UNNECESSARY Video recording framerate limitations

[usually_quiet]

> You can't control what replies you get
Did I ever claim I could? That was just a suggestion.

"Answer or discuss." is a command not a suggestion. You most certainly were trying to control responses.

>Figure out the information you want.
Reason behind technical limitations. Was that not clear enough?

I wrote "If you want answers, the first thing you need to do is figure out who has the information you want." I'm guessing you misquoted me on purpose to manufacture an opening for a poor attempt at a smart-ass remark.

And I know that only manufacturers themselves can give a definitive answer, but maybe, some people here also provide possible explanations.

General answers did not appear to satisfy you. You just admitted that you knew that asking here was very unlikely to give you the information that you wanted.

Of course, the expectations will rise. What else? But that does not make the captured video footage look any worse. It does not degrade like analogue tape over time.

My point actually was that the video will look bad when compared to what is likely to be widely available from phone cameras in 10-20 years. This is the third time someone explained that to you. The quality isn't even the best now. Even in 2018 video shot by the best phone cameras doesn't match the quality that some high-end consumer cameras can deliver. BTW Super 8 cameras were analog, but used film not magnetic tape.

I now have a new name to add to my ignore list.

[lordsmurf]

I know the parameters such as ISO, exposure, aperture size and effects on the picture (example: reinforced bokeh at wider aperture size (means lower F number)) etc.
If there is something you do not consider me to understand, then go ahead. I am listening.

Those are all extremely rudimentary things.

It's like telling a race car drive you know about cars:
You: "They have four wheels!"
Driver: "What should my tires be inflated to on this track?"
You: "Uhh...?"

One of the primary obstacles with sensors is dynamic range. Learn about that. Some of you questions come across as asinine because of things like that. When your sensor acquisition rate increase, DR is one of the things affected. Phones are already marginal quality, and would quickly spiral into unviewable garbage if shutter speed is pushed.

Like I said ... you don't know what you don't know. Instead of acting like an expert, perhaps ask questions.

The simply rule is that time and light are always related. Always.
Adjusting one creates need for trade-off. Always.

[lingyi]

@TechLord

You've confirmed what I (and I'm sure others) have suspected. You're trolling (albeit cleverly) with obscure technical questions and continue to press for answers when you're told to continue elsewhere.

Continual learning is admirable, but you can't expect someone to summarize their years of accumulated knowledge and experiences in a forum. Theory is fine, but there are some aspects of learning that can only be attained through experience.

You facade is failing, especially in your recent posts. You've already caused at least one knowledgeable and experienced member to ignore your posts and you may be looking at a potential ban if you continue to ask the same questions over and over.

Contrary to what you may believe, the majority of the members of this forum are not your peers, in age, knowledge or experience. If you're having difficulty communicating with peers within your age group, I highly recommend seeking counseling (professional, spiritual, familial) to better understand yourself and others.

[TechLord]

I know the parameters such as ISO, exposure, aperture size and effects on the picture (example: reinforced bokeh at wider aperture size (means lower F number)) etc.
If there is something you do not consider me to understand, then go ahead. I am listening.

Those are all extremely rudimentary things.

It's like telling a race car driver you know about cars:
You: "They have four wheels!"
Driver: "What should my tires be inflated to on this track?"
You: "Uhh...?"

One of the primary obstacles with sensors is dynamic range. Learn about that. Some of you questions come across as asinine because of things like that. When your sensor acquisition rate increase, DR is one of the things affected. Phones are already marginal quality, and would quickly spiral into unviewable garbage if shutter speed is pushed.

Like I said ... you don't know what you don't know. Instead of acting like an expert, perhaps ask questions.

The simply rule is that time and light are always related. Always.
Adjusting one creates need for trade-off. Always.

I have not seen the second page, excuse me. I have just adjusted the number of displayed posts per page to 40, the maximum possible setting.
I also know about dynamic range.

And asking questions is exactly what I am already doing.

[TechLord]

> You can't control what replies you get
Did I ever claim I could? That was just a suggestion.

"Answer or discuss." is a command not a suggestion. You most certainly were trying to control responses.

>Figure out the information you want.
Reason behind technical limitations. Was that not clear enough?

I wrote "If you want answers, the first thing you need to do is figure out who has the information you want." I'm guessing you misquoted me on purpose to manufacture an opening for a poor attempt at a smart-ass remark.

