Rolling shutter RUINS your photos & video: Let's fix it!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ก.ย. 2021
- Storyblocks makes your videos better! Visit Storyblocks.com/tonyandchelsea and sign up to download their video and audio clips for use in your own videos.
Tony Northrup teaches you about rolling shutter in this tutorial. Rolling shutter is a limitation of modern photography and video cameras that causes flickering, distortion of moving subjects, and tilting lines in panning shots. He teaches you about sensor readout speeds and how they vary for both electronic and mechanical shutters.
Need to pressure the industry to work harder on development of affordable global shutter sensors!
@@asificam1 You can't dim an LED. It's either on at full brightness or it's off. That's why they fake dimming with PWM.
@@LarsLarsen77 That's not true. You can dim an LED, but it needs to be dimmed using constant current method, instead of regulating voltage.
@@LarsLarsen77 That is definitely not true, how do you think LED video lights work? I can use mine down at 10% power with my camera's shutter speed at 1/1000 of a second and see no flicker because the power delivery is DC instead of PWM.
@@asificam1 Having DC power delivery for LEDs is not that trivial when you're talking about small devices like light bulbs and LED strips.
@@TechnoBabble It is not trivial as having to just put a small capacitor, but it is trivial in a sense that you can buy a cheap constant current regulator, and be able to dim LEDs without flickering. CC regulators usually use hundreds of thousands of Hz when regulating electricity (essentially they also use PWM, but very high frequency complemented with enough of capacitance makes smooth output).
Omg, Tony, you have no idea what a relief it is to hear you not only explain A very clear problem but also lay out a solution. I shoot a lot of sports and events at night time, and the artificial lighting has always been an issue. I appreciate the lesson! Thank you millions!
Back in the day, as my Mum was an avid Royal watcher, when Charles and Diana wed, she wanted photos off the TV.
I had to lower the shutter speed to 1/30 to prevent the flickering. The results were, well, OK for the time and my Mum got photos that her friends oohed and aahed over for days.
My first commission at 16 :)
Excellent presentation and analysis! Thank you so much for clearing up this somewhat arcane subject.
Best explanation I've heard of rolling shutter. Now, I think I understand it.
I'm glad someone does. I don't quite understand how a mechanical shutter with a slow shutter speed of say 1/30 can have less rolling shutter than an electronic one with say 1/120 with regards to panning motions or moving subject.
@@pow9606 The slower speed shutter replaces the rolling shutter effect with....the blurring effect. The bottom line might be that if you are getting a rolling shutter effect...slowing the shutter speed down will reduce the rolling shutter effect, but increase blur. what you can do is try to find the shutter speed with the least of both somewhere in the middle.
hank you so much Tony! Really I needed to learn about the rolling shutter and you taught it very well and in details! Good luck!
Thanks for the tips... Helps us understand why most electronic flash photography is discouraged with electronic shutter use.
The rolling shutter distortion is time-domain aliasing, and as you would expect with sample-rate aliasing it is subject to the Shannon/Nyquist theorem, requiring a sample rate of 2x the event rate in order to eliminate the aliasing.
What’s subtle here, and what is so well explained in the video, is that the sample rate here is not the shutter speed, but the total sensor readout speed. The “shutter speed” is the effective exposure time for any given band of the sensor, and will have an effect on motion blur, but the anti-aliasing speed needed to eliminate aliasing distortion is the total readout speed for the whole sensor. Thus, if the hummingbird flaps its little wings at 50Hz, a total readout speed of 100Hz is the minimum required to capture it without aliasing and thus motion artefacts. Anything less WILL produce these unwanted effects.
Again, this is not the shutter speed we typically think of to “freeze” motion. That’s a different thing, based on arc-seconds of movement, and will differ according to magnification, viewing distance and a few subjective values for what we consider to be “sharp”. In many cases, some image blur is not only acceptable, but even desirable, and freeze-motion shots of things we know to be moving quickly may have an unnatural feel.
Lest we imagine these artefacts to be something new in the digital world, we need look no further than the photos produced by Jacques Henri Lartigue, of the Grand Prix race in 1913. Using a camera with a curtain-type focal plane shutter, Lartigue produced famous photos of racecars with oval wheels, surprising many observers at the time.
