fountain test using casio ex-e12 and Vista's WMM

[Reid Welch]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HP0CfolMwb4"]YouTube- #4 Casio EX-S12 "motion jpeg avi" 720P is a pretty smooth actor[/ame]

for what it is, I am pretty pleased,
particularly by the ease of editing and the apparent liquid-smooth water dropping.

any thoughts for a beginner's benefit?

am only into documenting the local sights,
and a pocket cam is great for emergency use, too.

=the shake at the start, atop the roof is purely my body's shaking: have a sort of permanent tremor lately.
=the tripod shots of the fountain are, perhaps, more telling.
=the focus is not always perfect...it's fooled to focus on the water drops, it seems.
=once this kind of cam starts shooting, it cannot track focus.
=some of the closer in scenes: I thought it would focus on the bowls,
but, instead it seemed to prefer to focus on the sparkling water drops.
=if I understand (remember) the cam shoots at 24fps, and yt converts/plays at 15fps.
=this is my third casio, replacing an SD quality, widescreen aspect, S770.
I like the convenience of the front firing mic, and its AVC seems quite good.

Will show another video make in the courtyard, to show off the quality of its eight bit audio,
though the video is a bit on the long side---the content and the acoustic results may be of interest.
corrections appreciated, am quite a newbie to all this.

the roof top shaky shots: that tile was HOT, and I was on bare feet, to not slip and,
break the camera ; never minding about breakng -me-, ha ha.

[Reid Welch]

I don't remember for sure, but think I had set the cam to "pan" focus. This was rendered by old Vista's WMM. It is surely far too soft-focused, but shows how well this sort of inbuilt mic -can- record people.

No edits, no cuts, it was all ad lib,
and was Ernie's first pedal stroke since 1948:
he last rode a 1937 Columbia Silver Streak of his brother's ownership, in '48.

Then, just as we finish, in comes our favorite neighbor. The sound is satisfactory to myself.

What do you think of what Casio has made of minimal,
digicam audio? Myself, well,
am impressed. All is "clear sounding". It's one of two reasons
that I bought a newer "card" casio:
A) "HD" of sorts, and B) the audio would be OK!

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAsrCF1Qz6k"]YouTube- #4: myoldman rides bike for 1st time in =61= years![/ame]
(why no 720P option? It seems to be YT's conversion choice, for this was rendered at WMM's highest quality (though the focus is "off"), but...no "720P" for this video, and I do not know why....

This audio is far, far better than I could ever get from Panasonic's TZ5A,
and its upward-firing mic...and such poor "eight bit" audio, that it was useless.

Next, if I can find it: a high quality -sound recording- of a fine, small, antique music box, details to be explained in the next form.

PS: I tend to make errors in typing...it is EX-E12, and so far as I know,
it's the last of the "motion jpeg avi" type of cams. I like that old format
for it does not need a fast computer or sophisticated edit program.

[Reid Welch]

Original, poorly preserved film. Transfer done via the HV30, about one year ago. The film in its cassette: that was the one, last time it would play.

This system was such a loser that it about put Polaroid out of business.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3jto8f2ooI"]YouTube- POLAVISION #1: Myself When Young[/ame]

Again, old Vista WMM, plus an old, beloved recording. I like that song of philosophy.
The running chassis? That's its first venture from
the courtyard. I completed the body restoration about twelve years later, and drove this car, as my sole automobile, for 25k miles, in Miami traffic,
till it was destroyed in a T-bone accident, not my fault, but...all was destroyed...and I was lucky that no injury to myself occurred. I came out that same door by which I went....

That lashed-on chair: a family relic from, perhaps, the 1870s:
as strong as new.

[Reid Welch]

Pros and cons.

Sample: the old, now obsolete, S770 of 2007,
rendered for YT using old WMM, minimally compressed,
and uploaded to YT at largest file-size that was possible.

