Phantom HD vs. Canon 7D questions

I

iggy4mayor

New member
Okay, so what I'm wondering is, how come a Canon 7D at 1000+ FPS produce footage like the Phantom HD cameras do? I understand sensor size obviously, but everyone tells me that you "MUST" use Twixtor to get those smooth Time Warp esque footage that everyone drools over (windows shattering into millions of pieces, bubbles bursting, etc.) Does that mean that a Canon 7D doesn't shoot a true 1000 FPS? How come programs like Sony Vegas and FCP prevent you from stretching footage out to unbelievable lengths like I can imagine you do with Phantom cameras? Or, what does the footage from a Phantom look like when it comes out untouched? Can anyone clear this up for me? Thanks!
 
theres no comparison between a $1800 camera and a $100k+ camera. look up Twixtor - its a plugin thats used to create an illusion of super slow motion using regular framerates, usually 60p.
 
The 7D does not shoot at 1,000 FPS. It's maximum limit at 1080 is 30p, and at 720 it is 60p.

The Phantom is a completely different kind of camera - a high-end digital cinematography camera. The 7D is just a DSLR. The Phantom allows for up to 1,000 FPS at 2K and records in a far more robust format than the 7D's H.264 4:2:0 8-bit.

Twixtor is a plugin for After Effects, like Efexone said, that creates intermediate frames for a given piece of footage, stretching 24 or 30 frames to up to 1,000. This, however, is based on algorithms, which can screw up the interpolation, creating some weird effects that do not look like slo-mo at all. E.g. http://vimeo.com/20339025 Look at how the body of water kind of wiggles when the footage slows down.

Footage from the Phantom is legitimate 1,000 FPS, if that's how it was recorded. Footage from a 7D can never be 1,000 FPS, but it can be run through Twixtor to manufacture a high-speed look.
 
Last edited:
And yeah I know about Twixtor that's why I'm asking all this. All my Twixtor'd footage looks like ****, has tons of motion blur/interpolation issues. But all the youtube videos I see look amazing.

http://vimeo.com/17249367

Like yeah there's a couple parts if you watch really closely you can see the motion blur/ghosting body parts, but it's very slight. I shot video of cars driving by at 1/4000 this morning in beautiful bright light on a very basic backdrop, and it just looks god awful.
 
Driving is not the way to cheat it. You need a background with almost nothing in it. i.e. a sky like in the youtube clip. Then crank up your shutterspeed to kill any motion blur. 1000fps is a little high for a goal on most things. Try doubling your 60p to 120 and then try doubling that to 240 and see how it falls apart. I've had it work great and but also tank.
 
thekreative said:
Driving is not the way to cheat it. You need a background with almost nothing in it. i.e. a sky like in the youtube clip. Then crank up your shutterspeed to kill any motion blur. 1000fps is a little high for a goal on most things. Try doubling your 60p to 120 and then try doubling that to 240 and see how it falls apart. I've had it work great and but also tank.
Click to expand...

Oh, so are you trying to match a multiple of 60? That could explain why some of it comes out like crap
 
It's more the point of making one or two new frames instead of 16 frames out of the blue. 1000 fps out of 60fps is a big stretch. If I had a job that needed that sort of frame rate I'd charge the rental fee for the phantom and do it right. For fun I'd start small (120-240 fps) and see how slow I can getit past that, but it's almost always going to fall apart if you take it to far.
 
iggy4mayor said:
ok well you kinda just like said oh phantom is more expensive and then told me to look up an effect that I mentioned in my original post.
Click to expand...

Dude - you are clearly new to the game, so I suggest being a little more humble/polite when replying to someone who is trying to help.

You are clearly getting confused with frame rate and shutter speed. The Phantom can shoot at a frame rate of 1000 frames per second, your DSLR can shoot ONE frame at a SHUTTER speed of 1000th of a second. To get great looking slow-mo you need a camera that can shoot at fast FRAME RATES, not shutter speeds. It takes a lot of processing power to process 1000 frames a second - thats why these cameras cost a lot, thats why a 'cheap' DSLR cant...

I hope that enlightens you.

Chris D
 
The Phantom HD Gold can shoot 1920x1080 images at frame rates beyond 1000fps. That is 1000 separate images captured each second.

A Canon 7D can shoot a version of 1920x1080 at 30fps or 60 interlaced fields per second (effectively 1920x540 offset frames).

Shutter speed defines the length of exposure of each frame. One could shoot at one frame per second with an exposure time of 1/1000th of a second or one could shoot at 1000fps with an exposure time of 1/1000th of a second.

Twixtor takes the frames you give it and creates a false "in-between" frame. It does a pretty good job but can only work with the information it has. The more false frames one asks from it the more artifacts will crop up.

There are no artifacts of false motion with the Phantom as it is actually capturing those frames, nothing false about it. The Phantom is then recording those frames in 14-bit Uncompressed RAW, which is miles more advanced than the heavily compressed h.264 video frames the Canon records. In fact the recording from the Phantom is essentially the same as the recording the Canon does in its highest quality in Stills mode.

Very, very different machines.
 
iggy4mayor said:
ok well you kinda just like said oh phantom is more expensive and then told me to look up an effect that I mentioned in my original post.
Click to expand...

You are a noob so be polite.

the 60p max of 7D dslr is nothing compared to 1000+ fps of the phantom. Know your camera, know what shutter speed vs frame rate is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top