What shutter produces NO artefacts? The best shutters for air-to-air photographs, where there are usually spinning propellers or rotors, are between-the-lens, leaf shutters. This type of shutter produces no artefacts of any type. Granted, they are not very fast by today’s standard (usually maxing out at 1/500 sec/2ms) but the motion blur produced is usually more desirable anyway for propellers, and it is possible to calculate shutter speeds to produce ¼, ½, or a full rotation of blur. I use large-format film cameras for air-to-air when possible, for this reason. I have yet to see between-the-lens shutters offered for digital cameras, but I would not be surprised to see them offered soon, as more photographers wish to have this artistic control over motion artefacts.
Love the discussion. I'm not sure Nyquist theorem is really the issue at hand although it is similar. I say this because the data from the sensor should not be related to the time domain. A fast moving object is an object at specific point in time and digitizing this point it time creates a data stream that I don't believe is properly thought of as being part of the time domain just because it takes time for the data to be read. It peaks my interest and you may be right but it doesn't feel right. I'm going to see if i can research a what I think might be a better explanation of how to model this but thanks for peaking my interest either way.
I was thinking it is more like noise but that is not right.
Does it really work like this? I think you are mis-applying the Nyquist limit here. If you want the wing to look frozen you need the “sample rate” or the readout speed to be many many times faster than the wings flap rate. If your sample rate is just 2x the flap rate then the wing will be very very smeared.
This isn’t digital signal processing. You can’t get away with just two samples per cycle. For a photo to have imperceptible rolling shutter you need the “sample rate” to be maybe 20-100x the flap rate, depending on how much rolling shutter is tolerable to you.
@@mynameisben123 I may be misunderstanding your comment, but I believe you are the one who is confusing the effects of motion blur with aliasing.
A completely sharp and frozen image is not the only acceptable result for moving objects. In many cases, a photographer may wish to have motion blurin a beating wing or spinning propeller, as it better conveys the sensation of movement than an un-natural-looking frozen image. Time-domain aliasing is another story though, and the resultant geometric distortions are grotesque and displeasing to most viewers.
Hello Tony, I notice it most with a fast moving rugby ball, either falling from the sky or a split second after it’s been kicked. I have the mechanical-electronic shutter dilemma your excellent video described and haven’t really found a solution. Thank you.
Video starts 2:28
Fix starts 6:20
Excellent explanation I always heard the term 1 million times but never exactly knew what it was
i love the graphic examples awesome video!
You really went in depth with rolling shutter, great video.
your explanations are on point. thank you
Thank you for the informative content sir!
Great explanation. Thanks for the info.
Try doing pans with a film camera with a horizontal traveling shutter (Nikon F3) and then do the same shots with a camera with a vertically traveling shutter (Nikon FM2). Critical analysis of the images will show two very different types of distortion.
Excellent, thanks Tony.
Great video - superb info and great editing.
Glad it was helpful!
Very clear, TNX!
Thanks, always quality advice 👍
As a portrait, family, maternity, and newborn photographer I’ve never had an issue with rolling shutter but definitely glad to know these tips in case I do!
It's possible to encounter this in people photography for sure. Try photographing a church wedding silently. :D
One day you'll get a birthing job where the kid just shoots right out across the room and you'll thank Tony for this video.
@@gyozakeynsianism I just hope the doctor will be ready with their catchers mitt 🤣
@@garrettsmith4574 That's the spirit! But you'll need something more like a bean bag chair.
thank you so much ❤
Great stuff! You mentioned that there are 'plugins' that can reduce rolling shutter. Can you recommend a couple? Thanks!
I love these tech videos! ❤
The video quality is so good! What camera are you using to film this?
Waay cool! Thanks Tony!!
awesome video..Thanks
Thanks for that. Now I can at least slightly grasp what that is.
Hi, a request. Can you do a complete tutorial of Fujifilm XS10. Thanks
Fantastic content, thanks. Golf clubs though DO bend significantly during the swing, especially with more powerful players - though they do use stiffer shafts.
Good point, especially if you use graphite golf shafts like I do, they bend a lot more.
amazing job srsly
This is the kind of videos i like the channel for. I'm tired of gear videos. You are great teacher Tony.
