video and adjust the speed and length to your preferences.

A 2 minute final movie will require 3600 photos at 30 fps
That is one photo every 2 seconds for two hours.

To be honest a 2 minute movie of someone paining will be quite boring.
I would try a photo every 5 or ten seconds. The movie will be shorter but have more impact and keep the viewers interest.

[russy01]

2min vid of painting boring? Only how 2mins of cars would be boring to somebody else fella!

3mins of some chap painting an egg gets 7m views - so I wouldn't worry about the length of the vid - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OcydG0RiqI

Ill have a play around with different techniques later. Thanks for you help thus far.

[The_Jackal]

That wasn't meant as a derogatory comment, more from the point of view of concentration of the human brain.

[RobDickinson]

2min = 120 seconds * 24 (for fps) = 2880 shots thats how many you need for a smooth bit of video.

2 hours is 7200 seconds so 7200/2880 2.5 seconds in between each shot.

Not sure what camera you are using but if it was me I would use my canon SLR with magic lantern on which has an awesome intervalvometer.

Shoot manual, make sure the lighting doesnt change, dont use a small aperture (so try lowish f number).

Then you have to combine those photos into a movie, thats step 2..

[Tuna]

Oh, and remember that for High-def movies you only need 1080x1920 so turn your camera resolution right down or you'll be wasting a lot of space (and using up a lot of processing time) just to convert the images to the right size.

[AndWhyNot]

RobDickinson said:

2min = 120 seconds * 24 (for fps) = 2880 shots thats how many you need for a smooth bit of video.

2 hours is 7200 seconds so 7200/2880 2.5 seconds in between each shot.

Not sure what camera you are using but if it was me I would use my canon SLR with magic lantern on which has an awesome intervalvometer.

Shoot manual, make sure the lighting doesnt change, dont use a small aperture (so try lowish f number).

Then you have to combine those photos into a movie, thats step 2..

Good advice here. My bold- I'm guessing Rob's suggestion about aperture is to keep the shutter speed high. One thing to consider is how jumpy the final footage might look if the artist is moving around the canvas a lot; using a longer exposure of 1/10 to 1/2 second will blur the motion within the frame and give a smoother appearance overall. Might not be right for you but something else to experiment with during your trial phase.

[RobDickinson]

AndWhyNot said:

Good advice here. My bold- I'm guessing Rob's suggestion about aperture is to keep the shutter speed high.

Thanks, but nope! Canon lenses have electronic apertures, they stop down in between each shot, but not always to the exact same amount! it can be only a small amount different but in timelapse you notice this as a flickering between images.

This is much more apparent with small apertures where the percentage difference increases than towards the bigger aperture range, so f5.6 or wider is better.

There is a way around it - the aperture 'hack of setting f11 etc then holding DOF preview and half twisting the lens (disconnects contacts) so it sticks at that aperture for the whole time. Kinda thinking this is a little more advanced than needed tho.

Tl is so easy to muck up, dont touch the camera once its going, make sure everything is on manual and you are shooting raw or set a fixed white balance. Shooting smaller images is nice but it leaves far less leeway for editing or consistency , you can use mRaw or something instead.

[Craikeybaby]

I've used both Canon EOS (with an intervalometer remote) and GoPro for timelapses and the GoPro is much easier, it has the built in timer and can be powered. It is also more discreet, with just an LED flashing, rather than the mirror/shutter sound on a DSLR.

[russy01]

Craikeybaby said:

I've used both Canon EOS (with an intervalometer remote) and GoPro for timelapses and the GoPro is much easier, it has the built in timer and can be powered. It is also more discreet, with just an LED flashing, rather than the mirror/shutter sound on a DSLR.

Yes, I was thinking the same. I will try later, didn't get round to it yesterday.

Incase any of you were interested, the artist is infact my little sister. She is a 18yr old college student who is starting to get fairly good...we want to put some media together to boost her portfolio and this video is going to be something over and above what her contemporaries have done.

Here is a quick sketch she has done this morning using Charcoal. Its Finn, one of the Main Characters from the new Star Wars film.

[GetCarter]

Craikeybaby said:

GoPro is much easier, it has the built in timer and can be powered. It is also more discreet, with just an LED flashing, rather than the mirror/shutter sound on a DSLR.

You can turn the LED off too.