Basic Wildlife video editing tutorial...

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

Member's gallery
Garfield said:
@Nimi can ignore this thread ;) but I thought this was a rather well done introduction to basic techniques for producing wildlife videos. Unfortunately one of my take-aways is that great videos start with great content, and I find getting great content without travelling to exotic locations is the biggest single challenge in this hobby!
Click to expand...
Hi Gary,

Thanks very much for posting this excellent tutorial on wildlife video production. It is without a doubt the best one I have seen, and over the years I've seen a lot of them. I've been using Davinci Resolve for 2 years now almost every day and I still learned some very useful things from this tutorial, especially about organizing my clips. Like the presenter I used Adobe Premiere Pro before.

I hear you regarding the challenge of getting great content without travelling to exotic locations. My wife has had health issues for many years and as a result I have been unable to go anywhere outside of Ottawa except for the shortest day trips. This has forced me to try really hard to find and appreciate the beauty and magic of our two local rivers and our many local parks and nature trails. I have come to love them and to love all the fascinating and beautiful critters that live there during the different seasons.

Thanks again and happy shooting, (y) (y) (y) :)
Rudy
 
Member's gallery
I haven't watched the clip yet, but I will shortly. In the meantime, a brief comment with regards to wildlife video vs photos, if you will.

Given that with video you're able to capture wildlife behavior over a period of seconds to hours, traveling to exotic locations is less important to producing an interesting video than taking the time to observe and document interesting animal behavior that occurs everywhere around us, even in the macro world.

With the capabilities of today's cameras, even down into the mid-range models, for the average person, capturing decent images of exotic animals is more a matter of time and money than skill and perseverance, though to get to the level of Steve and others who make or made their living selling their work, both skill and perseverance are required in spades!

Shooting great content to produce and edit even a short video can be quite another matter with a whole new set of challenges to overcome and skills to learn, but well worth the effort if you enjoy sharing something you've seen or experienced that held one's interest for more than 1/2000th of a second.

I know there are many who are in the "I never shoot video!" camp, that's perfectly fine, totally get that...and many who never shoot stills, either. I do what I need to do to share something that interests me and I use the best tool to do that.

Cheers!
 
Member's gallery
MotoPixel said:
I haven't watched the clip yet, but I will shortly. In the meantime, a brief comment with regards to wildlife video vs photos, if you will.

Given that with video you're able to capture wildlife behavior over a period of seconds to hours, traveling to exotic locations is less important to producing an interesting video than taking the time to observe and document interesting animal behavior that occurs everywhere around us, even in the macro world.

With the capabilities of today's cameras, even down into the mid-range models, for the average person, capturing decent images of exotic animals is more a matter of time and money than skill and perseverance, though to get to the level of Steve and others who make or made their living selling their work, both skill and perseverance are required in spades!

Shooting great content to produce and edit even a short video can be quite another matter with a whole new set of challenges to overcome and skills to learn, but well worth the effort if you enjoy sharing something you've seen or experienced that held one's interest for more than 1/2000th of a second.

I know there are many who are in the "I never shoot video!" camp, that's perfectly fine, totally get that...and many who never shoot stills, either. I do what I need to do to share something that interests me and I use the best tool to do that.

Cheers!
Click to expand...
Very well said, Tom. You're preaching to the choir here! :) (y)
Cheers,
Rudy
 
Member's gallery
Can someone clarify something for me?
In the project "timeline" settings, do I set the frames per second at what I shot in?
When I start the project, it asks to change the frame rate.
Thank you.
 
Member's gallery
bobinSDakota said:
Can someone clarify something for me?
In the project "timeline" settings, do I set the frames per second at what I shot in?
When I start the project, it asks to change the frame rate.
Thank you.
Click to expand...
Hi Bob,

As the presenter explained in her video, when she chooses the Timeline frame rate in Project Settings she selects the 30 frames per second (29.97 secs) because this is good for footage shot at various frame rates including 120fps, 60fps, 30fps and even 24fps. This allows you to use various frame rates on the same timeline and allows you to slow down the the 120 and 60 fps to 25% and 50% normal speed. When the pop up window tells you that your frames rates don't match and asks if you would like to change the setting select "no".

Cheers,
Rudy
 
Member's gallery
bobinSDakota said:
Can someone clarify something for me?
In the project "timeline" settings, do I set the frames per second at what I shot in?
When I start the project, it asks to change the frame rate.
Thank you.
Click to expand...