You don’t need an A1 or R3 to get less rolling shutter in silent mode. You can buy the much cheaper a9 and get fast sensor readout. Fast FF sensor has been around 4 years.
indeed you can get 3 cameras from sony today that are able todo it. The A1 is about 2x faster it seems then the others (including the R3). Getting a R3 at the moment is not possible they are not on sale so you have 3 options if you want silent shooting with less rolling shutter ff A9,A9II and A1.
@Benjamin Mesa Thats fine to each his own but there is added value in a stacked sensor thats why they are also moving to it. And yes the a7RIII is a lesser cameras as the R5 no doubt. And i still own one, I jus sold a R4 for a A1. The 7R3->7R4->A1 is about 100+ updates and changes its like comparing a R5 with a RP in way even many sony 'fanboys' don't see the massive steps between generations which is a pity.
@Benjamin Mesa fine but you do understand that was not the point of the discussion its not my job to convince anyone who hates a brand. I could tell you 'these menus' have been redone but clearly that won't help the discussion was rolling shutter.
Thanks
One of your better videos.
thanks for this video... i knew about the flicker when it came to rolling shutter but not the warping of the video on fast pans. It was driving me crazy.
Shooting stringed instruments with rolling shutter actually looks pretty cool :D
I like it ! With the hummingbird
thanks tomy
I'm glad to finally know what people who always talk about this problem actually is, but I suspect I'm so used to seeing it that I'm not too concerned about it
Unless it is the main subject of a video, most people are indeed not too concerned about it. Examples such as that of the airplane propeller distortion can frequently be seen in television programs and commercially released (Hollywood, etc.) movies.
@@keensoundguy6637 know how to make
Omg how come I didn't run into you before! I loved the video!
The content is always good here. :-)
Thank you, now I got it!
I have a lumix s5 if you use aps-c crop mode for video (crop) or photo (med 12mp tele) the Rolling shutter drops from 21ms to 10.5ms. keep that in mind if it becomes an issue.
the stacked sensor from the Sony A9 with the silent shutter, has also less problems with rolling shutter??
Chelsea's hummingbird problem is also my problem. What solution do you suggest for that?
Tony on a nikon Z9 how do you eliminate rolling shutter , a friend of mine has sent me some photos of a mallard in flight and it was horrendous .
To avoid flickering at home whenever I buy lights from IKEA I go with my camera and test every bulb with typical video/photo settings to make sure I do not see banding i.e. their switching frequency is high enough such that it does not show up.
Pretty smart & probably something every filmer should do if they live close enough to where they purchase their lights. How do you do this. Do they have them on a working display or you take them out & put them in a lamp display? (I never been inside a Ikea)
@@thomastuorto9929 yeah Ikea was just an example but could be any local household store with lights on display. Even if they are not on display just explain the situation and ask for assistance they will show you lights. There certain things that although you can buy online it's better to try for yourself at the physical store. In the end of the day a good set of LEDs will last for 10-15 years.
Z6 has about 1/38s in 12 bit raw mode (indistinguishable with 14 bit above ISO 200) already works fine for day to day and slower paning
FYI: Some LEDs have drivers that do not flicker. If they do significant power conditioning to control the LEDs, it will be less or non-existent. The ones with the little orange "filaments" have minimal conditioning. Look at the bulb with your cell phone camera and you can see the bands in the image.
That's right! Good quality flashlights and lamps don't use drivers with PWM (Pulse-width modulation) which causes the flickering at specific shutter speeds. Also good old incandescent lamps don't have this problem.
We can make sensor with simultaneously reading and in fact we did a lot back them, it was called CCD. The JFET-LBCAST sensor had really fast speed reading too.
There are also global shutter CMOS sensors, which use 5 transistors per photosite ("pixel") instead of 3, and that way they essentially have analog memory, which can be read when shutter is closed.
Is there any way to fix the image of the hummingbird in Lightroom, or Photoshop?
I love the thumbnail!
Shooting BIF, rolling shutter rarely appears with my R5. Informative video, Tony.
BIF?
(BIF = birds in flight) and yeah that's our experience, too. We just bought the 600 f4 for the R5 if that shows our level of confidence. I've sen tilty trees in panning shots, and that crazy hummingbird shot, but MOST of Chelsea's hummingbird shots were fine.
