Video from the C23 and H Plus

[NorWiscPilot]

Jeff, I'm absolutely certain that you could teach me a lot more than I can teach you. And my observations are based on zero personal experience of drone videography. I do have experience of digital imaging and editing but not in this arena; so the artifacts which distract me may well be the norm (although I haven't seen nearly as many on other C23 videos).

So, FWIW and without taking notes for the full length of the video, these are the artifacts which jumped out at me:

2:17 The short grass is shimmering (at high speed)
2:20 Foliage pixels are smearing
2:23 The near foliage is in focus but in the mid-distance it is blocky and smeary
2:26-2:32 The foliage shifts in and out of focus; more smearing
2:41 The grass shifts out of focus
2:57 The short grass is fluctuating posterised/blocky as colours/detail are dropped
3:03 Tree foliage top left suddenly loses detail/focus.

My connection isn't fast so I checked again at 720 - without any improvement. But I would be very pleased to hear that you don't see any of the above.

Thanks Yukay!

I have printed out your time sheet and will take a look when I get a chance. Day job gets in the way sometimes!

Jeff

 

[YuKay]

I just wonder if 50-60fps is too much data for the fastest UHS-I cards to capture without some aggressive downsampling at critical times. Top end 4k capture needs a V60 card and we are restricted to V30.

 

[PatR]

That’s s big part of it but note that edges are consistently mentioned, indicating the lens itself may be part of the problem.

 

[CraigCam]

I just wonder if 50-60fps is too much data for the fastest UHS-I cards to capture without some aggressive downsampling at critical times. Top end 4k capture needs a V60 card and we are restricted to V30.

That’s why I’m hoping proper filters can reduce shutter speed and subsequently data size also. I can overcome a lot of issues with proper settings and having to go up to 4K shutter speed to cut incoming light is too much. It makes a huge difference with the GGO3+ so I’m hoping the same with C23.

 

[Rubik]

I've noticed in many actioncam videos taken from bicycles riding through forests, that every pixel is changing so rapidly that the bit rate of the video can't keep up. The result is clumping together of pixels into larger blocks. This is exactly what we are seeing in the Terrestial Imaging video from 2:20 to 2:50. They say it was recorded at 4Kx30 but we are only shown 1080p. Usually, that's the best way to produce 1080p video. So, I think they must have used an inferior microSD card that could not keep up with the 100 Mbps recording rate possible from the C23 camera. Even my CGO3+ at 60 Mbps can do better than that. Or could YT have messed it up that badly?

 

[PatR]

Any way you look at it, if they want to promote the H Plus that video has to be done over. I don't have the fastest internet after Xfinity "improved" it but at 1080 resolution it was not a video I want to look at a second time.

 

[Rubik]

That’s why I’m hoping proper filters can reduce shutter speed and subsequently data size also. I can overcome a lot of issues with proper settings and having to go up to 4K shutter speed to cut incoming light is too much. It makes a huge difference with the GGO3+ so I’m hoping the same with C23.

Don't mix up shutter speed, frame rate and bit rate. Shutter speed is how long the sensor is exposed to light for each frame and has little or no influence of file size. Frame rate (frames per second) has a big influence on file size and smoothness of moving scenes (if the equipment can handle it). So, 60/50fps will create twice as much (?) data as 30/25 fps. Bit rate determines how much information (detail, color variations, etc.) can be recorded in each frame. That also effects file size. If all 7.5 million pixels are changing with each frame, the bit rate needs to be high to capture all that information. Otherwise, you get the blotchy video we just saw.

 

[rdonson]

It might also be worthwhile to ask them to also upload to Vimeo. That way we could eliminate YouTube as a source of the issues

 

[PatR]

It might also be worthwhile to ask them to also upload to Vimeo. That way we could eliminate YouTube as a source of the issues

Very much agree. Plus, there’s the ability to remove and replace a video at will.

 

[rdonson]

Very much agree. Plus, there’s the ability to remove and replace a video at will.

I left a YouTube comment for Mike at TI about this.

 

[Eagle's Eye Video]

I just wonder if 50-60fps is too much data for the fastest UHS-I cards to capture without some aggressive downsampling at critical times. Top end 4k capture needs a V60 card and we are restricted to V30.

If that is the case, the better question is why does the E90/C23 not have a UHS-II capable microSD drive, if one of the sales bullet points is "4K 60FPS"? I have UHS-II V60 cards, but I will have to wait until I purchase to see what I can get written to from this UHS-I device.

On the purchasing front, one possible noteworthy change...

YUNEEC Typhoon H Plus Pro Hexacopter YUNTYHPRBPUS B&H Photo

This is a bookmarked vendor I have on my system... while the H Plus is still listed as coming soon, the price as of last week was the same as many... RS version at $1899.00... but now, reduced to $1599.00. I'm guessing they would not have bothered updating the site, if they did not now have a definite in-stock target date. Also bodes well for the pricing of the non RS version.

 

[Rubik]

If that is the case, the better question is why does the E90/C23 not have a UHS-II capable microSD drive, if one of the sales bullet points is "4K 60FPS"? I have UHS-II V60 cards, but I will have to wait until I purchase to see what I can get written to from this UHS-I device.

Do not despair. Remember the FutureDrone video made available for download previously (mine headworks and workings) did not show any pixelation. It was recorded at 3480x2160x60fps and 100 Mbps. Also, the Media Acoustics video (village, farms and bridge) was 3480x2160x50fps and 100 Mbps with no pixelation. I don't know what kind of microSD cards they used but clearly the C23 card write speed is fast enough.

