Alnilam wrote:More of "time-lapses" in this video are not very natural : it is obvious that the changing sky is added on a still image of landscape,
For anyone who has physically done this kind of work, the "obvious" is NOT so obvious. If we keep the camera fixed, thus having a constant field of view during the sequence, you will get what Chris has produced. The animation is created by layering sequential still images and where the brightest pixel is now added, thus incorporating the latest still and which yields motion.
otherwise trees or flowers must be shaked by the wind.
Your underlying premise is flawed. If there is NO wind, there would be no shaking of trees or flowers.
It is very different in the last sequence with the flag.
The only thing different involving Lycabettus Hill and the waving flag is the presence of winds themselves on that particular afternoon.
I suppose that this choice was made to avoid the blinking of landscape, very frequent in "time-lapse" because of changes in light (clouds).
This is software-dependent and how we handle the transition from frame to frame in the animation.
Another reason to do so : star trails are made with a dark sky and the landscape is generally almost black and appears in a "shadow" mode. Without any artificial light, landscape is lightened by the moon sooner or later in the night...
I think you missed the point here. One needs lighting (ex. the young moon) so as to illuminate the foreground. Otherwise, under a dark sky, the foreground will be grossly underexposed (if at all visible). One can result to artificial means to lighting the foreground (such as a powerful flash) but the natural lighting provided by the moon is, in my opinion, the best means.
In any case, the result is very artificial.
This is unfortunate since such a result involves a serious amount of work!
Great job, Chris.
Anthony.
[quote="Alnilam"]More of "time-lapses" in this video are not very natural : it is obvious that the changing sky is added on a still image of landscape,[/quote]
For anyone who has physically done this kind of work, the "obvious" is NOT so obvious. If we keep the camera fixed, thus having a constant field of view during the sequence, you will get what Chris has produced. The animation is created by layering sequential still images and where the brightest pixel is now added, thus incorporating the latest still and which yields motion.
[quote]
otherwise trees or flowers must be shaked by the wind.
[/quote]
Your underlying premise is flawed. If there is NO wind, there would be no shaking of trees or flowers.
[quote]
It is very different in the last sequence with the flag.
[/quote]
The only thing different involving Lycabettus Hill and the waving flag is the presence of winds themselves on that particular afternoon.
[quote]
I suppose that this choice was made to avoid the blinking of landscape, very frequent in "time-lapse" because of changes in light (clouds).
[/quote]
This is software-dependent and how we handle the transition from frame to frame in the animation.
[quote]
Another reason to do so : star trails are made with a dark sky and the landscape is generally almost black and appears in a "shadow" mode. Without any artificial light, landscape is lightened by the moon sooner or later in the night...
[/quote]
I think you missed the point here. One needs lighting (ex. the young moon) so as to illuminate the foreground. Otherwise, under a dark sky, the foreground will be grossly underexposed (if at all visible). One can result to artificial means to lighting the foreground (such as a powerful flash) but the natural lighting provided by the moon is, in my opinion, the best means.
[quote]
In any case, the result is very artificial.
[/quote]
This is unfortunate since such a result involves a serious amount of work!
Great job, Chris.
Anthony.