And I know that only manufacturers themselves can give a definitive answer, but maybe, some people here also provide possible explanations.

General answers did not appear to satisfy you. You just admitted that you knew that asking here was very unlikely to give you the information that you wanted.

Of course, the expectations will rise. What else? But that does not make the captured video footage look any worse. It does not degrade like analogue tape over time.

My point actually was that the video will look bad when compared to what is likely to be widely available from phone cameras in 10-20 years. This is the third time someone explained that to you. The quality isn't even the best now. Even in 2018 video shot by the best phone cameras doesn't match the quality that some high-end consumer cameras can deliver. BTW Super 8 cameras were analog, but used film not magnetic tape.

I now have a new name to add to my ignore list.

[Typing answer on mobile phone]

Thank you for your signature shoutout. I was just about to ask you to add me to your ignore list. Gladly, you managed to figure it out by yourself.

Does it matter, whether that was a command or not? Your reaction was paranoid.

Did I ever claim that Super 8 was digital and that phones beat real cameras?

[TechLord]

@TechLord

You've confirmed what I (and I'm sure others) have suspected. You're trolling (albeit cleverly) with obscure technical questions and continue to press for answers when you're told to continue elsewhere.

Continual learning is admirable, but you can't expect someone to summarize their years of accumulated knowledge and experiences in a forum. Theory is fine, but there are some aspects of learning that can only be attained through experience.

You facade is failing, especially in your recent posts. You've already caused at least one knowledgeable and experienced member to ignore your posts and you may be looking at a potential ban if you continue to ask the same questions over and over.

Contrary to what you may believe, the majority of the members of this forum are not your peers, in age, knowledge or experience. If you're having difficulty communicating with peers within your age group, I highly recommend seeking counseling (professional, spiritual, familial) to better understand yourself and others.

▪I could have created multiple accounts, intending vandalise the board, if my account was for trolling. But that's not my style and it would not provide any value to anybody, including myself.
▪As already stated, if he did not add me to his list of ignored user accounts yet, I would have briefly asked him to do so in my previous post. It is not bad to be invisible to haters.
▪I did never claim to have peers in the forum. But asking harms nobody.
▪It is not clear to me, where "elsewhere" is. Have I overlooked something?
▪The three linked questions I asked were related to each other, but not identical.

[lordsmurf]

I also know about dynamic range.

Your questions and assumptions suggest otherwise.

[TechLord]

I also know about dynamic range.

Your questions and assumptions suggest otherwise.

I asked about HDR video, sure. But I have done some online research meanwhile.
And I also tested some professional equipment at tech stores some time ago.

[_Al_]

You can ask a question yourself. Why pro equipment is always bigger than the phone, why lenses are multiple time bigger that phone lenses. Not sure if you understand that.

Then look into image processing in those devices. What you think you compare or see is basically digitally created image, especially in the phone (it is colored, sharpened, interpolated ). It is made up. It is just meant to be viewed. Pro device, is meant to capture actual reality as much as it can, borderline technology, so it does not overheat and manages it in real time. Captured formats could have some room for further tempering.

If there is no phone with 480fps, there is a reason why. If there is or I'm sure there is some lab with a phone chip set up that manages 480 fps , using perhaps different batteries . It has limitations. You know now that it has to cheat to make things work in those tiny devices.
Why it is not common - quality is not on the par with what that phone would cost. Whatever below. Maybe something else:

-very unreliable outcome results, depending on light condition, you know that you need a lots of light for a phone to have a decent footage, but with that high fps, you can get results that are really inconsistent, which brings you:

- Say $500 phone has certain so so standard you cannot go under for video capture.

-management decision - as you heard, they do things only if it is good for them, not you, people do not buy a phone for slo-mo. Example I have PS4, they took away CD playback feature for business reason because they know you only small % of folks realize it and yap about it, it is asmall % of a nuisance as oppose of gains

-recent battery affairs can scare the hell out of phone makers, so juice demanding applications are a scarecrow

-some other reason ...

-its waiting for a big name to break the ice and market that slo-mo feature, you know like you can see an add for a car that has a feature of opening its door just by swiping a foot underneath it. Would you look at that! Does not matter that the car's transmission or otherwise the car is a crap. It is just marketing that way.

