DSLRUsers.com

I have just started playing with time lapse (well, I have done it in the past but not with conversion to a video). It is actually very easy and a lot of fun. The hardest part is finding good subjects.

I noticed the moon setting yesterday morning and thought it would make a good subject. I missed it yesterday so I set up for it this morning. I had the camera all set up and ready to go and was waiting for the moon to get low enough in the sky to enter the frame. Unfortunately, it clouded over before the moon was low enough. I went ahead with the sequence anyway as the clouds were quite interesting. You actually see a glimpse of the moon between 0:07 and 0:08.

This first one is a static version just showing the clouds:


The second one is taken from the same series of photos but includes a slow panning effect - similar to what was seen in Frozen Planet:


Neither is particularly stunning, but fun nonetheless.

Note the uploaded files are only 720p. I could export at 1080p if I wanted to.

yeah timelapse is a neat trick to play with, but takes quite some time to really get something stunning, all the usual things apply, composition, subjects and of teh most important one, interesting movement.

I have taken to trying a few timelapse when out and about - here is one from Cathedral Rocks

http://youtu.be/7grL1K_pQ2w

biggerry wrote:I have taken to trying a few timelapse when out and about - here is one from Cathedral Rocks

http://youtu.be/7grL1K_pQ2w

Great sequence. The first 30 seconds are the best. After that it's not as interesting.

How did you allow for the changing light? Set the camera on auto?

ATJ wrote:This first one is a static version just showing the clouds:


The second one is taken from the same series of photos but includes a slow panning effect - similar to what was seen in Frozen Planet:


Neither is particularly stunning, but fun nonetheless.

They are fun. One of the things I enjoy seeing in a cloud timelapse is the realisation that upper level clouds (if there are any) are moving in a different direction and speed to the main clouds in the scene. You have a bit of that here.

Michael

My humble suggestion would be to speed it up a bit and the panning is too slow for me

Remorhaz wrote:My humble suggestion would be to speed it up a bit and the panning is too slow for me

I doubled the speed on the panning version which should help:

How are you doing the panning?

photohiker wrote:How are you doing the panning?

With a feature called "Ken Burns Effect". Basically, the source images are 4288x2848 and the final resolution is 1920x1080 so I have a lot of scope to pan within the image. With Final Cut Pro X, you chose the starting frame and the ending frame and it pans and/or zooms between the two.

ATJ wrote:

biggerry wrote:I have taken to trying a few timelapse when out and about - here is one from Cathedral Rocks

http://youtu.be/7grL1K_pQ2w

Great sequence. The first 30 seconds are the best. After that it's not as interesting.

How did you allow for the changing light? Set the camera on auto?

I set it to aperture priority and dialled in -0.5 comp. Iso 100. Matrix metering. Intervalometer set to every 5 seconds for infinite amount of shots. I accidentally left teh LCD review on but I still had a couple of bars of juice left (D80).

ATJ wrote:

photohiker wrote:How are you doing the panning?

With a feature called "Ken Burns Effect". Basically, the source images are 4288x2848 and the final resolution is 1920x1080 so I have a lot of scope to pan within the image. With Final Cut Pro X, you chose the starting frame and the ending frame and it pans and/or zooms between the two.

Aha. And there was I thinking you had built some kind of fancy rotator based on an Ikea egg timer or something...