When it's a collection of stills, apparently. No, it's probably not the gag to open your next presentation with, but it is an interesting idea.
The Indy Star has been getting round a video ban by putting lots of photographs together.
Apparently:
We wanted to do something special from our Indianapolis Colts football games with multimedia, but hit a wall with the NFL rules against newspapers shooting video on the field. Several of our photographers ... had experimented with time-lapse projects using a still camera and motor drive bursts, putting the images together with Quicktime to give people a video-like experience.
Cunning and it begs the question: "How many frames per second can you use before it becomes a video?".
Unfortunately, I can't find an example on the IndyStar website. Do let me know if you fare any better.
Shrimp Jesus and other unexpected results of the AI boom
-
AI is at once more ubiquitous and less useful than people think. Navigating
the coming flood of generated content is going to be a challenge.
1 comment:
I think the minimum fps for film/video/tv is around 24fps (or fractionally less). So I suppose any more than 23fps would constitute video. In case you actually *wanted* to know. ;-)
Post a Comment