In the first part of my timelapse blog series I wrote about different types and techniques for longer and really long (seasonal) timelapse movies. In this article I want to describe a few specific techniques and tools that are useful (and often mandatory) to finalize those timelapses.
But first I'll lead into this timelapse article with my new video "Mountains and Clouds 2015" that I've shot over the course of about one year in the South Island of New Zealand on various trips.
One thing I wish I had done from the start is shoot all the frames for timelapses in full resolution and as RAW files. Always keep future use of your files in mind! Unless I got lucky and the scene was really well exposed, I couldn't correct as much as when grading from RAWs and because of the better resolution the final video will also look sharper. I take bets on Twitter (@tobiaswulff) on which scene was the one shot in RAW ;) .
The first step to processing timelapse RAW frames is to "develop" them from being a digital negative to a bitmap photo file. When exporting the image it is important to choose a format that will retain the full bit depth of the original RAW file: options are TIFF or 16-bit PNG. JPEGs should not be used since they only store 8-bit of color depth which will not fare well in color correction and grading later.
There is another way, though: keeping the files in their RAW format and using a video editing software that can deal with RAW footage, such as Davinci Resolve 12. For Resolve to ingest the RAW files they have to be converted to DNG. My photo management software of choice digikam has an in-built DNG converter and I believe so does Apple Aperture, Adobe Bridge and/or Lightroom. While working with a RAW video is pretty neat, because this is not a recognized format from a video camera (such as RED) the possibilities to adjust the image are limited and a proper RAW photo program such as Darktable or Lightroom is much better suited for the job. Nevertheless, you are importing 10+ bit image data into the editing/color grading software which gives much, much more room for colour and exposure adjustments.
As described earlier, Resolve can ingest DNG RAW files so it is possible to do editing and color grading with the source material. For the timelapse video posted at the beginning of this article, however, I compiled each sequence into a video first, which can be done using one of the following two Linux programs: Blender or ffmpeg (CLI tool). This use of "baked" videos will make the edit smoother because the program doesn't have to deal with as much data.
ffmpeg is a command-line tool, so it is easy to batch-process or automate converting image file sequences into video files. ffmpeg supports all the usual video file formats and containers, including ProRes which is a 10 to 12-bit 4:2:2 or 4:4:4 codec and the preferred format for Resolve. However, I found that the picture didn't quite come out the way I wanted, in particular darker areas got too dark so for example stars in night time sequences (like the one at the end of my video) almost disappeared. I'm sure this can be adjusted using the codec settings but for now I have turned to Blender.
Blender is first and foremost a 3D modelling and animation program. However, in recent years it also became a more and more powerful video editor and VFX pipeline, and it can be used to turn any bitmap sequence into various video formats. Once an image sequence has been imported, it can be modified (scaled, rotated, color corrected, composited with a 3D scene, etc) using nodes as shown in this screenshot:
For exporting I chose AVI RAW since it gave the best quality and could be converted to ProRes for Resolve, again without any loss in quality. It might be possible to export directly to ProRes or to use ffmpeg under the hood but I haven't explored the export and encoder settings too deeply yet.
Long Timelapse Processing Techniques
The biggest problems with long-term timelapses in the outdoors (i.e. outside a controlled environment) are changing lighting conditions and that it's basically impossible to get the camera set up 100% exactly the same way every time: the tripod will be positioned slightly differently, a zoom lens will make the focal length setting inaccurate, pointing the camera at the same spot will still be a millimeter or two off ... Luckily, both issues can be dealt with fairly successfully in software as described below.
Stabilizing and Aligning Photos
In order to make the transition from one frame to the next as smoothly looking as possible, non-moving objects in each frame really shouldn't move or jump around. Therefore, it is necessary to either align all the photos before they are compiled into a sequence (or video), or to stabilize the final video. There are at least three very different ways to achieving this. These different approaches can differ greatly in terms of time and effort, and quality of the end result.
1) Align photos automatically using Hugin. Hugin is an HDR and panorama toolkit but it can also be used to align a sequence of photos without exposure bracketing or stitching them into a panorama. There are several algorithms to choose from when aligning photos (I usually use "Position(y, p, r)" but its results are not perfect). The algorithm will look at all the photos that are next to each other in the sequence and find common control points in the picture that it uses to align (translate, rotate and scale) them. Control points can also be manually added, removed and shifted to improve the alignment. In terms of speed this is the easiest and fastest approach. I usually roughly follow this tutorial - something you will need because it's a complex piece of software!