[Bernix]

Yes lenses, not just size, but material and manufacturing matters. Search for some pro lenses from leica (btw, some has ability to photo skyscraper from street and lines are precisely narrow) also Carl-Zeiss is very good brand. As _Al_ mentioned, 500 bucks phone, can't simply has several thousand bucks lens in it. And lenses really matter. I would say most important thing of any camera.
You can have super camera with ordinary lenses and you get crappy picture from it too.

Bernix

[lordsmurf]

And I also tested some professional equipment at tech stores some time ago.

- Testing in a store isn't testing at all.
- Which stores? Note that Best Buy doesn't have pro anything.
- Again, "pro" and "phone" don't even belong in the same thread.
- And I've never seen a truly pro store that will let a teenager test the equipment without first seeing if you have the $$$$$ to buy it. They're just not willing to hand over a $K item just for you to fiddle for fun.

Carl-Zeiss is very good brand.

Not really. Zeiss whored their name out, and is/was commonly used on plastic junk. Even on good lenses, Zeiss has the same QC issues that plague other companies like Canon and Nikon now. Quality of a lens really depends on the lens, not the brand.

[lingyi]

@TechLord

▪As already stated, if he did not add me to his list of ignored user accounts yet, I would have briefly asked him to do so in my previous post. It is not bad to be invisible to haters.

It's one thing to ignore "haters" on a worldwide forum with thousands of members, but another to ignore "haters" in the real world when they may be the person or persons that can provide you the answers you require.

▪I did never claim to have peers in the forum. But asking harms nobody.

As you pursue higher education, you'll find the instructors less open to answering questions and more apt to present YOU with questions that require your independent study and research to answer. And as you aspire to higher employment positions, the ability to present solutions is far more valuable than presenting questions.

Look up gamemanico / gamemanico2 / samus87 / mediafiles87 posts on this forum as a example of someone who was "hurt" (i.e. banned on this and multiple other forums) by continually asking variations of the same questions and never accepting what he was told.

▪It is not clear to me, where "elsewhere" is. Have I overlooked something?

usually_quiet posted: "If you want answers, the first thing you need to do is figure out who has the information you want. As I said, it should be obvious to a 16-year old self-proclaimed technology expert that asking questions here about why certain specific design decisions were made is a waste of everyone's time. Only the people responsible for creating the phones/cameras you are asking about can tell you precisely why the technical limitations you are complaining about exist. "

You posted: "And I know that only manufacturers themselves can give a definitive answer, but maybe, some people here also provide possible explanations."

In the collegiate and work world, speculation and theories (from a forum) carry far less weight (and likely to be outright rejected) than empirical proof from a known source (the manufacturers).

[lingyi]

Addendum to the above post:

Pursuit of knowledge isn't a bad thing. Perhaps someday you may be able to bring quality 480fps video capability to affordable cell phones. But proper pursuit of knowledge means researching the technical and economic limitations of that technology. Research includes reading (and understanding) Technical White Papers, manufacturer's releases (press, specifications, etc) and hand's on experience.

[Bernix]

Hi Lordsmurf,
I said these two company Leica and Carl Zeiss for they high end products quality. And of course Quality of product is priority, not the brand. And don't want to beleve that C Z lost they ability to create great quality high end optics. Once they have "know how" I don't believe they gave up it absolutely.
Even if they did, it doesn't change that lenses are most important thing in photo and video industry. Probably share first place with (in digital world) with image sensor. But what will be superb image sensor without quality lenses.

Edit: Also don't believe they will offer optics for about 25k dollars and it will have not satisfactory results. But of course price are even several times higher in some cases.

Bernix

[TechLord]

You can ask a question yourself. Why pro equipment is always bigger than the phone, why lenses are multiple time bigger that phone lenses. Not sure if you understand that.

Then look into image processing in those devices. What you think you compare or see is basically digitally created image, especially in the phone (it is colored, sharpened, interpolated ). It is made up. It is just meant to be viewed. Pro device, is meant to capture actual reality as much as it can, borderline technology, so it does not overheat and manages it in real time. Captured formats could have some room for further tempering.

If there is no phone with 480fps, there is a reason why. If there is or I'm sure there is some lab with a phone chip set up that manages 480 fps , using perhaps different batteries . It has limitations. You know now that it has to cheat to make things work in those tiny devices.
Why it is not common - quality is not on the par with what that phone would cost. Whatever below. Maybe something else:

-very unreliable outcome results, depending on light condition, you know that you need a lots of light for a phone to have a decent footage, but with that high fps, you can get results that are really inconsistent, which brings you:

- Say $500 phone has certain so so standard you cannot go under for video capture.

