8 thoughts on “GoPro Hero 6 Black & Sony AX-700 HFR Details!”

1. The 240p on the GoPro looks fantastic!

   1. Yes it is pretty good. It has aliasing issues but overall it is well controlled. It is still not as good as the Sony RX series when shooting 240fps but that is to be expected.

2. I’d take a little softness or aliasing to get continuous HFR **ever single time**, and here’s why:

   You take all that footage you shot at 120/240fps, you dump in in your editor, you “interpret” it to 60fps (or 30/24fps, whatever appeals to you, I like the smoothness of 60p, but I understand that some like the filmic judder of 24p), drop it on your timeline and set the percentage so that it is running at real time (eg 200% for 120fps footage on a 60p timeline). Then you start your edit. It is absolutely amazing the artistic freedom you have when you can decide **exactly** where the slow motion is going to happen. And once you’ve had the chance to do it this way, you (1) never want to go back to the limits of 3 seconds of slowmo here or 6 seconds there, and (2) you’d be shocked how often what you thought was going to be the perfect spot for slowmo while you were shooting turns out to be completely wrong, and the ideal place is somewhere different. Now, if you’d shot it on a FS700, RX10, RX100, FS5 or whatever, you’d be stuck. With continuous HFR, the sky is the limit.

   Disclaimer: I’ve done it both ways on cameras dating back to the Sony Z5U (one of their first semi-pro cameras with 6 second burst slowmo) & RED 1, and given the choice, I’ll always roll with continuous HFR. There is no comparison, even if you have to take a little less image quality sometimes.

   And Mr Admin,with all due respect, while you somewhat diss software slowmo, Premiere’s 2017 implementation of “Optical Flow” is surprisingly good. More than a few people think we are shooting at a much higher frame rate and/or much more expensive camera than we actually are!! The secret is knowing it’s limits, and how far you can push it, then never going past that point.

   1. Very valid points. Software slow motion is not for scientific, industrial or motion analysis. It can be used effectively for video production but it will not create new information. It is not a dis but there is nothing like the real thing. The higher you go in high speed the less motion blur there is due to shutter speed increments. We feel that continuous slow motion for filming is overkill and can d3stroy the film look if played back at real time speeds. Thanks for contributing to the discussion!

3. I’m assuming from your comment that you fall into the 24p camp. Which is fine if somehow you really do prefer motion judder. But what bugs me is when the Hollywood types (and uninformed indie producers) say it’s an artistic choice. No, actually it has nothing to do with art, and everything to do with how much it cost to develop film in the early days of motion pictures. Initially, they looked at 48fps, but it was quickly ruled out as far too expensive. They settled on 24fps as a speed that is (just barely) enough to trick the human eye into thinking it is viewing continuous motion.

   As a result, an entire industry and equipment standard was built on a frame rate that is at best only about 6fps faster than the human eye & brain can discern separate images. Indeed, the main reason that so many movies shot on film are exposed to the left (low key, darker) is that the dimmer the image, the smoother the motion appears to be. Conversely, in bright scenes, they had a terrible time trying to make the motion look smooth. So much trouble in fact, that in the days of film projection at the movie theaters, many movie theaters had expensive equipment installed that gave perceived frame rates of 48 or 72fps, for a more enjoyable, less eye-straining viewing experience.

   So if 24fps is so awesome & artistic, why was so much money spend on giving the audience a better viewing experience by upping the perceived frame rate to get rid of obvious and noticeable flicker? Maybe 24fps isn’t as artistic as Hollywood wants us to think, hmm?

   1. It’s a subjective topic and after careful testing myself I like 24p the best at 180 degree shutter in video production for TV series and film. The motion aspects are subjective and a preference is a personal thing. For motion analisis 30p is ideal and for vr and live broadcast above 60p is a minimum. The hobbit in my view was ruined by the faster frame rate. As I said, a matter of personal preference.

4. I agree with Thomas about having continuous HFR for slow motion shooting. Having 2,3,6 seconds i feel is just not long enough to give the amount of footage you need to be able to edit what you might be trying to get. If the go pro 6 updates to 420/480 fps at 720p and Wvga or vga at 800 plus fps i would get one tomorrow. All of the slow motion stuff I have got over the years is only for myself, i don’t even put it on YouTube. My ideal super slow motion speed is 420 fps at a play back speed of 30 fps to get 14 times slow motion at not less than 720p, 1080p would be perfect. It’s a waiting game I guess.

   1. In the future, it will probably be capturing the scene photon information for a given time making frame rates completely irrelevant. If you want 1,000,000 fps you could have it with a simple dial. Photon capture mapping is already working in the labs and has applications much more interesting than high frame rates including seeing through walls and anticipate collisions of very fast objects.

Comments are closed.