2) Align photos by hand in GIMP (or Photoshop): there are various plugins for those image editing programs that allow a user to specify two common control points in two pictures and the plugin will then do the alignment. The results are near-perfect but it will take a long time because you have to do it for each frame in your sequence (what's that - 60, 90, 200?). A professional suite like Adobe's probably contains automatic tools similar to Hugin as well.
3) Stabilize the final video: all professional editing and/or VFX programs such as Resolve, Hitfilm, After Effects and also Blender have built-in stabilizers. I haven't tested this method yet but because they work on a frame-by-frame basis they should be able to stabilize the footage very well. However, as described in the next step, I like to blend (or blur) my frames which will definitely make stabilizing the video more inaccurate so doing it before the video is compiled seems more robust to me.
As shown in some of the examples from other photographers in the first timelapse article, we often simply blend images or videos together to make for a smoother (and longer) final product. This can either be done between sequences (say you show a locked down timelapse of autumn, then blend it into another timelapse of the same spot in winter) or between every single frame. Using the free toolkit ImageMagick, this can be done with one command:
convert frame_a.jpg frame_b.jpg -evaluate-sequence mean frame_ab.jpg
Ideally, your original source files would be organized to have odd sequence numbers (frame001, frame003, ...) and the generated blended images will fill the gaps (frame002, frame004, ...). This way you'll end up with all the frames for the timelapse video, now much smoother because even though lighting conditions and your camera setup change dramatically between each frame, there is now a frame in between that combines both conditions and makes it look much morepleasant on the eyes.
As you can see, there is quite a difference between the blended and the original image sequence - apart from the speed that it loops at of course since one has twice the frame-count of the other. Note that this is not a perfect alignment and also that I haven't done any RAW processing yet (these are simply out-of-camera JPEGs) so for a final product I would first process all the frames so that they are similar in exposure and saturation. Left is original (rough and unpleasant), right is blended (smoother):
Please head over to Google+ or Twitter @tobiaswulff (see links on top of the page) to discuss this article or any of my photography and videography work. My Flickr, 500px and Vimeo pages also provide some space to leave comments and keep up to date with my portfolio. Lastly, if you want to get updates on future blog posts, please subscribe to my RSS feed. I plan to publish a new article every Wednesday.
This is a continuation of my previous Workflow article. In the workflow article I've linked to Chase Jarvis' excellent videos and blog posts about working with digital media and keeping it safe. I highly recommend to watch them if you are interested in a more in-depth look at workflow and backups.
When I started getting into photography beyond simple point-and-shoot or cellphone snapshots, I realised that leaving all my valuable photos in one location without a decent backup plan would be too risky. I've never had a hard drive suddenly die on me but I'm sure that one day it will happen - suddenly or, maybe even worse, gradually. Not that my old snapshots weren't valuable but RAW photography suddenly involved much more data and also more high-quality prints, competitions, and a growing portfolio. Of course, I had done backups to an external hard drive and this is often as far as most people take it. This prevents data loss due to a sudden one-disk failure. However, even my older photos which were taken during some of the most memorable and important periods of my life were always just backed up to that other drive in the same room. A violent power surge while it is plugged in, a fire, water damage, or theft could easily render all those important files inaccessible.
The requirements were easy to jot down:
Full system protection against a one-disk failure so I don't get stopped dead in the tracks if something happens to my hardware,
off-site backups for the most important data so that even my house being swallowed off the surface of the earth doesn't lead to significant data loss,
ability to take snapshots of folders or partitions so that I can experiment with files without the risk of corrupting or losing any data (this also helps with taking backups),
protection against data corruption and bit flipping which does happen.
Multi-terrabyte hard disks are become pretty affordable and if your priced digital possessions are shot with expensive cameras, there's no good reason not to invest another $100-200 to make your data and ideally your whole system fully redundant. A RAID1 mirrors all data on the disk so if one disk suddenly fails the other one can keep running. It is recommended to use disks from different batches - or even models - so that a manufacturing issue does not propagate across both drives. RAID1 can easily be done in software by the Linux kernel and there are no complicated algorithms that could lead to issues recovering data further down the road. It is as simple as: both disk have exactly the same information stored on them.
