Hello Fellow Yuneec Pilot!
Join our free Yuneec community and remove this annoying banner!
Sign up

Shooting Photos or just use Video?

Steve Carr

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 15, 2015
Messages
5,371
Likes
2,149
Location
Bessemer, MI
#1
I'm hopeful some of our experienced photo guru's will just in here with the correct info.

I can see no point in shooting photos in jpg. It appears to me that grabbing a frame from video produces the same result. I can see the difference in shooting dng photos, but not in jpg.
 
Joined
Dec 26, 2017
Messages
39
Likes
21
Location
Stockton, California
Website
www.jcommstudios.com
#2
I'm hopeful some of our experienced photo guru's will just in here with the correct info.

I can see no point in shooting photos in jpg. It appears to me that grabbing a frame from video produces the same result. I can see the difference in shooting dng photos, but not in jpg.
@Steve Carr Thought I would post my thoughts from the discussion we just had on fb. I agree with the option to dng, which most people might find overwhelming if they have no color grading experience. I always shoot in 4K and process to 1080 for the edit. The software I use to convert is called Brorsoft Video Encoder ($29) and it has an option to do frame captures of the 4K video. With the Typhoon H the jpeg stills created are fairly robust at 3840x2160 and measure 40" x 22.5" at 96 dpi. In Photoshop you can change the resolution to 300 dpi. It will also change the height and width to a much higher value which should then be changed back to 3840x2160 retaining the 300 dpi. Save it and you end up with a print capable 300 dpi photo at 12.8" x 7.2" which is usually large enough for most print situations like a brochure etc. You also have 30 frames per second to choose your stills from!
 

Eagle's Eye Video

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 16, 2016
Messages
1,932
Likes
935
Location
Albuquerque NM
#3
EDIT: [Opening statement removed, as to not offend those not understanding the original context.]

Part of that depends on the setup being used. For instance, the CGO3+ will shoot 4K at 4096x2160, while shooting a photo at 4000x3000. So the vast majority of the difference in image size is in cropping to the 16:9 HD format from the 4:3 sizing in photo mode. In this scenario, there is little actual resolution loss in terms of size.

However, as has been demonstrated on this board a few times, there is more than pure pixel dimensions that determine resolution... which is why the DNGs produce a superior result.

Where this completely changes, is if you discuss the resolution capabilities of the C23/E90 camera. The maximum video resolution remains the same as the CGO3+... 4096x2160. However the maximum photo resolution is why you paid 2X for the camera, at 20 MP... 5472×3648. So you will lose a significant percentage of your available pixel resolution, by going the route of video frame capture.

It should also be noted that specific to the current setup of the C23, that JPGs are complete shite, and no competent photographer would consider using them at all. IMHO, any pilot delivering video captures as photos from the C23 is seriously cheating their clients.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 24, 2017
Messages
1,593
Likes
1,132
Location
Central Florida
#4
I agree when it comes to the CG03 (which is a 12 MP size), that a frame from a 4k video will be just about as good and large as a Jpeg shot full frame. DNG's while not much larger pack far more color depth information into the same space. So if its JPGs your after video will provide almost as good results as the full Jpeg and DNGs will provide the best the camera has.

For reference here is a size chart I just made to see the relative sizes between a 4K frame and then a 12 and 20 megapixel frame. Keep in mind the a full HD frame is 1/4 the size of the 4K and I would not recommend using frames from video shot at that setting.

This picture shows actual relative size but on a scale small enough to see it on the screen.

Image Size.jpg
 

Steve Carr

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 15, 2015
Messages
5,371
Likes
2,149
Location
Bessemer, MI
#5
It should also be noted that specific to the current setup of the C23, that JPGs are complete shite, and no competent photographer would consider using them at all. IMHO, any pilot delivering video captures as photos from the C23 is seriously cheating their clients.
Good point on the comparison of the C23 to the CGO3+. So how does the C23 jpg compare to a frame grab? I would assume they are roughly the same.
 
Joined
Feb 24, 2017
Messages
1,593
Likes
1,132
Location
Central Florida
#6
From a quality standpoint a 4K frame grab of video from the C23 looks better than the full size image because it doesn't have the massive over-sharpening but; it is about half the physical size as shown above. And EEV is right the JPG's I take go straight into the bin. ;) Another thing to keep in mind is most times if we are shooting video in the bright sun we may be using an ND filter which slows the shutter and gives the video the natural blur to moving objects, so from a still capturing point of view - that would further degrade a single frame used as a photograph in most cases.
 

Eagle's Eye Video

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 16, 2016
Messages
1,932
Likes
935
Location
Albuquerque NM
#7
A C23 JPG will still have the pixel size resolution of 5472×3648, but the actual image quality is considerably compromised, in terms of perceptible over-sharpening and the usual reduced quality of saving as a JPG. Also take into account that we as users do not know the compression level that is applied by the Yuneec programmers. It is more than the minimum compression settings, since the file size difference between a DNG and a JPG from the CGO3+ is about 1/10. A maximum quality JPG will be closer to 1/3 the file size of a DNG.