 

[rdonson]

As @Rubik points out we've seen enough good examples of photos and 4K video to know that the camera and lens are quite capable. If there was anything amiss Mickeyboo, Ty Pilot, Steve Carr, et all would be howling at this point.

 

[PatR]

Steve’s been down for personal maintenance and Mickey has been conspicuous with imagery silence since his return from the country.

 

[YuKay]

Don't mix up shutter speed, frame rate and bit rate. Shutter speed is how long the sensor is exposed to light for each frame and has little or no influence of file size. Frame rate (frames per second) has a big influence on file size and smoothness of moving scenes (if the equipment can handle it). So, 60/50fps will create twice as much (?) data as 30/25 fps. Bit rate determines how much information (detail, color variations, etc.) can be recorded in each frame. That also effects file size. If all 7.5 million pixels are changing with each frame, the bit rate needs to be high to capture all that information. Otherwise, you get the blotchy video we just saw.

Rubik, am I wrong in thinking that a) shutter speed affects exposure and b) under- (or over-) exposure can reduce file size?

I can't find my post of a few weeks back linking to a photography article which showed two otherwise virtually identical images, one of which was under-exposed and, as a result, 20% smaller in file size.

With all images, the more detail therein, the bigger the file size will be. So, logically, images which are under- (or over-) exposed will contain fewer details and therefore be smaller.

 

[Rubik]

Rubik, am I wrong in thinking that a) shutter speed affects exposure and b) under- (or over-) exposure can reduce file size?

I can't find my post of a few weeks back linking to a photography article which showed two otherwise virtually identical images, one of which was under-exposed and, as a result, 20% smaller in file size.

With all images, the more detail therein, the bigger the file size will be. So, logically, images which are under- (or over-) exposed will contain fewer details and therefore be smaller.

Yes, you are right that that the data set for a heavily compressed frame will be smaller. I didn't realize that it could be 20% smaller. The extra compression can result from large areas where there is little variation (sky, severely overexposed areas, severely underexposed areas, etc.).

 

[rdonson]

I left a YouTube comment for Mike at TI about this.

I got a reply from Mike (TI) on YouTube and he likes the idea of 4K 30 and 60 video and will look into providing some on YouTube and Vimeo

 

[YuKay]

I mean really? That shimmer is seemingly less than a second from the craft no longer flying: stuck in a tree. How do we know the camera did not hit first?

Evaluating this video is laughable.

Now, if this was a joke, “you got me”!!!!

Jeff

Bit harsh on a pro pilot who was just getting a feel for his new H Plus. I'm sure there must be other pros who have crashed a new drone.

But anyway, I owe him, you and this forum an apology because I have just discovered that most of the artifacts I saw in these clips were introduced by my browser.

I knew that Safari on a Mac couldn't play any YouTube videos at higher res than 1080p but that didn't bother me as my connection can't support much more than 720p anyway. But what I hadn't appreciated was the mess that Safari makes of converting YouTube's VP9 codec to one that Apple approves of.

The dreadful still image I posted earlier is only visible in Safari. And my comments about that pilot's portfolio were therefore misplaced so I have deleted those posts. I will also review my previous comments about artifacts and ensure that I can still see them in my new default browser, Opera.

Thanks for making me investigate.

 

[Rubik]

Bit harsh on a pro pilot who was just getting a feel for his new H Plus. I'm sure there must be other pros who have crashed a new drone.

But anyway, I owe him, you and this forum an apology because I have just discovered that most of the artifacts I saw in these clips were introduced by my browser.

I knew that Safari on a Mac couldn't play any YouTube videos at higher res than 1080p but that didn't bother me as my connection can't support much more than 720p anyway. But what I hadn't appreciated was the mess that Safari makes of converting YouTube's VP9 codec to one that Apple approves of.

The dreadful still image I posted earlier is only visible in Safari. And my comments about that pilot's portfolio were therefore misplaced so I have deleted those posts. I will also review my previous comments about artifacts and ensure that I can still see them in my new default browser, Opera.

Thanks for making me investigate.

Thanks for clearing that up.
I looked at the videos in 4Kx60fps. Aside from the hedge trimming and overexposure, they look pretty good. They could use some post processing, though. I do see some pixelation in the scenes where things dreadfully close to the camera are moving by rapidly. That's not unexpected.
I hope his H+ is OK.

 

[rdonson]

Bit harsh on a pro pilot who was just getting a feel for his new H Plus. I'm sure there must be other pros who have crashed a new drone.

But anyway, I owe him, you and this forum an apology because I have just discovered that most of the artifacts I saw in these clips were introduced by my browser.

I knew that Safari on a Mac couldn't play any YouTube videos at higher res than 1080p but that didn't bother me as my connection can't support much more than 720p anyway. But what I hadn't appreciated was the mess that Safari makes of converting YouTube's VP9 codec to one that Apple approves of.

The dreadful still image I posted earlier is only visible in Safari. And my comments about that pilot's portfolio were therefore misplaced so I have deleted those posts. I will also review my previous comments about artifacts and ensure that I can still see them in my new default browser, Opera.

Thanks for making me investigate.

The fault with Safari and YouTube isn't all Apple's fault. YouTube is built to run best on the Chrome browser. Every other browser is second or third or worse fiddle. Try Chrome if you want better results with YouTube. I use both Safari and Chrome. Chrome mostly for YouTube videos.