Author Topic: Can you please remove the limits or increase them for some filters, we are in ..  (Read 377 times)

cristidr

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Can you guys please remove the limits from some of the filters, for new builds? we are in 2018+ :) not 2010-

The app is a great tool that I support, but limits on filters like the 200 fps for the Change FPS are ridiculous now. Please move it to 2000 or something like that in new builds. Most phones have 256+ to 1000 fps in slow motions these days and I think that more people will use your apps that way.

Also the swsResize, can't be used to resize above 2888 px X 21xx ... something like that, so no 4k + if I might need to do that( for testing ,etc ).

Is it possible to remove or increase those limits in future builds, without recommending me to recompile myself the code ?


eumagga0x2a

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2527
swsResize GUI sets 4096x2160 as max size which is 4K. You can always circumvent this limitation by avoiding to call the GUI, i.e. just adding the required size in the project script and never opening the swsResize configuration GUI. I'm not sure that you won't hit the ceiling somewhere else in Avidemux is you try to go beyond 4096, however.

The same applies to "Change FPS", i.e. the limits are enforced only by the GUI, you are free to use values beyond 200 (but below the internal limit of 2000 in the editor) in the project script when you avoid opening the filter configuration dialog. But the limit of 200 fps will be raised anyway, thank you for the reminder.

cristidr

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Thank you ! great
I saw that the resize works now in 2.7.1 for 4k. I will use the recommendations you proposed.


eumagga0x2a

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2527
Most phones have 256+ to 1000 fps in slow motions these days

I have to revive this topic. Slow motion recording means the camera shoots a whole lot of images per second, but the resulting video has usually 30 fps (minimum 25, max 60). Please clarify in what particular aspect a higher limit in the "Change FPS" filter GUI would be of any practical use as hardly any existing equipment is capable of playing videos above 200 fps.

E.g., to produce a 10x timelapse of a 50 fps video, one combines the "Resample FPS" filter with the target fps set to 5 fps with "Change FPS" changing the fps from 5 back to 50.

dosdan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
I have to revive this topic. Slow motion recording means the camera shoots a whole lot of images per second, but the resulting video has usually 30 fps (minimum 25, max 60).

There are two ways to do slo-mos:
  • Record at a high frame-rate and then playback at a lower frame-rate.
  • Increase the number of frames after recording, either by straight duplication or by interpolation.

I've got a camcorder that can record at 100fps/120fps. Here I'll discuss 120fps.  A 1s clip at this frame rate will contain 120 frames.  But if I play it back, either in the camera or in a media player, it will take 2s and playback at a 0.5x rate.  So the file is somehow marked internally as "60fps"

Now I can take this into Vegas Pro and, staying at a project frame-rate of 60fps, change the playback rate of this clip, or just a part of it, to say "0.25". This will make 3 new copies of each frame e.g. 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2...   After encoding, the new 60fps clip would contain 480 frames, so it will playback for 8s.  Obviously, with each frame appearing 4 times in a row, playback will be jerkier than without this replication, but the longer playback duration gives you more time to notice details in a complex motion sequence, say a soccer goal save.

Also the camera can perform a interpolation operation on these 120fps clips. This transformation takes as long as the clip duration. So a 1s 120-frame clip takes 1s to become a new 2s 60fps 240-frame clip, containing this sequence 1, 1|2, 2, 2|3, 3...

This interpolation can also be done in software using MV (motion vector) operations, but it's usually very slow, unlike in the camera where it's done in hardware.

So, which ADM filter operations actually change the number of frames in the clip (through replication) and which just change the indicated fps rate to be used for playback?

By the way, here I posted a sequence of dropped tennis-ball sequences showing
  • 120fps @ 60fps 0.5x playback
  • In-camera interpolation (fast) from 0.5x to 0.25x
  • A 0.25x version made by using 0.5x from the camera combined with a 0.5x interpolation using MVTools2 in Avisynth/VirtualDub (very slow).
https://www.avforums.com/threads/mvtools-a-few-notes-on-creating-super-slo-mo-for-free.1978311/#post-22587679


And here, a compilation clip showing a comparison of the quality of a number of ways of slowing down a soccer-ball kick.

https://www.avforums.com/threads/mvtools-a-few-notes-on-creating-super-slo-mo-for-free.1978311/#post-23553835

Dan.

« Last Edit: January 02, 2019, 09:58:08 PM by dosdan »

eumagga0x2a

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2527
I don't even consider interpolation here. The "Resample FPS" filter works by dropping or duplicating frames while recalculating timestamps to keep the total duration constant, the "Change FPS" filter recalculates timestamps of frames modifying the total duration but keeping the number of frames constant.

My point is that the argument of smartphones being able to record at 960 fps or such is not viable as an argument to bump fps limits in the filter GUIs.