The image quality is "OK".
But, listen to the audio quality of its front-mounted,
"pinhole" sized, single electret mic and audio capture?
This is, pretty surely, eight bit audio, done well.

No "audio" enhancements.
Note, please, the vocal intelligibilty?
Note that the camera offers only "AVC".
For this sort of job, "AVC" seems to be ideal:
Point and shoot, tripod mounted, tipping the tripod as needed,
for I can no longer hand-hold a camera of any sort
without my new "shakes" syndrome, making every
veiwer...s e a s i c k


Note the rather good VOICE quality?
The newer Casios, of semi-HD quality,
equally small, or smaller, are of similar,
if not identical, in audio recording quality.


Two samples:

A) the old, obsolete, SD quality, Casio S770: audio capture quality:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAsrCF1Qz6k"]YouTube- myoldman rides bike for 1st time in =61= years![/ame]

B) the newer, nearly obsolete, Casio EX-E12
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FInhfyvoGOA"]YouTube- #11: DANGEROUS review of Casio EX-S12 "HD" digicam[/ame]

PS: I realize now that I've duped, not to annoy, but to show side by side,
the old S770's audio quality.

Note the wind noise of the "B" recording?
I've a perfect, zero-cost work-around for that:
a bit of cotton fluff, from a cotton ball, blu-tacked over the mic:
no more wind noise if I do that, not in anything less than hurricane winds.

[Reid Welch]

the premise: what works best for YT uploads, in terms of minimal motion artifacts?

I propose, at the moment (my plans will change depending on YOUR advice:

=go to the seashore nearby.

Take ten second clips, using the EX-12, which outputs "avi." files.

Now, say I make two ten second clips:
A) one of the distant waters of Biscayne bay.
B) one of relatively close-up, such as is seen in the later portion of this too-long WLMM-rendered, compressed "720P" thing...see at about five minute in, where I swirl the sea grass in the limpid water?

Now if I were to do this with this camera, very short clips, for the file sizes of motion jpeg are quite large, yet can be -natively uploaded to YT,
that would make for "Version one, native".

Then, take the identical footage, and run it through WLMM (for that's all I have here at present...render as "for 720P".
This will produce a wmv. file of about one tenth the size.

If this is done, there would be four in total, of ten second clips, two in native format, two as may be despoiled ?? by WLMM.

Would this be of any interest to anyone other than myself?

I could probably do this tomorrow,
but, today: it is rainy and dull.

If YT is still "15fps", as I believe it to be,
motion artifacts, outdoor shooting, even,
say, of a rubber ball bouncing,
might be of interest;
even the kids next door playing tetherball...

Any thoughts?

Here is YT's guideline page of the present day:
http://www.google.com/support/youtub...16612&hl=en-US

Summary
Here's a summary of the audio and video specifications you need for the best results on YouTube. For further details, please read the information listed directly below this summary.

Video Resolution Recommended: Original resolution of your video - for HD it is 1920x1080 (1080p) or 1280 x 720.
Bit rate Because bit-rate is highly dependent on codec there is no recommended or minimum value. Videos should be optimized for resolution, aspect ratio and frame rate rather than bit rate. Frame rate The frame rate of the original video should be maintained without re-sampling. In particular pulldown and other frame rate re-sampling techniques are strongly discouraged. Codec H.264 or MPEG-2 preferred. Preferred containers FLV, MPEG-2, and MPEG-4 Audio Codec MP3 or AAC preferred Preferred containers FLV, MPEG-2, and MPEG-4 Sampling rate 44.1kHz Channels 2 (stereo)
YouTube recently began offering users an option to view content in high definition- 1080p resolution (when the source upload supports it). Please note, we are currently experimenting with this feature and optimizing it accordingly, so we can't guarantee that your videos will always be transcoded into this format with this user option present.
For an example of a video being streamed in 1080p resolution, please click this link and then click on the text toggle "watch in HD" located beneath the right hand corner of the player.
For best results, ensure your video and audio lengths are the same. If you're using an editing package, make sure that the file you upload to YouTube does not have edit lists. Take a look at this Help Center article to learn more.
How to best upload widescreen videos

