Timeline for What is a rolling shutter? When do I have to be aware of it?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
27 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 15, 2018 at 14:26 | comment | added | thomasrutter | When I say the rolling shutter effect in digital video is "unrelated to the effect above", I mean it is unrelated to the effect of a focal plane shutter on still cameras. But, it is a very similar effect to the one you get with rolling shutters on film cine cameras. I even say it is "analogous to" that effect - it's not exactly the same, since in the latter, technically the film isn't lit row by row, but by a rotating shutter. | |
| Apr 14, 2018 at 13:30 | comment | added | Orbit | @thomasrutter : You start with the heading 'What a rolling shutter effect is', but then you subtlely talk only talk about digital video, and say that the effect has nothing to do with physical shutters, it may be correct for video, but i find it very confusing. You also say that the effect is completely different and unrelated to the effect with a physical shutter, but I think it is exactly the same, the only difference is that with a physical shutter, the sensor is lit row by row, and in digital it is read row by row, the physical principle is the same. Maybe change the heading a bit? | |
| Apr 14, 2018 at 12:50 | comment | added | thomasrutter | @rickboender I have to say I really don't see where you're coming from or if you've commented in the right place. You say: "most electronic shutters also read out the sensor line by line, so they can also suffer from the rolling shutter effect" - yes, this is the entire point I was making in my answer. I've even used similar words to you - "instead of capturing the entire frame at once, information is read from each row of the frame one after the other, top to bottom" - this is right in the answer you commented on. | |
| Apr 13, 2018 at 21:56 | comment | added | Orbit | The second part is not really correct. It is related to the shutter, only most electronic shutters also read out the sensor line by line, so they can also suffer from the rolling shutter effect. slrlounge.com/… . With a mechanical shutter, the effect is caused by the two shutter blades being too slow to open completely. So only a line of the sensor is lit at one time, this line moves over the sensor. If something is very fast, it will be in a different place when the top is lit, compared to the bottom. | |
| Apr 12, 2018 at 22:32 | comment | added | thomasrutter | That quote appears in a paragraph specifically talking about how it applies to digital video. In the preceding sentence I wrote "as it applies to digital video". The point is that with digital video there is not a physical shutter, but you can still get the rolling shutter effect. This is a fairly important thing to understand if you come in thinking that it is somehow caused by a physical shutter. Within the same quoted section I then go on to explain the origin of the term in film. You'd have to skip over the start and end of that paragraph to miss that context. | |
| Apr 12, 2018 at 19:53 | comment | added | Michael C | @thomasrutter Well, when you say things such as, "Actually, a rolling shutter effect does not actually involve a physical shutter, but it's called that as a convention because it is analogous to the way a film cinema camera has a shutter that moves across the frame." it seems to indicate that you are rejecting the fact that the term was used LONG before digital video was invented! | |
| Apr 12, 2018 at 19:52 | history | edited | Michael C | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 293 characters in body
|
| Jun 5, 2016 at 12:38 | comment | added | thomasrutter | Do I need to make that information more prominent in my answer? A couple of comments now have "corrected" me on this even though I thought I did address it in the answer. | |
| Jun 5, 2016 at 0:40 | comment | added | Michael C | The term rolling shutter was in use for at least half a century before the existence of electronic imaging with the invention of television cameras. It was most often used in the context of movie cameras, but was around before their invention as well. | |
| Apr 27, 2016 at 22:47 | comment | added | scottbb♦ | I've already pointed out where I think the contradiction is. However, I'm more than happy to defer to your answer as it stands, which has certainly earned its place by standing as it has for the last 3 years AND is the accepted answer. =) | |
| Apr 27, 2016 at 4:10 | comment | added | thomasrutter | My answer is consistent with what you pointed out on Wikipedia. Where do you think the contradiction is? | |
| Apr 27, 2016 at 2:37 | comment | added | scottbb♦ | I'm just pointing out that there is some contradiction or confusion with what's stated In a common (albeit by no means canonical) reference source people might refer to. | |
| Apr 27, 2016 at 0:47 | comment | added | thomasrutter | Did you read the part of my answer that says "it is analogous to the way a film cinema camera has a shutter that moves across the frame". I specifically pointed out this is equivalent to an effect on film cinema cameras and that that's where it got the name rolling shutter. So thanks for your "correction" I guess. The question was specifically in regards to DSLR cameras, which is why I primarily addressed rolling shutter effect in that type of camera. | |
| Apr 26, 2016 at 23:00 | comment | added | scottbb♦ | Indeed, the classic "leaning" 1920's race car image is exactly a rolling shutter effect caused by a wiping shutter progressively exposing the scene from bottom to top. | |
| Apr 26, 2016 at 22:55 | comment | added | scottbb♦ | The Rolling shutter Wikipedia article disagrees with the opening sentences of the "What a rolling shutter effect is" section above. From WP: "Rolling shutter ... is captured not by taking a snapshot of the entire scene at a single instant in time but rather by scanning across the scene rapidly"; and, "the 'rolling shutter' can be either mechanical or electronic." | |
| Apr 26, 2016 at 17:51 | comment | added | wedstrom | @supercat I wonder if anyone has tried to write a video player/codec/format that would artificially reverse the line rolling shutter effect digitially | |
| Nov 12, 2014 at 16:47 | comment | added | supercat | It may be worth noting that if a video that is shot with a rolling-shutter camera is shown on a CRT whose scan pattern matches that of the camera, the artifacts created by the rolling shutter will be reversed by the scanning action of the CRT. For example, a video of near-vertical lines moving from right to left would skew them so the bottom was shifted to the left, but a CRT showing a video of near-vertical lines would skew them so the bottom appeared shifted to the right. I don't know of any modern displays that try to accurately emulate such behavior, however. | |
| Apr 2, 2013 at 23:34 | history | edited | thomasrutter | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 33 characters in body
|
| Mar 10, 2013 at 19:24 | comment | added | culebrón | I made a similar question and was down-voted, because this explanation does not show up in the search. Thanks for the explanation on matrices. | |
| Mar 11, 2011 at 13:53 | vote | accept | fmark | ||
| Mar 9, 2011 at 2:04 | comment | added | thomasrutter | Yep that's good, thanks. In case people are wondering, the diagrams show the shutters moving horizontally whereas modern cameras seem to have vertical shutters. Same effect though. | |
| S Mar 9, 2011 at 1:11 | history | suggested | fmark | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added referenced diagrams
|
| Mar 8, 2011 at 22:45 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Mar 9, 2011 at 1:11 | |||||
| Mar 8, 2011 at 22:42 | comment | added | fmark | +1 Great explanation, thank you. I've inserted the referenced images from wikipedia, I hope you don't mind. | |
| Mar 7, 2011 at 11:00 | history | edited | thomasrutter | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 7 characters in body; added 133 characters in body
|
| Mar 7, 2011 at 10:52 | history | edited | thomasrutter | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 1168 characters in body; added 61 characters in body
|
| Mar 7, 2011 at 10:40 | history | answered | thomasrutter | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