However it should be noted, that if the client does not need full 20 MP resolution,
zooming and cropping provide obvious advantages.
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
388
Likes
160
Location
Germany / Bavaria
Website
h-elsner.mooo.com
#8
For CGO3 and CGO3+ the sharpness can be tuned by a CGI command. Possibly this works also for C23, I don't have one. The JPGs from C23 looking, hmmm ... strange, I would say.

http://192.168.42.1/cgi-bin/cgi?CMD=INDEX_PAGE
http://192.168.42.1/cgi-bin/cgi?CMD=GET_SHARPNESS
http://192.168.42.1/cgi-bin/cgi?CMD=SET_SHARPNESS&value=6
{values between 1..10, 6 is default for CGO3/3+}

You need only a device that is connected to CGOx via 5GHz WLAN and a browser. Or you use the CGO command page at q500log2kml.

First read INDEX_PAGE to initialize the connection, then the sharpness just to check if it works. Remember the value as default value.
Then try to change SHARPNESS, make a test still in JPG and check if you like this. Find the best value for your camera...

br HE
 
Joined
Feb 24, 2017
Messages
830
Likes
368
Location
Northern Wisconsin, USA
#9
For a different perspective...

If I am shooting for a client, I will always use dng+jpg.

The expected use for the jpgs is for proof only. The dng (raw) will be used for the final adjustments and prints, et al.

Video is in its own category and used as such.

My personal workflow and philosophy for aerial work matches my ground work with my DSLRs... one can always downgrade, but very tough to produce higher res, higher quality from substandard originals.

The challenge is to get enough requests to put these workflows in motion!

Jeff
 

Eagle's Eye Video

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 16, 2016
Messages
1,932
Likes
935
Location
Albuquerque NM
#10
For CGO3 and CGO3+ the sharpness can be tuned by a CGI command. Possibly this works also for C23, I don't have one. The JPGs from C23 looking, hmmm ... strange, I would say.

http://192.168.42.1/cgi-bin/cgi?CMD=INDEX_PAGE
http://192.168.42.1/cgi-bin/cgi?CMD=GET_SHARPNESS
http://192.168.42.1/cgi-bin/cgi?CMD=SET_SHARPNESS&value=6
{values between 1..10, 6 is default for CGO3/3+}

You need only a device that is connected to CGOx via 5GHz WLAN and a browser. Or you use the CGO command page at q500log2kml.

First read INDEX_PAGE to initialize the connection, then the sharpness just to check if it works. Remember the value as default value.
Then try to change SHARPNESS, make a test still in JPG and check if you like this. Find the best value for your camera...

br HE
Those interested in testing their cameras are welcome to download this sharpness target. Ideally you will print this out at a copy shop with an oversize inkjet printer. Instruct the staff, to print in Acrobat... at the native size of 4 feet x 2 feet, in grayscale at the highest print quality settings.

Lens Sharpness Chart
 
Likes: Windluv
Joined
Sep 30, 2018
Messages
13
Likes
4
Age
61
#11
I'm hopeful some of our experienced photo guru's will just in here with the correct info.

I can see no point in shooting photos in jpg. It appears to me that grabbing a frame from video produces the same result. I can see the difference in shooting dng photos, but not in jpg.
I do that all the time. I take video of my 5 year old grandson with steady grip. He really moves sometime. Can always get quite a few perfect shots.
 
Likes: Rubik
Joined
Oct 16, 2018
Messages
63
Likes
6
Location
AnywhereButOverThere
#12
@Steve Carr Thought I would post my thoughts from the discussion we just had on fb. I agree with the option to dng, which most people might find overwhelming if they have no color grading experience. I always shoot in 4K and process to 1080 for the edit. The software I use to convert is called Brorsoft Video Encoder ($29) and it has an option to do frame captures of the 4K video. With the Typhoon H the jpeg stills created are fairly robust at 3840x2160 and measure 40" x 22.5" at 96 dpi. In Photoshop you can change the resolution to 300 dpi. It will also change the height and width to a much higher value which should then be changed back to 3840x2160 retaining the 300 dpi. Save it and you end up with a print capable 300 dpi photo at 12.8" x 7.2" which is usually large enough for most print situations like a brochure etc. You also have 30 frames per second to choose your stills from!
sorry but you are mixing things up, DPI is relevant for printing only, you could change it to 100,000 DPI and it changes NOTHING about the picture quality unless printing (it does NOT correlate to pixels - DPI means DOTS PER INCH - ink droplets per inch!), has nothing to do with files or actual resolution or jpeg quality either.

jpeg quality is the quality of the f/w or s/w which is changing the RAW sensor data into the jpeg, it varies but most in cam jpeg algorithms are decent, depends of purpose after-all.

True/real RAW capture does NOTHING to the data from the sensor, but usually it may do something to make it 'prettier' either noise reduction or lens correction, etc.

DNG is just the Adobe 'standard' for Digital Negative (G=??) and it generally will imbede a small snapshot of orig, but yuneec does not do this in my experience (snapshot used for quick viewing only)

in most RAW s/w you can choose the jpeg QUALITY which means the less the quality the smaller the size of file, but then you can also choose the 'resolution' of the picture from orig of 12mp down to 480x640 which is low quality and would be a very small file too.

jpeg by nature throws away 80-90 % of the RAW data that was captured by the sensor and which is retained in a RAW or DNG raw in yuneec's case, NO DATA FROM SENSOR IS THROWN AWAY.