• Originals Please!
  The less a video is re-encoded prior to uploading, the better the resulting YouTube video quality. We encourage you to upload your videos as close to the original source format as possible, with a minimum of intermediate re-encoding steps. Each re-encoding can generally degrade the quality of your video and create some specific problems too, which we'll address below.
• Aspect Ratio
  The aspect ratio of the original source video should always be maintained when it's uploaded: Uploaded videos should never include letterboxing or pillarboxing bars.
  The YouTube player automatically adds black bars so that videos are displayed correctly without cropping or stretching, whatever the size of the video or the player. For example, the player will automatically add vertical bars (pillarboxing) to 4:3 videos in the new 16:9 widescreen player size. If the player is re-sized (when embedded on another website for example) the same process takes place, so that 16:9 videos are letterboxed (black bars top and bottom) when the player is sized to 4:3, for example. Similarly, anamorphic videos will be automatically letterboxed when shown in either 16:9 or 4:3 sized players. The player can only do this if the native aspect ratio of the video is maintained.
  If letterboxing is added to a video before it is uploaded (to create a 4:3 video from a 16:9 master for example), the widescreen player will add pillarbox bars too, resulting in black bars all around the video (windowboxing) and a bad viewing experience (see the diagram below).

Apologies, for this repeat of a pooky, quickly made video using the tiny EX-E12, rendered through WLMM, to "720P" quality.
It is only in the last few minutes, where a tripod is employed,
that this video is of even academic interest...motion artifacts: we don't like.

the first five minutes is all rough-car ride to the scene...then come the birds and the water.
But this is wmv, not native format of avi.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXnh178G7XI"]YouTube- Coconut Grove, Festival Plans, Dinner Key,[/ame]

hmmm,,,never mind the sappy music? It can be changed to hip hop
or grand theft auto, ha ha, at will...good old YT is trying to be kindly to us all.
It is just amazing that any of these companies can offer us
anything for video hosting at all. I've been into internet video before there
was even any true internet video. Ern and I had not one, but two, full price,
fool-priced, Viewtron set-ups. Those were the bad old days:
Day-umm, we have it sweet, today, by comparison.
In five years more, all this will seem like the Mutoscope, in the comparison
to, say, the Zoetrope.

Zounds, we even have internet sounds: no more need for the tin can telephone
for calling Silas from the barn, to the house, for vittles. Life today is free pork
for all.

[jordanService]

I guess you would pass the test where NASA sticks you into solitary confinement for 2 months to see how you would react with out human contact.

[Reid Welch]

I guess you would pass the test
where NASA sticks you into solitary confinement for 2 months
to see how you would react with out human contact.

You just got a "green thumb" for your rep, Jordan.

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMn9ms37ImA"]YouTube- Twilight Zone Where Is Everybody[/nomedia]


=I do get out every day and see real, wonderful
people.

=Am not alone. Have friends here, after all:
they are Taky, Eric, Mal the Beneficent,

and all the members who help me to cope
with existing in a sort of "twilight zone",
necessarily, due to...am not sure...confused at times.
Why? Where is everybody? It's not...was not...comforting.
Everybody is alright now, here and everywhere.

more footage will be required....

More circumspection, more placid thought.

Thank you, all, for allowing me a genuine life.

r.

[Reid Welch]

more footage will be required....

Well, you all should know, that,
the cited video link, up above?

I saw that, first run, at home, in the Boys' Room,
in the year, 1959.

That is also the year of THIS footage, linked below,
the tracks....

Tip: Camera work does not always involve LIGHT,
but it does, if it is honest, invoke TRUTH:

http://poetrycritical.net/read/61213/
THE ENGINEER, non fiction, my Miami, 1959


~~~~~~~~~~~~

Wally's Camera Shop, first re-visit, for a treat




+