-
-
-
-
-
-
I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to accomplish here. Could you describe the shot or process a little better.
What I think you want to do is to take a single pixel vertical strip from frame 1 at column 1, then take another column of pixels from column 2 and frame 2 then do it again for column 3 frame 3, column 4, frame 4 and so on until you have one column sampled for each frame for the entire composition.
I think that you then want to stack up these columns of pixels to create a single frame with each column being a different slice of time.
You can do that with a gradient and Time Displacement. Just select a black to white gradient with black on the left and white on the right. Pre-compose that layer. Then take your footage and apply Time Displacement. Set the CTI indicator to the frame that is half the width of your composition. IOW, if the comp is 1920 X 1080, set the CTO to frame 960.
Now adjust the time resolution to your frame rate and set the offset to the position of the CTI (960) by the frame rate (30) and you've got it.
Frame 960 will have a column of pixels from each of the 1920 frames in your movie.
Here's a screenshot of a single pixel line moving from the top of the frame to the bottom of the frame with time displacement applied. The comp settings are 872 X 486 @ 30 FPS.
The gradient in the background is a pre-comp that is driving the Time Displacement.
| -
-
-
-
-
-
I don't think you'll get the kind of image you want by taking 1 pixel wide slices of time. You'll end up with a time smear.
Take a look at this short video of someone walking using the time slice method you're describing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01JzIIJGaSg
If you have a sample of what you want it might help us to point you in a more efficient direction.
| -
-
-
You are misinterpreting the technique that is used here. The photographer is using a slit scan panoramic camera but is panning at the same speed that the people in the shot are walking.
These cameras have been around as long as there has been photography. The film back is curved and the lens and a slit at the focal plane move by a gear mechanism moving the slit over the film. We have a photograph of my great grandfather in Park City, Utah in the 1880's shot with one of these cameras. It's a group shot of all the miners working at the mine but great grandpa is on the left side of the group and also on the right. He just ran behind the group after the lens passed him and got to the other side before the lens did. They used something like this:
Here's one from the 40's
Normally, the camera is stationary and the lens and slit moves. In the case of your example, the camera is panned in the opposite direction the lens is moving so that the moving subject, the people, stay centered in the frame, and the background is blurred. This also isn't a new technique. There's a very famous photograph of the 1948 olympics that was shot like this.
You can achieve this effect easily with a standard video camera and Time Warp by simply panning with the subject. It's dark outside now, but in an hour or so I'll shoot something with my iPhone and post an example. With a little clever pre-comping I can even simulate the panorama. You may even be able to do this with the new panoramic shot feature with the iPhone iOS6. I'll even give that a shot. You'll never get this effect with a high shutter speed, a stationary camera and thousands of frames.
In 1974 I did a story on a Seattle firefighter that built his own camera that used 10" wide roles of aerial photography film to shoot amazing panoramas of Seattle.
Here's a panoramic camera you can buy today for $275 that will do what you want to do.
| -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Mylenium's solution is very clever but it's not going to give you any different effect than Time Displacement and a gradient.
If the bike is moving and the camera is still then the time slices will slice up the bike into strips and keep the background the same. To make a complete bike you need to be panning with the bike. When I get a moment I'll post a shot that shows what I mean. There's no way to hold the camera still, have the bike move and then slice up time and get a complete bike. Each time slice will only contain a small slice of the bike.
There are digital slit scan solutions out there. They work exactly the same way a slit scan film camera does. You just can't do this with technique with a standard full frame camera.
Here's the shot with horizontal time slices (because the cars are moving toward and down in the frame.
Notice how the car in the middle lane on the left is chopped into a bunch of frames but the cars in the right lane moving away are shortened way up.
If I get a chance later tonight I'll slice up a shot where the camera is moving. The subject will be relatively undistorted but the background will be cut up into slices. If you look closely at the image above you can see he time slices in the center barrier and the lane markings caused by camera movement.
| -
-
With a 1 pixel strip you would still see 30 pixel tall slices because the video was 30fps. It would be meaningless to slice any smaller.
In regards to your wanting to get a sharp image of the bike I think you still are missing something. If the camera is not panning or moving with the bike at approximately the same speed then you're going to get slices of one part of the bike only.
For example, if the camera is still and it moves from left to right and it takes 1 second to cross the frame. Let's say your time slices see a strip of the bike that's 1 inch wide. The resulting image would be that one inch of the bike repeated all the way across the frame. It would be just like the image of the car above that's not really a car, but just a portion of the car repeated many times.
This would be nothing like the image you showed us as an example. There's no way of generating that kind of image without approximately matching the speed of your subject.
Shooting at a high frame rate without panning would only give you smaller strips so the portion of the bike in the strip would be narrower.
You'll end up with something like this:
The single column of pixels just right of my daughters nose is repeated across the frame. That's about what you'd get with a stationary camera.
| -
This is a very weird hybrid manual/digital technque I was playing with a lot last year to make aniamtions: Try taking a sharp image of someone riding the bike with a very fast shutter. Then move it across the bed of a scanner While it's scanning so that the scanner captures and distorts slices of the image as it moves. Depending on how fast and when you move the image with the scanner you could potentially control how distorted the background is in relation to the subject. I know this is a totally different technique than what you were originally after, and it will no doubt render different results, but I feel like it might get you in the ballpark of what you want. Also, one thing I realized when doing this is the higher you set the dpi on the scanner, the slower it will scan. You could also shoot multiple pictures to create a panorama the size of Adam Magyar's work with a normal DSLR camera on a panning tripod head. Then assemble those images in Photoshop with Photomerge, print out your panorama and drag it across the scanner to distort it. Here's an image I made last year by just moving my face across the scanner bed :-)
The scanner only focuses on what's directly touching the bed, but if you had a photo you could hold it down is you move it so it would be sharper. As I said it's a totally different technique, but it's fun and might give you more control.
| -
Not to beat a dead horse but this is what I got when I shot a short video of my daughter riding beside me. Sliced it up into a bunch of vertical slices in time. You can see the wave created by her knee, and the extended arm because we were not perfectly synced for the 6 seconds of this shot:
For even more fun take a peek at this video. You can see the slices develop over time. If I was perfectly tracking her head for example, it would be relatively distortion free throughout the video but the wavy image of her knee would remain.
|
- 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
- 5 points awarded for
-
10,000+ points
-
1,001-10,000 points
-
501-1,000 points
-
5-500 points
-