There are also a few other benefits of RAID1. First, while write speeds are slower, read speeds are twice as fast. Once the photo or video data has been offloaded from the memory cards, editing software can take advantage of that for a quicker and more fluid workflow. Additionally, when using a file system like btrfs, any data corruption on one disk can be repaired with data from the other disk. I'll talk about this further down.
For hardware I use two
Western Digital Red 4TB NAS Hard Drives (de). WD has an excellent reputation and the Red drives are designed for workstations and Network Attached Storage (NAS) systems where disks can run many hours at a time (think heavy editing or transcoding) or even 24/7. For a great big-scale reliability study of current hard drives check out this Backblaze article about the drives in their data centre - personally, I'd stay away from Seagate.
All your important data must be stored securely off-site. While it is luckily quite unlikely to fall victim to a house-destroying catastrophe or serious theft it is still possible, and it is the one point were complete data loss could happen when it is expected the least. I use two identical external drives and one always lives off-site in a safe location. I swap them out every one to two weeks depending on the flow of new photos, videos and editing files.
For my big backup disks I use the more affordableWestern Digital Green 3TB Hard Drives (de) which are not designed to run for long periods of time so they shouldn't be used in workstations or servers. For backups they are ideal because they are only spun up every other week and it means cheaper storage: all of my data with room to spare for at least the next half year for under $100. To attach the backup disk to my computer I use a cheap and fast Sabrent USB 3.0 to SATA External Hard Drive Docking Station, then rsync to copy new and changed data from my workstation to the disk.
Since I don't really need any of my older, smaller drives for my workstation (if I run out of space it is easier to buy new big multi-TB disks rather than reuse old sub-TB ones and assemble them into RAID0s and RAID1s), I'm also planning to copy some of my finished projects and previous years of photography to those smaller drives and to keep them in yet another off-site location as an archive. My only concern is that after a year of not spinning them up and running a btrfs scrub, data corruption might start to get noticeable.
The Linux file system btrfs provides multiple features that come in very handy when keeping data safe and running backups. For starters, btrfs scrub start /media/data will start a check of all my multimedia files and fix any issues found. Btrfs keeps metadata (which includes checksums) and actual data separate so if there is any damage to the real data there is a chance it can be recovered from the metadata. Furthermore, in a RAID1 system the data can be restored from the other disk which shouldn't show the same (random) data corruption.
The next great feature is snapshots: btrfs subvolume snapshot photography photography-backup creates a snapshot of all my photos and keeps changes that happen from now on separate (through a mechanism called copy-on-write). So if I accidentally delete a file in my photography/ folder I can get it back from the backup folder, yet it doesn't use up any additional space on the drive if files stay the same. This can easily be automated using cronjobs to create and rotate snapshots on a daily or weekly basis. It is also handy to create a snapshot before copying files off to an external hard disk so that I can keep working on my photos and videos while the backup is running in the background.
Other, smaller backups
I also have rsnapshot running every hour to take backups of my XMP sidecar files that get created by Darktable, my RAW photo processing application. Since Darktable automatically saves any changes made to a photograph as they happen, it is quite possible to accidentally delete the whole editing history (the RAW file itself is never modified, though, by the way). However, I have to say that this hasn't happened to me at all in almost two years of using the program. Anyway, keeping the small XMP files available for up to a month is an easy, inexpensive and great way to keep my mind at peace.
Just today, Caleb Pike released a video on his workflow and backup strategy as well. While fairly different due to different tools and computer expertise, the main principles and requirements stay the same and I recommend watching his take on the topic, especially if you found mine too technical or Unix centric.
Please head over to Google+ or Twitter @tobiaswulff (see links on top of the page) to discuss this article or any of my photography and videography work. My Flickr and Vimeo pages also provide some space to leave comments and keep up to date with my portfolio. Lastly, if you want to get updates on future blog posts, please subscribe to my RSS feed. I plan to publish a new article every Wednesday.
Ever since I started taking RAW photographs and developing them on my computer, I put a lot of thought ("obsessing over") into how I want to organize my workflow and in particular how to structure my files.
