Snapping a Steel Rod 1000x slower - The Slow Mo Guys - General

[video]https://youtu.be/vPBM0g9usMs[/video]

Huh, I expected a little more necking than that.

It's neat how they're filming at such a high frame rate that even though they've got the rod lit up like the surface of the sun the video is still comes out much darker.

I wanna know what the actual machine is rated for, whatever the bar is latched onto must be a beastly material.

[QUOTE=Water-Marine;51691809]Huh, I expected a little more necking than that.[/QUOTE] I expected less. rebar that thick is hardened steel

[img]https://puu.sh/tru01/d06667a6f0.png[/img]

[QUOTE=MadBomber;51691987]I wanna know what the actual machine is rated for, whatever the bar is latched onto must be a beastly material.[/QUOTE] @ 0:40, they say 220 kips, it broke at ~157 kips

[QUOTE=chunkymonkey;51691953]It's neat how they're filming at such a high frame rate that even though they've got the rod lit up like the surface of the sun the video is still comes out much darker.[/QUOTE] Mostly related to post-processing. They could choose to have it appear brighter / more contrasty.

I was expecting a horrible sound.

[QUOTE=paul simon;51692960]Mostly related to post-processing. They could choose to have it appear brighter / more contrasty.[/QUOTE] Thing is, with high frame rates, there's no time to have a long enough exposure to capture a lot of light. For example, at 30fps the longest exposure you can have is 1/30s, 1/25s at 25fps, etc. Same goes for 10000fps, where you can only have 1/10000s of exposure (0.0001s) per frame, you HAVE to have a shitton of light on your subject for it to be not dark as fuck.

[QUOTE=Naota1248;51692682][img]https://puu.sh/tru01/d06667a6f0.png[/img][/QUOTE] Now someone just needs to make a .gif of his hand sliding up and down the hard shaft.

[QUOTE=lexus04;51694128]Thing is, with high frame rates, there's no time to have a long enough exposure to capture a lot of light. For example, at 30fps the longest exposure you can have is 1/30s, 1/25s at 25fps, etc. Same goes for 10000fps, where you can only have 1/10000s of exposure (0.0001s) per frame, you HAVE to have a shitton of light on your subject for it to be not dark as fuck.[/QUOTE] Of course, just saying the footage has a lot of leverage. They could make it look brighter in post if they wanted to.

not without losing quality

[QUOTE=butre;51695634]not without losing quality[/QUOTE] I don't have the source video in the RAW format they film in, and even I can (by using a screenshot from this compressed YouTube video) pull more brightness and contrast out of this footage without ruining the quality: [img]http://puu.sh/tsEXs.png[/img] In this comparison, I know what I'd prefer. This footage in particular is [B]not[/B] noisy enough for brightening it to be an issue, especially if you use temporal denoisers in post - something Gavin should be very familiar with. I don't see why you're trying to argue against my statement :v: Source: I often work with RAW photos and RAW video formats

the amount of noise in your brightened version is horrible and it doesn't show any extra detail.

[QUOTE=butre;51697540]the amount of noise in your brightened version is horrible and it doesn't show any extra detail.[/QUOTE] 1 - I don't have access to the source material, I have to deal with a still image from a YouTube video. (YouTube compression does not like dark areas, amplifying that is bound to give bad results) 2 - Temporal noise reduction is incredibly effective in cases like this. 3 - The trade-off between noise and brightness is obviously worth it in this case where the noise is so minor and the footage could use being brighter, it obviously appears underexposed. But, sure, just be a contrarian for no reason. Anyone with any experience at all in colour correction & RAW processing will understand how easy it is to pull some extra brightness out of this relatively noisefree and flat footage of a static scene with ideal areas to sample noise for temporal denoising.

if you want more light you want either a longer exposure or actually more light. putting light where there was no light to start with just makes the overall quality worse and there's no denying that. we just have different ideas of how much worse is acceptable.

[QUOTE=butre;51697730]if you want more light you want either a longer exposure or actually more light. putting light where there was no light to start with just makes the overall quality worse and there's no denying that. we just have different ideas of how much worse is acceptable.[/QUOTE] I like noiseless footage as much as you do, and I'm certain that with the right processing you could make this 1 stop brighter and equally noiseless.

The biggest issue with your edit is that some of the dust particles in front of the rod are white and some are casting shadows onto the rod, so when you brighten it like that you lose a ton of detail when the dust, rod, and shadows are all near-white

[QUOTE=lxmach1;51697784]The biggest issue with your edit is that some of the dust particles in front of the rod are white and some are casting shadows onto the rod, so when you brighten it like that you lose a ton of detail when the dust, rod, and shadows are all near-white[/QUOTE] It's equally easy to lower the highlights, it's a non-problem.

[QUOTE=paul simon;51697791]It's equally easy to lower the highlights, it's a non-problem.[/QUOTE] but you didnt

[QUOTE=paul simon;51697467]I don't have the source video in the RAW format they film in, and even I can (by using a screenshot from this compressed YouTube video) pull more brightness and contrast out of this footage without ruining the quality: [img]http://puu.sh/tsEXs.png[/img] In this comparison, I know what I'd prefer. This footage in particular is [B]not[/B] noisy enough for brightening it to be an issue, especially if you use temporal denoisers in post - something Gavin should be very familiar with. I don't see why you're trying to argue against my statement :v: Source: I often work with RAW photos and RAW video formats[/QUOTE] Your edit looks way overblown and too bright. The original looks quite fine, the rod is lit well enough and background is unimportant so it's dark.