Oh, birds, I generally just flip them off at the beach 🙃
I was shooting a wedding. I was behind the priest and decided to change to silent mode with my Sony a7r4. It was dim. I honestly thought it was the camera screen when checking my photos. When I came back home the banding was terrible. I couldn't find a solution on how to fix them. There was a link that said it can fix banding on raw files. It still doesn't work. So I had to manually fix the photos by photoshop. Using rectangle too with feather 20px ., and use the curves to adjust the dark bandings to match the light ones. It doesn't look 100% , but still better by around 60%.
and the camera manufacturers didn't speak about it and still they don't! Let's wait for a global shutter.
As a sports photographer I’ve noticed that when I shoot soccer at night, The R6 is great but sometimes you can notice this problem in moving subjects
Try shooting tennis. The electronic shutter in the R6 is unusable there. :/
Wait, is that why some of my photos will randomly feel squeezed at the end of a few burst shots? Legitimately don’t understand why that happens, I try to not touch the lens so I don’t know where the distortion comes in from
From what I've read, there's a small dynamic range penalty when using electronic shutter, but then you do get slightly better sharpness due to lack of shutter shock.
If there is I have not noticed it.
Sonys change from 14 to 12 bit color when using the electronic shutter for still images. (Although you only get 14 bit in single shot mode so if you're shooting burst it doesn't matter.)
@@tylrwnzl Some Sony cameras (A7III, A7R III, A7C, A7R IV) shoot 14-bit continuous if you use uncompressed RAW.
@@TechnoBabble yes you're right. I'm thinking APS-C as that's what I shoot.
Nikon Z9 now has fastest readout speed sensor in consumer Mirrorless cam. So fast they didn't need to put mechanical one in it. Have you had a chance to test it yet Tony?
Where did you get the sensor readout time data from?
Imagine this would be a ordinary school lesson ☀️
It is (at least in my classroom)!
I was worried about distortions when shooting flying cole tips, but it’s hardly noticeable, although my Olympus camera not even has a back-illuminated sensor. But the smaller sensor size certainly helps with a fast readout. Rolling shutter isn’t a problem on Smartphones either. Another solution: a central shutter such as in Hasselblad lenses.
I'm a concert photographer. On two occasions, I shot part of a concert with the silent shutter in the Nikon Z6 and Z6ii. 99% of the shots taken were ruined by banding. Just horrible. More recently, I was all excited to pre-order the Z9 (I really want better autofocus than the Z6ii) , but when it was announced that the Z9 has no mechanical shutter, I decided I needed to know more before putting down that kind of $$.
As a concert photographer shooting stills, I'm not concerned about "slanting buildings" or "warped golf clubs" or "bizarre airplane propellers", but I am terribly concerned about "banding" when shooting concerts under LED/artificial lighting.
So ... do you think the Z9's readout speed will prevent/eliminate banding? Will it prevent some banding, but there's a chance I'd still have to deal with banding in some situations?
as far as we know now only a global shutter eliminates banding. Camera manufacturers want to make some money from the models they sell now and only then they will change to global shutters. The solution is there but we have to wait
@@MrKoenPieter since the time I made my comment above, I've bought a Z9 and have shot several concerts with it. So far (knock on wood), no banding issues to report. That said. I am looking forward to the day global shutters are prevalent in flagship cameras. :)
Suggestion: Would be great if you could do a video on hummingbird photography.
In photo I still not seen any rolling shutter in my EOS M (2012). In video also not seen, but I don't do quick panning and cek it in slow motion.
For still electric silent shutter photos, You didn't mention it in the video. (edited, forgot to mention this is for stage theater hot lights)
On my Canon EOS R, When I have certain stage lighting. If I notice banding in my shots. I have to figure out what's the light "frequency", which most of the time is 60hz. From there, I have to use the multiples of 60 to try to match up the stage light sync. So I'm usually be shooting in 1/125, or 1/250 of a shutter speed to help minimize the banding when using still electric silent shutter photos on the EOS R.
It seems to me the if the problem was this easy to solve, this would be how we'd all be working around it. And it clearly isn't.
i cant see why this would fix the problem. Sensor readout is the time the sensor needs for the pixels, from top to bottom, to start reading. The shutter speed only indicates the amount of time each pixel has to keep "reading" until they stop. This means, if you shoot at 1/250 and if the sensor readout is about 0.05sec (1/20th), that when you take a photo, the pixels from the top of the frame will end the exposure before the pixels from the bottom even start the reading (because the readout is slower than the exposure). Counterwise, in a 1sec exposure, the readout would finish way before the first pixels that started reading, the ones on the top, end the 1sec exposure.
