Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Indeed, the inability to start frame averaging via remote (or tethering, for that matter) is a bug, one that I've turned into a feature by firing off a single frame (either right before or right after the FA exposure) that I can use either as a backup in case of vibration/shaking or in post-processing to blend in elements that show artifacts in the frame-averaged exposure. Regardless, a shutter delay and a light touch on the back are good practices.All good advice above but I would just add one more thing that recently caused me a few issues when using FA on the IQ4 150 - I found that the P1 remote release (BOB) does not actuate the FA. It operates the delay but just takes one shot.
Well, mine does anyway!
So the only way I could ensure that there was no initial vibration was to set the shutter delay to 3+ seconds or so and use the “conventional” release on the rear screen when was FA selected.
I hope that this helps.
Paul
that's interesting, theoretically. In practice, my normal workflow with my IQ4 Achro (on a Alpa 12 STC) is as follows:Interesting theoretical point. This type of FA is used to smear motion, as opposed to gaining resolution and SNR. Perhaps it is for that reason - we are smoothing motion - that I have never seen a discussion of what IQ4 frame averaging does to resolution of static image components under field conditions.
The teeny COC's of small pixel sensors make them very subject to the effects of vibration. I have experienced that with multishot on 100MP. Really hard to get things stable enough and only really manageable in studio. People using FA for motion smearing seem less concerned, but there must be similar effects going on. I wonder if vibration during FA is reducing the MTF of the IQ4 to something much lower than we see on a test bench? If it is, the real solution is to tether a fatter pixel sensor and average on the host. 'Course, that would only work if we were able to do frame averaging via the tether but, sadly, C1 - never mind C1 mobile - is too simple minded for that.
From a theoretical standpoint, a single shot will typically out-resolve a frame-averaged image for the reasons you enumerate. In practice, however, it depends... For example, when shooting grand vistas of distant city skylines, I often employ frame averaging not only to smooth water and/or clouds, but to counteract the effects of convection and other sources of atmospheric turbulence. Averaging has the effect of canceling out random fluctuations cause by such disturbances, whereas buildings tend to remain perfectly static. I do on occasion see degradation owing to camera movement or shake if it's breezy or I'm not careful in my setup, but under the right conditions and executed properly, frame-averaging provides increased resolution than would otherwise be possible in these situations.Interesting theoretical point. This type of FA is used to smear motion, as opposed to gaining resolution and SNR. Perhaps it is for that reason - we are smoothing motion - that I have never seen a discussion of what IQ4 frame averaging does to resolution of static image components under field conditions.
The teeny COC's of small pixel sensors make them very subject to the effects of vibration. I have experienced that with multishot on 100MP. Really hard to get things stable enough and only really manageable in studio. People using FA for motion smearing seem less concerned, but there must be similar effects going on. I wonder if vibration during FA is reducing the MTF of the IQ4 to something much lower than we see on a test bench? If it is, the real solution is to tether a fatter pixel sensor and average on the host. 'Course, that would only work if we were able to do frame averaging via the tether but, sadly, C1 - never mind C1 mobile - is too simple minded for that.
I see frame averaging differently than multi-shot, where you are trying to eek out more resolution by moving the sensor a fraction of a pixel. From a vibration standpoint, is there any difference between frame averaging and just simple long exposures? It seems to me that any long exposure, be it by FA, ND or just darkness, is going to have increased risk of vibration-induced image degradation.Interesting theoretical point. This type of FA is used to smear motion, as opposed to gaining resolution and SNR. Perhaps it is for that reason - we are smoothing motion - that I have never seen a discussion of what IQ4 frame averaging does to resolution of static image components under field conditions.
The teeny COC's of small pixel sensors make them very subject to the effects of vibration. I have experienced that with multishot on 100MP. Really hard to get things stable enough and only really manageable in studio. People using FA for motion smearing seem less concerned, but there must be similar effects going on. I wonder if vibration during FA is reducing the MTF of the IQ4 to something much lower than we see on a test bench? If it is, the real solution is to tether a fatter pixel sensor and average on the host. 'Course, that would only work if we were able to do frame averaging via the tether but, sadly, C1 - never mind C1 mobile - is too simple minded for that.
Good point, Dave. Long exposure is long exposure.I see frame averaging differently than multi-shot, where you are trying to eek out more resolution by moving the sensor a fraction of a pixel. From a vibration standpoint, is there any difference between frame averaging and just simple long exposures? It seems to me that any long exposure, be it by FA, ND or just darkness, is going to have increased risk of vibration-induced image degradation.
Stanley, may your failures be limited to windy beaches. I wonder how many of us are doing IBIS-equipped MF these days, primarily because of shake.I have failed many times to capture a sharp FA on a windy beach.
IBIS is the enemy of long exposures. Windy beaches and long exposures or FA are a problem.Stanley, may your failures be limited to windy beaches. I wonder how many of us are doing IBIS-equipped MF these days, primarily because of shake.
Thanks much Dave,Hi Sertac,
I assume you are using a 2 second delay to fire the camera. If not, certainly do that. Wind is always the killer. You can't control it, but there are a few things you can do:
All this helps in windy conditions for maybe up to 10 seconds. If you are trying to take 2 minute frame averages or longer in windy conditions, then that's going to be very frustrating, if not hopeless.
- What tripod are you using? A good, 2 or 3-series tripod will probably be necessary.
- When the wind is blowing, lightly touch one of the tripod legs. Is it buzzing? If so, you can stand on the windward side of the camera to help block some of that wind. I've also tried holding two of the legs and putting downward pressure on them to reduce the vibrations. Although I can feel the buzzing stop when I do this, I honestly don't know if that's better or worse than whatever movement I'm inducing by holding it down.
- Which brings me to the third trick: Take many, many shots. Then take more! When I was shooting a sunrise in the Patagonia wind, I shot 59 images over a 45 minute period. Probably 2/3 to 3/4 of those were trash because of camera shake.
- Edit: The lower the tripod, the better. If the subject is in the distance with a long-ish lens, then you could set up the tripod very low to the ground.
Dave
Not all of them, probably with windI have not experienced this on mine, could you describe your setup? Does it happen on all frame averaging shot or just certain ones?
Greg