Search options (Page 112 of 133)

Bonjour,
Le tracking qui est actuellement dans la version de développement est meilleur en termes de qualité et de vitesse de traitement. (bien meilleur à mon avis mais je vous laisserai juger )

Le chiffre correspond à une donnée interne de l'algo, c'est le coefficient de corrélation entre la zone de l'objet (rectangle interne) de l'image précédente et celle de l'image courante. En gros cela mesure la réussite du tracking pour l'image en cours. La valeur va de +1 à -1, mais si elle descend sous le seuil de +0.5, on estime qu'il n'y a pas de "match" et le tracking est abandonné.
Le rectangle externe correspond à la zone de recherche. (ce sera mieux expliqué dans le guide d'utilisation qui est en cours de rédaction )

Hi,

There is only one version, it has all the languages packed in.
The program first tries to detect if your system language is supported. If not, it should fall back to English.
However there might have been a bug that would make it fall back to French instead.

- Could you write here what the first menu is ("Fichier", "Tiedosto", something else ?)
- To change language, go to the second menu starting from the right, then first submenu.

Are you on an English Windows ?

Hi,
I hope someone can come and answer this better than me because I have not much experience with AVCHD, and I don't do a lot of conversions.

If you are not much concerned with storage size, you can use the highest quality option available in your conversion software.

Regarding blurriness/quality, bitrate is not as much relevant as the compression method used, because most of the time is spend decoding the image. This is especially true for large image size like full HD.
For a given codec and image size, you can use a higher bitrate. That should improve quality without degrading rendering speed. (You could use uncompressed files).

Regarding jerkiness, this will really depends on the machine performances and you'll have to make tests to find your threshold.
If you see the speed slider decreasing on its own, then the program can't keep the pace.
I would target for 25 or 30 fps, and then reduce size until it plays smoothly if you have jerkiness issues or automatic slow down.

Also, if possible try to use an intra-frame only codec (like DV or MJPEG) since that will make the backward navigation easier and decoding faster.

Thanks guys

"Image sequence" is sort of taken by the image export tool when saving multiple images at regular intervals.

I really like "Overview"
I wonder if it would be clear enough alone, considering it's under the Motion menu. (So it would read Motion > Overview)

Multiple View sounds good too, but somehow slighltly less characteristic of the function ? (I fear users might mix it up with the two screen mode for video comparison)

Hi,
Just to clear some things up,

This is not a competition. There's no "market share" to loose or win.
There is just several softwares that happen to cover overlapping fields. Nothing prevents you from using them all.

Agreed.

They are not overlooked, it's just a matter of prioritization.

There is a massive ammount of work to be done (Camcorder capture, audio, improved drawing tools, better measurement tools, better comparison tools, publishing framework, motion summarization and extraction, etc.)

Notational analysis is one of them. Your message is a +1 vote for it in the prioritization queue. Others may have different needs / views.

Now that's a statement. I, on the contrary, think that this type of motion summarization is an invaluable tool for motion analysis.
(By the way, there are people ready to afford the price tag just to get this feature.)

I am. If I had to use it for a project right now, I'd use LongoMatch software as linked above.

And if I found it to be lacking in some departments, then I would go on their forum and suggest improvements, give feedback, etc. As I said, nothing prevents you from using several programs. Especially when some of them are provided at no cost.

I certainly hope that one day there will be a fully fledged notational analysis module in Kinovea, but I also know it's not going to happen soon.

Well, I don't view Kinovea as a video management system, but more as a motion analysis tool. It makes a big difference.
Managing the whole user's video collection is a nice goal, but not ours. Kinovea might just be one piece in your toolchain.
You can complement it with some file level manager on one end, and maybe a CD burner on the other for exemple.

I also think that focusing on playback and analysis will make for a more lightweight and easy-to-use program in the end.

Thanks