Ideally, you think about frame rate before you shoot and set the timeline to the same framerate. That eliminates the need to frame-skip, expand, etc. There is an ongoing, at times uncivil discussion about what that frame rate should be. 24, 25, 30, 60, etc.

The only reason to shoot 60 or 120 is if you plan to display them in slow motion, ie set the timeline frame rate at a fraction speed. For example, shoot at 120, set timeline at 30 for a 4x slower. Wildlife often benefits from that.
 
Member's gallery
Nimi said:
The only reason to shoot 60 or 120 is if you plan to display them in slow motion, ie set the timeline frame rate at a fraction speed. For example, shoot at 120, set timeline at 30 for a 4x slower. Wildlife often benefits from that.
Click to expand...

Not long ago I watched a video by a wildlife videographer (can't recall who) that claimed shooting normal 60 fps (not for slo-mo) can be beneficial. He believed the higher frame rate is better for capturing fine details like hair and feathers on wildlife/birds etc. - especially if the critters are moving. He also claims that Auto Focus works better using 60 fps by having more frames to use to grab focus.

I did a quick test on my backyard white-tailed deer herd and I "think" I could discern a bit more hair detail at 60 fps vs 30. But more tests needed - as for better AF I didn't really try to test that.
 
Member's gallery
PhilcTx said:
Not long ago I watched a video by a wildlife videographer (can't recall who) that claimed shooting normal 60 fps (not for slo-mo) can be beneficial. He believed the higher frame rate is better for capturing fine details like hair and feathers on wildlife/birds etc. - especially if the critters are moving. He also claims that Auto Focus works better using 60 fps by having more frames to use to grab focus.

I did a quick test on my backyard white-tailed deer herd and I "think" I could discern a bit more hair detail at 60 fps vs 30. But more tests needed - as for better AF I didn't really try to test that.
Click to expand...
Assuming he maintains the same shutter angle, his shutter would be twice as fast at 60fps, which would reduce motion blur.
 
Member's gallery
Garfield said:
@Nimi can ignore this thread ;) but I thought this was a rather well done introduction to basic techniques for producing wildlife videos. Unfortunately one of my take-aways is that great videos start with great content, and I find getting great content without travelling to exotic locations is the biggest single challenge in this hobby!

Click to expand...
Very good video!
 
Member's gallery
During the pandemic a videographer put together a project to capture video of the bees in his backyard and it was as good as anything I have seen. It may be easier to go to Africa and have a safari business take you to large subjects but there are other options.

Access is a separate issue and becoming a docent at a reserve or other restricted area may be a good investment of your time. For example where I live there is a reserve with bobcats which start to hunt around sunset which is when visitors are required to leave.
 
Member's gallery
Calson said:
During the pandemic a videographer put together a project to capture video of the bees in his backyard and it was as good as anything I have seen. It may be easier to go to Africa and have a safari business take you to large subjects but there are other options.

Access is a separate issue and becoming a docent at a reserve or other restricted area may be a good investment of your time. For example where I live there is a reserve with bobcats which start to hunt around sunset which is when visitors are required to leave.
Click to expand...
I saw this video, it was fantastic. Here is the trailer:
 
Member's gallery
PhilcTx said:
Not long ago I watched a video by a wildlife videographer (can't recall who) that claimed shooting normal 60 fps (not for slo-mo) can be beneficial. He believed the higher frame rate is better for capturing fine details like hair and feathers on wildlife/birds etc. - especially if the critters are moving. He also claims that Auto Focus works better using 60 fps by having more frames to use to grab focus.

I did a quick test on my backyard white-tailed deer herd and I "think" I could discern a bit more hair detail at 60 fps vs 30. But more tests needed - as for better AF I didn't really try to test that.
Click to expand...
Assuming the 180-degree "shutter angle" rule, recording and processing 60p output just means the video is captured at double the shutter speed vs. 30p, so it does a better job freezing movement in each frame which translates to a perception of higher acquity as long as all of the frames are used for output. Of course this requires a 60hz viewing device, which is pretty typical these days, but not if you push this theory to capturing and outputting source imagery at 120p. The problem with moving too far from the cinema standard of 24p is that it's what many of us have grown up with and are used to and ultra-high frame rates can seem "unnatural".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top