Hello and good day DJI Bryan. Thank you for sharing this wonderful aerial video you have created. Great editing and thank you for your support.

Was this w/ the Zoom or the Pro?

AntDX316 Posted at 6-2 15:53
Was this w/ the Zoom or the Pro?

Put it in the Mavic 2 Zoom Forum, so a Mavic 2 Zoom

Excellent footage

Nice work.

DJI Bryan Posted at 6-2 23:14
Put it in the Mavic 2 Zoom Forum, so a Mavic 2 Zoom

Crank your Sharpness to +3.

DJI Bryan Posted at 6-2 23:14
Put it in the Mavic 2 Zoom Forum, so a Mavic 2 Zoom

You can't see that when you are in a thread ( I did make a suggestion already)

Nice shots btw!

AntDX316 Posted at 6-2 23:34
Crank your Sharpness to +3.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25JNh7dwFXE

Detracts from the smooth, natural cinematic feel

A J Posted at 6-3 00:00
Detracts from the smooth, natural cinematic feel

I understand but the natural cinematic feel was because the tech back then was pretty much maxed out at the 24p spec.  People still run 29fps in movies I assume for storage.  If they did 60 the amount of processing would be super high.  For me, I like the super smoothness of the 60fps video but I think some people don't.

When I film I film the max 60fps available like 2.7k60 on the Mavic 2 Zoom, C4K60 on the P4Pv2.0, and 1080p30 on the Spark.  I used to run 1080p60 on the 2 Zoom for 96mm but the quality sucks.  I didn't really get any clients and the clients don't really call me back unless they have no one else with the 12MP Zoom.  Of course, the image quality isn't as good and if they are going to spend hundreds of dollars for footage they will want the P4P V2.0 or the Mavic 2 Pro imagery.

AntDX316 Posted at 6-3 00:06
I understand but the natural cinematic feel was because the tech back then was pretty much maxed out at the 24p spec.  People still run 29fps in movies I assume for storage.  If they did 60 the amount of processing would be super high.  For me, I like the super smoothness of the 60fps video but I think some people don't.

but +3 sharpness digitally sharpens the footage and over defines it - causing additional issues.

A J Posted at 6-3 00:08
but +3 sharpness digitally sharpens the footage and over defines it - causing additional issues.

According to the sharpness video I've made it doesn't look like it.  Artificially sharpening is what cheaper devices do.  The newer devices don't seem to do that or they do but do it w/ newer algorithms but w/o the marketing for some reason.  I mean, it would be kind of odd for companies to fight over who has the better artificial sharpening process method and componentry so they just remain tight-lipped about it.  A lot of things remain uncoded when they do have the code to perform great and luxurious tasks such as having tire pressure monitors show down to the 0.x.  Having lights that operate like AI but with regulation, it's removed in certain countries.  Like how using CE when you could use FCC, etc.

AntDX316 Posted at 6-3 00:12
According to the sharpness video I've made it doesn't look like it.  Artificially sharpening is what cheaper devices do.  The newer devices don't seem to do that or they do but do it w/ newer algorithms but w/o the marketing for some reason.

That's exactly what they do. Increasing the sharpness to electronically controlled by the processor.

A J Posted at 6-3 00:14
That's exactly what they do. Increasing the sharpness to electronically controlled by the processor.

I've updated what I wrote.

AntDX316 Posted at 6-3 00:15
I've updated what I wrote.

It doesn't change the facts of how sharpening an image is done on these drones...

A J Posted at 6-3 00:16
It doesn't change the facts of how sharpening an image is done on these drones...

The image still looks a lot better.

AntDX316 Posted at 6-3 00:18
The image still looks a lot better.

That's a matter of personal preference of course. An overly sharpened image looks unnatural to me.

A J Posted at 6-3 00:19
That's a matter of personal preference of course. An overly sharpened image looks unnatural to me.

I agree which is why I have to be careful about going too far w/ the sharpness in post.  Sometimes I do but I just select it individually w/ the Lightroom brush tool.

AntDX316 Posted at 6-3 00:20
I agree which is why I have to be careful about going too far w/ the sharpness in post.  Sometimes I do but I just select it individually w/ the Lightroom brush tool.

Well there are no general settings - it is all subject to what the individual is looking to capture. To advise using +3 all the time because it looks better is in the eye of the beholder  

A J Posted at 6-3 00:22
Well there are no general settings - it is all subject to what the individual is looking to capture. To advise using +3 all the time because it looks better is in the eye of the beholder

I mean, when you can actually make out the details in the trees in the distance at +3 vs 0 while everything looks better I'm unsure how 0 is better than +3.  We can just pretend +3 = 0 and 0 = -3.  In fact, the engineers could have just made it like that in the first place but I'm not sure why they didn't..

AntDX316 Posted at 6-3 00:24
I mean, when you can actually make out the details in the trees in the distance at +3 vs 0 while everything looks better I'm unsure how 0 is better than +3.  We can just pretend +3 = 0 and 0 = -3.  In fact, the engineers could have just made it like that in the first place but I'm not sure why they didn't..

0 will offer a softer image to +3 - it's quite simple.

Nice video. Thanks for sharing