video question?

[photog4life]

Ok on my camera like most cameras i have video... while my pictures are 16mp, my video is terrible... if it uses the same lens (bridge camera) and the sensor is obviously the same why would that happen? i asked here because i figured i would get better answers.... thanks... I have just been wondering for awhile... and yes i realize it is a photography forum not video forum....

 

[Robin Usagani]

think of video as bunch of JPEG. Depending on your camera, it can only capture smaller resolution. If it is a good one, it should be able to capture in HD resolution (1080p or the smaller 720p) with 30 frames per sec. If your camera isnt that great, it will take fewer per second and smaller resolution. The higher the resolution and the more frames per sec = the better the quality and file size.

 

[photog4life]

think of video as bunch of JPEG. Depending on your camera, it can only capture smaller resolution. If it is a good one, it should be able to capture in HD resolution (1080p or the smaller 720p) with 30 frames per sec. If your camera isnt that great, it will take fewer per second and smaller resolution. The higher the resolution and the more frames per sec = the better the quality and file size.

y can it only take lower res pics?

 

[Robin Usagani]

Why? ok.. lets say you burst your camera taking JPEGs. How many frames can you take per second? At some point your buffer will fill up and you cant take anymore photos. It takes a lot of processing speed and memory to take high resolution jpeg. This is a video and you need 30 per second!

 

[photog4life]

Why? ok.. lets say you burst your camera taking JPEGs. How many frames can you take per second? At some point your buffer will fill up and you cant take anymore photos. It takes a lot of processing speed and memory to take high resolution jpeg. This is a video and you need 30 per second!

o ok that makes sense... thanks i never even though of it that way...

 

[Jesse11]

think of video as bunch of JPEG. Depending on your camera, it can only capture smaller resolution. If it is a good one, it should be able to capture in HD resolution (1080p or the smaller 720p) with 30 frames per sec. If your camera isnt that great, it will take fewer per second and smaller resolution. The higher the resolution and the more frames per sec = the better the quality and file size.

 

[Judobreaker]

think of video as bunch of JPEG. Depending on your camera, it can only capture smaller resolution. If it is a good one, it should be able to capture in HD resolution (1080p or the smaller 720p) with 30 frames per sec. If your camera isnt that great, it will take fewer per second and smaller resolution. The higher the resolution and the more frames per sec = the better the quality and file size.

think of video as bunch of JPEG. Depending on your camera, it can only capture smaller resolution. If it is a good one, it should be able to capture in HD resolution (1080p or the smaller 720p) with 30 frames per sec. If your camera isnt that great, it will take fewer per second and smaller resolution. The higher the resolution and the more frames per sec = the better the quality and file size.

Direct copy-pasting wikipedia without giving credit: ok...
But this is just plain obvious.

 

[Village Idiot]

think of video as bunch of JPEG. Depending on your camera, it can only capture smaller resolution. If it is a good one, it should be able to capture in HD resolution (1080p or the smaller 720p) with 30 frames per sec. If your camera isnt that great, it will take fewer per second and smaller resolution. The higher the resolution and the more frames per sec = the better the quality and file size.

This is totally wrong. FPS isn't really about quality and more about standards. 30 fps is usually broadcast standard where 24fps is what's generally used in movies. If I watch a movie on one of those stupid TVs where it does that frame fill in thing, it looks like crap and doesn't have the movie feel to it.

So, understanding what you're copying and pasting from Wikipedia would also help you not look like as much of a...special person...

 

[Robin Usagani]

I did not copy and paste from wikipedia.

 

[Robin Usagani]

WTF? I did not use wikipedia.

think of video as bunch of JPEG. Depending on your camera, it can only capture smaller resolution. If it is a good one, it should be able to capture in HD resolution (1080p or the smaller 720p) with 30 frames per sec. If your camera isnt that great, it will take fewer per second and smaller resolution. The higher the resolution and the more frames per sec = the better the quality and file size.

think of video as bunch of JPEG. Depending on your camera, it can only capture smaller resolution. If it is a good one, it should be able to capture in HD resolution (1080p or the smaller 720p) with 30 frames per sec. If your camera isnt that great, it will take fewer per second and smaller resolution. The higher the resolution and the more frames per sec = the better the quality and file size.

Direct copy-pasting wikipedia without giving credit: ok...
But this is just plain obvious.

 

[Rephargotohp]

Nice, Accusers don't even check their facts, Simply Googling what Swetty wrote, shows that the only place all those words in order is here at this forum.

Say you're sorry

 

[Robin Usagani]

I think Wikipedia would be written better than that . Plus I pulled that out of my ass. It is probably wrong.

 

[Rephargotohp]

I use Assipedia all the time

 

[Crollo]

This is totally wrong. FPS isn't really about quality and more about standards.

Incorrect. The standards are based on how many moving pictures in a second that will cause fluid motion, therefore dramatically effecting the image as a whole.

 

[Judobreaker]

I wasn't accusing anyone of copying from wikipedia, sorry if you believed I did.
I was merely saying that copying from wikipedia isn't that bad, but down-right copy-pasting a reply someone gave only 4 posts above yours... That's just wrong.