-management decision - as you heard, they do things only if it is good for them, not you, people do not buy a phone for slo-mo. Example I have PS4, they took away CD playback feature for business reason because they know you only small % of folks realize it and yap about it, it is asmall % of a nuisance as oppose of gains

-recent battery affairs can scare the hell out of phone makers, so juice demanding applications are a scarecrow

-some other reason ...

-its waiting for a big name to break the ice and market that slo-mo feature, you know like you can see an add for a car that has a feature of opening its door just by swiping a foot underneath it. Would you look at that! Does not matter that the car's transmission or otherwise the car is a crap. It is just marketing that way.

Thank you for explaining.


I have never claimed, that a phone camera can cope with professional equipment in terms of quality.

Additionally, some of the devices I listed have the same canera modules, powerful hardware and image sensors as others, yet different limitations.

CD playback is just a tiny piece of software compared to the rest of PS4.

Additionally, how can 2160p@30fps require any more battery than 1080p@120fps? And if light conditions were an argument, 720p@240fps, which is more commonly supported, would be kicked out.

[TechLord]

And I also tested some professional equipment at tech stores some time ago.

- Testing in a store isn't testing at all.
- Which stores? Note that Best Buy doesn't have pro anything.
- Again, "pro" and "phone" don't even belong in the same thread.
- And I've never seen a truly pro store that will let a teenager test the equipment without first seeing if you have the $$$$$ to buy it. They're just not willing to hand over a $K item just for you to fiddle for fun.

Carl-Zeiss is very good brand.

Not really. Zeiss whored their name out, and is/was commonly used on plastic junk. Even on good lenses, Zeiss has the same QC issues that plague other companies like Canon and Nikon now. Quality of a lens really depends on the lens, not the brand.

What are some examples of what you consider as professional equipment? Your definition is not clear to me yet.

[TechLord]

@TechLord

▪As already stated, if he did not add me to his list of ignored user accounts yet, I would have briefly asked him to do so in my previous post. It is not bad to be invisible to haters.

It's one thing to ignore "haters" on a worldwide forum with thousands of members, but another to ignore "haters" in the real world when they may be the person or persons that can provide you the answers you require.

▪I did never claim to have peers in the forum. But asking harms nobody.

As you pursue higher education, you'll find the instructors less open to answering questions and more apt to present YOU with questions that require your independent study and research to answer. And as you aspire to higher employment positions, the ability to present solutions is far more valuable than presenting questions.

Look up gamemanico / gamemanico2 / samus87 / mediafiles87 posts on this forum as a example of someone who was "hurt" (i.e. banned on this and multiple other forums) by continually asking variations of the same questions and never accepting what he was told.

▪It is not clear to me, where "elsewhere" is. Have I overlooked something?

usually_quiet posted: "If you want answers, the first thing you need to do is figure out who has the information you want. As I said, it should be obvious to a 16-year old self-proclaimed technology expert that asking questions here about why certain specific design decisions were made is a waste of everyone's time. Only the people responsible for creating the phones/cameras you are asking about can tell you precisely why the technical limitations you are complaining about exist. "

You posted: "And I know that only manufacturers themselves can give a definitive answer, but maybe, some people here also provide possible explanations."

In the collegiate and work world, speculation and theories (from a forum) carry far less weight (and likely to be outright rejected) than empirical proof from a known source (the manufacturers).

Sorry, but I have no sockpuppet accounts at all.

I can remember having contacted manufacturers years ago, but they replied saying that they don't know it or blamed some hardware manufacturers (e.g. Sony for camera module).

Isn't one ban unified for all parts of the forum?

And: I did not decline the other two threads to be closed. It is good to have one unified place for discussion.


Which paranoid user was unable to maintain calmness and got emotional and fired up the spark that triggered the debate escalation, in reply to a factual question?

Bullsh_t

No further clarification re_quired/necessary.
Hopefully, he is usually_not_stalking my posts.

Well, he seems to be USUALLY quiet, as suggested by his username. But this time, there has been an exception.

I preferred this thread to lead serious, factual and non-emotional discussions.

But I am glad, that you seem to be more factual.