I would say from the size of the jpegs that yuneec is setting jpeg quality to about 50-70% or so, s/w genrally has a 1-10, 10 setting for quality, file size directly proportional.

also there are capable ENOUGH free video s/w for windows (no clue about mac) that are suitable for our purposes, it is mostly about the 'learning curve' for any app IF it can do what we want.

the stills capture from video will ALWAYS be jpeg ONLY. our cams can NOT perform RAW video.

so depending on the desired quality, use DNG in stills mode.

Even jpeg (uses full 12mp for stills, jpg or DNG) in stills mode, but in video mode IT IS THE RESOLUTION OF YOUR VIDEO CAPTURE SETTING ONLY, 4khd (8mp), 1080p (2mp) etc !!

GL !
 
Joined
Dec 26, 2017
Messages
39
Likes
21
Location
Stockton, California
Website
www.jcommstudios.com
#13
sorry but you are mixing things up, DPI is relevant for printing only, you could change it to 100,000 DPI and it changes NOTHING about the picture quality unless printing (it does NOT correlate to pixels - DPI means DOTS PER INCH - ink droplets per inch!), has nothing to do with files or actual resolution or jpeg quality either.

jpeg quality is the quality of the f/w or s/w which is changing the RAW sensor data into the jpeg, it varies but most in cam jpeg algorithms are decent, depends of purpose after-all.

True/real RAW capture does NOTHING to the data from the sensor, but usually it may do something to make it 'prettier' either noise reduction or lens correction, etc.

DNG is just the Adobe 'standard' for Digital Negative (G=??) and it generally will imbede a small snapshot of orig, but yuneec does not do this in my experience (snapshot used for quick viewing only)

in most RAW s/w you can choose the jpeg QUALITY which means the less the quality the smaller the size of file, but then you can also choose the 'resolution' of the picture from orig of 12mp down to 480x640 which is low quality and would be a very small file too.

jpeg by nature throws away 80-90 % of the RAW data that was captured by the sensor and which is retained in a RAW or DNG raw in yuneec's case, NO DATA FROM SENSOR IS THROWN AWAY.

I would say from the size of the jpegs that yuneec is setting jpeg quality to about 50-70% or so, s/w genrally has a 1-10, 10 setting for quality, file size directly proportional.

also there are capable ENOUGH free video s/w for windows (no clue about mac) that are suitable for our purposes, it is mostly about the 'learning curve' for any app IF it can do what we want.

the stills capture from video will ALWAYS be jpeg ONLY. our cams can NOT perform RAW video.

so depending on the desired quality, use DNG in stills mode.

Even jpeg (uses full 12mp for stills, jpg or DNG) in stills mode, but in video mode IT IS THE RESOLUTION OF YOUR VIDEO CAPTURE SETTING ONLY, 4khd (8mp), 1080p (2mp) etc !!

GL !
Had you read he entire post you would have realized we were discussing the ability to take a 4K capture and create a print ready 300dpi still for print (real estate brochure etc.) for people who do not have the experience in using Raw or DNG.
 
Joined
Aug 1, 2016
Messages
844
Likes
257
Location
Auburn, WA, USA
#15
I did a little research into various photo options with my CGO3+ camera. Here's the results. As you can see, images grabbed from UHD (3840x2160) video have only 69% as many pixels as Photo images (4000x3000). However, the resulting file size is quite a bit larger. I use this screen grab technique frequently to get just the right instant in time. As was pointed out above, the screen grab image will look better if the video frame rate was faster (ie. without ND filter) than the 60 fps I usually use for UHD video.
 

Attachments

Joined
Aug 1, 2016
Messages
844
Likes
257
Location
Auburn, WA, USA
#18
I took these pics when I was green with the H. At that time I didn't know how to use manual camera adjustments and auto white balance.
Back in those days all I knew was the auto modes, and gorgeous was my pick.
Well, that explains the overpowering greens. I'm glad to hear you didn't do that deliberately. Otherwise very nice.
 
Likes: AH-1G
Joined
May 26, 2018
Messages
72
Likes
23
Age
50
#19
One more thing to keep in mind when it comes to frame grabs, The way video compression works, unless you make sure you grab the Key(I) Frame, you're likely suffering from not only image comperssion artifacts but also mpeg compress artifacts designed to "be close enough" with motion. Essentially any frame not on the key frame(essentially jpeg) is a composition of the last and next key frame with a series of differential elements applied, which is why on low end video you can see the video go sharp then soft and blurry or macroblock and then go sharp again. The frames that are sharp are key frames and the rest is progressive differences applied to make the in between frames which is where most of the space saving of video compression comes from.

That said High end mpeg-4 has frequent I frames and high bitrate reduces blurring and macroblocking on P and B frames, but it will NOT be as sharp as a still.
 
Likes: AH-1G

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
13,750
Messages
156,564
Members
16,426
Latest member
MrDoggy