Now going back at your "60hz flickering fix with 1/250", as how i understand this all works... It seems to me that the pixels from the top would start the exposure earlier than the ones on the bottom, no matter what shutter speed you're using. If the readout is 1/20th, this means that the 60hz light has done three full flickering cycles by the time the camera has ended the readout... And each pixel has done a exposure of an incomplete cycle (1/250 < 1/60) at different stages of these cycles, so you should have 3 full flickering bands on the photo. This wouldn't happen if you shot at 1/60th because each pixel, no matter at what given time starts the exposure, would read a full flickering cycle, gathering the same amount of light as any other form another part of the sensor. Following that, you should have flickering in a 1/50 exposure because each pixel gathers a bit more than a full cycle at different stages of it, and the light gathering from each pixel varies again. So, when bumping up the exposure time, yes, the multiples of 60 theory makes sense, but when the exposure needs to be under 1/60, it seems to me that you have nothing to do to solve it other than having a super fast readout, again, the exposure has nothing to do at this stages.
@@marc5279 TL:DR
I think I forgot to mention in my post. That it was theater stage lighting that use hot lights, and not LED lights??? (Not familiar with the technical terms of theater stage lighting). Since LED lights act differently than the old hot theater stage lights.
@@marc5279 Also, I have to photograph low budget stage theater, and high school theater rehearsal shows. That's how I notice this problem. And how I fixed it.
@@RonaldLadao ye, big hot lights flicker quiet softly, and banding must appear really subtle, I cant see why you have any flickering issues in the first place... But if you say so, and that you experinced a fix doing this, i must be missing something here
One of the best explanations I have seen about rolling shutter issues...
Was about to drop some money on the Sony A7RIV. Guess I need to do some more research because I plan on doing videos as well as pictures with it.
The other day I was shooting hummingbirds and I had my shutter speed at 1/8000, aperture at f8 and ISO 800. Of course the pic looked dark but since I shot in raw and the amazing dynamic range on R5, the bird turned out brilliantly sharp. Yet, the wingtips were not tack sharp like I hoped for. I suppose its because of the phenomena you described in the above video?
I would guess that blur is more about action too fast for the shutter speed. Yes 1/8000 is fast, but so are hummingbird wing tips. Rolling shutter distorts where the wing tips are more than making them blurry.
Tony and that “gangster lean” rolling shutter..
How does t g e shutter help? The sensor is still scanned, one line at a time, from top to bottom.
I observed that the Nikon D810 is still recommended as a high quality camera in 2021, according to some pros. Both you and Chelsea had this model in 2015. I think it is useful, not only, to pursue the latest models, but to underscore value in some former flagship models. I love my D810, which produces excellent results in landscape/seascape imagery. I am aware of its video limitation in only being HD and that manual focus is the better choice for video, due to its intermittent focus results. I am not one to bother with video, because I tell the story in stills and time lapse...Of course, I would not be blabbing if you and Chelsea were not influential in my further knowledge in photography. Thank you for your informative content! As a side note, do you host viewer's photos for critique on composition or editing value?
One of your best informative videos. I shoot 99% stills. I use the mechanical shutter to limit rolling shutter.
@Tony & Chelsea Northrup
Do you know what readout speed the XT3 and XT4 has?
Sorry, I don't know. For the cameras I listed, I photographed that one flickery bulb and then counted the lines lol. Some day I'll have to do that for a bunch of cameras.
Is it possible that readout speed on Sony a6600 is so bad, that it caused distortion of the shape of the body in the still picture of the chickadee just moving across the perch?
Quick Solution for camera manufacturers: The sensor should scan top to bottom, right to left, instead of right to left , top to bottom....this would dramatically reduce the pan jello effect... the "awnser" though, would be an "instant" sensor... maybe each line of resolution on the sensor captured all at once, or each line in one full "swipe"... gl
or the sensor needs to scan so often, that it's basically an "all at once" sensor
I'm surprised that you have mentioned only "expensive" cameras having fast sensor readout like Sony A1 or Canon R3.