[_Al_]

Additionally, how can 2160p@30fps require any more battery than 1080p@120fps? And if light conditions were an argument, 720p@240fps, which is more commonly supported, would be kicked out.

that is dangerously close to a troll territory ,
for simplicity think one pixel has one bit of information and one pixel takes the same amount of energy to calculate, so 3840 x2160x30= something; 1920x1080x120= something bigger; so that means more processing .... or it is close and you have same amount of energy
Image is digitally processed/made up, where you take input values and processor makes output values (colors it as it things it should look like, sharpens it, perhaps denoise it, interpolates it) ,every pixel must be generated, it is completely different than analog devices, like capturing a snap/frame on the film.
Here you can get into situations, that processor would not make it for higher fps than 240fps it processes only every fourth line, sixth line, or they lower resolution, I don't know, whatever works in real time (or battery, or so it does not overheats etc.). Hence the quality drops, not mentioning less time for sensor to capture. That must be tested in a lab and satisfying software goes on the phone then.

So how much you can lower resolution so image is still ok? You cannot just half it all the time to keep up with processor, resolution must drop, and also there is half time for capture itself. So to prevent it, you'd need to stop skipping so much lines or keep resolution and that is not enough for processor or weird things start to happen. And even if you keep resolution, quality drops anyway (and it might become unstable) because of higher fps. I mean it is not difficult to imagine.

And what they kick out or introduce is not up to us, it is up to them, and there might be no logic in it, you keep coming back with those, so that is why guys talking about trolling

[TechLord]

Additionally, how can 2160p@30fps require any more battery than 1080p@120fps? And if light conditions were an argument, 720p@240fps, which is more commonly supported, would be kicked out.

that is dangerously close to a troll territory ,
for simplicity think one pixel has one bit of information and one pixel takes the same amount of energy to calculate, so 3840 x2160x30= something; 1920x1080x120= something bigger; so that means more processing .... or it is close and you have same amount of energy
Image is digitally processed/made up, where you take input values and processor makes output values (colors it as it things it should look like, sharpens it, perhaps denoise it, interpolates it) ,every pixel must be generated, it is completely different than analog devices, like capturing a snap/frame on the film.
Here you can get into situations, that processor would not make it for higher fps than 240fps it processes only every fourth line, sixth line, or they lower resolution, I don't know, whatever works in real time (or battery, or so it does not overheats etc.). Hence the quality drops, not mentioning less time for sensor to capture. That must be tested in a lab and satisfying software goes on the phone then.

So how much you can lower resolution so image is still ok? You cannot just half it all the time to keep up with processor, resolution must drop, and also there is half time for capture itself. So to prevent it, you'd need to stop skipping so much lines or keep resolution and that is not enough for processor or weird things start to happen. And even if you keep resolution, quality drops anyway (and it might become unstable) because of higher fps. I mean it is not difficult to imagine.

And what they kick out or introduce is not up to us, it is up to them, and there might be no logic in it, you keep coming back with those, so that is why guys talking about trolling

Very interesting information, thanks.

Of course, quality drops at higher framerates. That's why it xan not maintain the resolution.
But 1080p@60fps equals only half the data rate of 2160p@30fps.

But how exactly can one not be considered as troll?

[_Al_]

Of course, quality drops at higher framerates. That's why it xan not maintain the resolution.

So why you bring it up that there should be phones with higher frame rates?

def trolling():
   while  no_480_fps_phone:
         answer = input('But why:')
         print(answer)
trolling()

>>>low quality - inconsistent, maybe not needed by management, other reasons
>>>low quality - inconsistent, maybe not needed by management, other reasons
>>>low quality - inconsistent, maybe not needed by management, other reasons
.
.

don't take it hard, that's internet

[lordsmurf]

Hi Lordsmurf,
I said these two company Leica and Carl Zeiss for they high end products quality. And of course Quality of product is priority, not the brand. And don't want to beleve that C Z lost they ability to create great quality high end optics. Once they have "know how" I don't believe they gave up it absolutely.
Even if they did, it doesn't change that lenses are most important thing in photo and video industry. Probably share first place with (in digital world) with image sensor. But what will be superb image sensor without quality lenses.
Edit: Also don't believe they will offer optics for about 25k dollars and it will have not satisfactory results. But of course price are even several times higher in some cases.
Bernix

And I don't disagree with any of that.

... just didn't want the "name brand" idea to be taken literally by newbies, like the OP here.

What are some examples of what you consider as professional equipment? Your definition is not clear to me yet.

The better question is what do YOU think professional means?