Why you did not mention A9 and A9II which have also much better readout speed compering to "regular" cameras? ;-)
For example A9 (mark I) has 1/160 of the second readout speed and could be bought in Europe for "only" 2500 Euro. And by the way, that camera is on the market from 2017.
That being said the fast readout speed for stacked sensors works only for stills, in video the stacked sensor doesn't eliminate the rolling shutter distortions...
These days everyone is explaining rolling shutter limitations when in fact Sony users are aware and free of these issues from 4 years now :-)
Somehow it wasn't issue for Canon users before releasing Canon R3 ...
How does rolling shutter relate to shutter speed? If my sensor readout is 1/30 s, does that mean that I can get blurred results of a moving subject as if I'm shooting at 1/30 s even though I may be at say 1/200 s?
Sensor readout is the time the sensor needs for the pixels, from top to bottom, to start reading. The shutter speed only indicates the amount of time each pixel has to keep "reading" once it starts. This means, if you shoot at 1/250 and if the sensor readout is about 0.05sec (1/20th), that when you take a photo, the pixels from the top of the frame will end the exposure before the pixels from the bottom even start the reading (because the readout is slower than the exposure). Counterwise, in a 1sec exposure, the readout would finish way before the first pixels that started reading, the ones on the top, end the long 1sec exposure.
A slow readout would give you deformations on a fast moving subject and high frequency flickering lights. The blur you apply on top of that is determined by the exposure time... So a slow readout with a short exposure has the best numbers to destroy your photos with rolling shutter and banding. On the other hand, a fast readout pared with a sufficient long-enough exposure shouldn't show any issues. But keep in mind, they are not related and one doesn't affect the other, the readout stays always the same, and the exposure "softens" its effects the longer it gets. Hope it helped
Awesome video, very helpful, as always. Although, I am wondering why is Chelsea putting her camera in the fridge! :)
It was a joke from a previous video... her Canon R5 kept overheating :D
It seems like a rolling shutter hardware fix for electronic shutters would be to turn on light collection for all pixels at time 0 and to turn off light collection for all pixels at time 0 + shutter speed. Then read out the pixel values at your leisure. This would solve the slow readout speed problem. I haven't read any discussion of this solution. Could there be a problem with needing pixel memory until the values can be readout? Again, I have seen no discussion of these issues. Is adding pixel memory hard?
Need to go back to the days of leaf shutters in lens.
So let’s say I’m at a concert that has crazy lights that create these black bars. My camera is black magic 6k it has global shutter. How do I fix that on that camera. The led wall changes constantly lol also I want to shoot in slow motion and regular 24 fps thank you all
This is my entire artistic practice it is my fave. Blurry is best
Does NTSC or PAL matter? I believe NTSC is used in the US and everywhere else you are supposed to use PAL to eliminate flicker. Is this correct?
As long as the shutter speed is staying at the hz rate of the place. For instance in the US and Japan it should be 1/60 to avoid flicker and 1/50 in Europe and elsewhere to avoid that flicker.
I have shot NTSC 30fps video in Europe with a 1/50 shutter and there was no flicker, so as long as you can hit the shutter speed needed for the lights, do it
Some mismatches can’t be avoided though like you can’t use a 1/50 shutter with 60fps video because the shutter is too long but you can use 1/60 with 50fps video.
I'm amazed there isn't an option where a camera takes 2 or 3 images and then replaces the dark bands with the data from the next frame.
New mobile phone cameras that have HDR modes do this. They take a stack of photos all with slightly different ISO setting and then blend them together. It would be interesting to test these phones and see if the bands go away.
@@seth.heerschap phones are doing such cool things to get around the fact they are small sensors with tiny lenses, I would like to see some of those features come to 'proper cameras'.
@@Speak_Out_and_Remove_All_Doubt pretty much all of these features you can do in post with a real camera, with the added benefit of lower F stop, higher resolution, better dynamic range. But stacking is a very common feature in astrophotography and when you want to get the sky and subject without anything overexposed.
But I really do love the quick edit and post that smart phones have these days. They're improving much faster than professional cameras I think.
I was looking for a camera to do photos from a vehicle. I thought bigger sensors where the way to go due to more light coming in etc until I did read a comment on the A6100 about the rolling shutter, started investigating and wow, it is certainly an issue!. I'm moving back to investigate M4/3 cameras unitl global shutter sensors reach consumer market which seems like never happening.
Help me understand this here, I have a Canon 90D, The EOS 90D comes with an electronic shutter that can achieve a maximum speed of 1/16,000 seconds and a mechanical/electronic 1st-curtain shutter with a maximum of 1/8,000 seconds. So does that equate to 1-16th of a second and 1-8th of a second. Ta
no thats one/sixteenthousandth of a second and one/eightthousandth of a second
1-16th of a second = 1/16
1-8th of a second = 1/8
@@MikedieONE cheers just realised as i posted the amount of zero's lol
@@paulbrooks2796Lol
I have roling shutter problem in my phone any solution?
GOOOoooD
By default, mirrorless cameras only use the mechanical shutter for the second curtain. The first curtain is fully electronic. So, why doesn't the first curtain electronic shutter introduce rolling shutter.
This is a great explainer, but I still can't understand how a mechanical shutter is able to reduce rolling shutter effects. How is a mechanical shutter that opens for 1/x seconds going to solve the readout problem? The sensor still needs to read the image from top to bottom. Anyone have a good explanation?
EDIT: I think I figured out what's up. I think even when we're using the mechanical shutter, behind it is an electronic shutter: it's always electronically turning on the photosites (where each pixel is recorded), collecting photons, then reading the pixels out line by line to the processor and the memory card (vs. a global shutter, which can dump all the pixels onto the memory nearly instantly). The difference is, the mechanical shutter prevents the rolling effect DURING exposure. That is, the image is exposed at all photosites at the same time (ignoring the mechanical shutter's own "rolling" effect at faster shutter speeds); then the pixels still get dumped to the memory card line by line, but that process starts AFTER the mechanical shutter has closed. During the part of the process that might result in slanty buildings or warped propeller blades, there are no photons being delivered to the photosites.
This is just a guess. If you actually understand this stuff, I'm all ears!
Yes, I have resolved this rolling shutter by not going mirrorless!
You are incorrect. Thanks for playing.
You couldn't be more wrong but at least you tried.
I more or less understand the electronic shutter bending however not so much why mechanic shutter resolves it.
Mechanic shutter move at same speed it 1/8000 or 1/1000. The only difference is the distence between the 1st and 2nd curton. So why is it better?
Sony A6400; basketball game, of course indoors shooting silent using 1/500
All right except that people still seem to think the flickering only ovcurs with led lighting, like led is a bad new tech..but it also happens with other sources like foot example fluorescent
Yeah, it definitely also happens with flourescent, sodium vapour, and cheap incandescents at a high enough shutter speed.
I've had fluorescent (the u before the o guys), lighting give me blurred vision and that quickly led to some disorientation. I worried it was me until I got outside from the store and started feeling clear headed again. Just some locations though, not all ceiling tube lighting.
A Sony a9 is cheaper than a Sony a1 and has a very fast sensor readout (due to the stacked BSI CMOS sensor).
When I was about 13, I picked up my first CMOS-based video recorder. I immediately noticed the rolling-shutter effect and came up with the idea of CMOS-EVO (CMOS evolved) technology to run rolling shutter removal in the camera using artificial intelligence.
got a link?
I just shot a show with the Sony A7RIV and the A7III. Rolling shutter in the IV ruined a lot of my shots. I find the A7III was faster due to less Megapixels. It was more reliable. Thanks for the great video. I returned the RIV.
Psst. CCDs are better than CMOSes.
@@blenderbachcgi I learned the ropes on a large CCD camera, the Sony DSR-300 DVCAM. $30K around the year 2000(ish). So this whole rolling shutter/banding thing puzzled me when I started playing with my own consumer video cameras starting in 2014.
Is it not possible to calculate rolling shutter based on sensor/camera specs and just use a simple algorithm to reverse the rolling shutter effect?
No, you would also need to know how fast the camera is moving and how fast all objects in the photo are moving in relation to the camera.
@@TechnoBabble I’m pretty sure they can make AI for this particular issue
For static subjects tilting because of camera movement, yes. But it's pretty impossible when you have moving subjects and a stationary background, for example.
0:55 Deer in the refrigerator. 🦌