Many photographers might start by simply dumping all their pictures into a folder for each trip or shoot, hopefully ordered by date. If your folder names do not start with YYYY-MM-DD you're going to have a hard time quickly finding and grabbing your photos with a file manager - on the other hand, photo management software can simply use the date and time in the EXIF data to sort and find digital assets. However, what can happen if you take that approach is that you lock yourself into one specific workflow with one specific application.
Apart from that, one folder sounds fine, after all, different files for different purposes have different file extensions: RAW as the original ("digital negative") that never gets modified, XMP sidecar files that store additional metadata and RAW processing steps, XCF/PSD work-in-progress editing files, and finally JPEGs. Nevertheless, I keep my JPEGs and my RAWs in different folders so that I can quickly copy all the JPEGs to an external device to show them to other people. Having to go through the export functionality of a photo management tool would complicate this process unnecessarily.
A great video to watch is Chase Jarvis' TECH blog post and video on his company's workflow, and if you've got some extra time to kill: Chase Jarvis LIVE Q&A on workflow which goes into much more useful detail (but also rambles on about less important stuff from time to time). There is a lot of solid advice from highly successful professionals in there but it can easily be applied to your personal needs by scaling it down a notch. After all, most of what they do still applies to one-man-bands and enthusiasts:
Use redundant hardware to prevent data loss due to technical failures
Backup regularly and off-site to prevent data loss due to theft or human error
Have a standardized workflow so that all your folders are organized consistently
Tag and rate to find photos once you've accumulated thousands
I want to be able to quickly get to my photos and show them to someone or copy them to a USB flash drive without having to go through my photo management software. By having separate folders for each photo shoot sorted by date and within those separate folders for each file type ("digital negative", 'developed photos", "project files"), I can always use the CLI or a file manager to get exactly the files I want without reading their EXIF etc data.
Interoperability might not be very important if you know that you will always use one specific program and that you can rely on this program being available, up-to-date and meeting your needs for many years to come (we are talking potentially decades here). Personally, I wouldn't put that much trust into it, and while proprietary photography applications have a slightly better track record than something like MS Office, keep in mind that things might still change very suddenly and your favorite program might not meet your requirements anymore or work in a very different, non-backwards compatible way (like when FCPX came out).
My photo management program of choice, digikam, relies on my own file system structure of my albums, and displays them basically exactly like they are stored on disk. However, it can also browse all photos by date, tag, rating, etc. This way, I can quickly search and filter for specific criteria, or just browse my albums as they are stored in folders. For much, much more information on digikam I highly recommend the eBook digikam recipes which is easily worth the little money it costs if you're looking into using Linux for your photography workflow.
I don't want to rely solely on my photo management program to do the backups. This is another reason why I started this blog post and my workflow considerations with a sane and well organized file system structure: any backup program will be able to grab those files (all of them or a subset) and copy them somewhere else doing full, incremental and differential backups. Restoring them is also easier if the photo or photo shoot in question can be found quickly.
I will talk more about my backup strategy and how I've implemented it (including tools around rsync and btrfs) in a future blog post.
My personal directory structure which reflects most of the workflow:
It starts with a folder for the YEAR (e.g. 2014),
within each year I have a sub folder DATE_PROJECT/TRIP (e.g. 2015-09-30_Trip_Location),
if there are a lot of photos: DAY (full date) or other categorization (e.g. by camera, sub-project, etc)
Further sub folders based on workflow (see below)
File names are usually DATE_TIMESTAMP (with suffix _1, _2 etc if multiple photos have the same timestamp). I've also seen many people keep the camera's original file name but add date and time at the front. Personally, I don't see any point in keeping the camera's numbering scheme - it doesn't convey any useful information apart from avoiding duplicates if date/time are the same.
These are the sub folders that I use to organize the files within each shoot:
jpg: final JPEGs, often straight from camera and the ones developed by myself; I want all the final pictures in one folder so I can browse them easily
orf: my current camera's (Olympus) RAW files
liveworks: contains RAW files and their XMP sidecars
This covers 95% of my usual projects which are trips or events with lots of out-of-camera JPEGs and a few jewels I want to work on from RAW. These are the ones you see show up in my portfolio. I usually don't have HDR, panorama or other composite shots but if I need a place for them I would put them in a new folder in liveworks. JPEGs that get a final touch-up in GIMP also go into a new "edit" folder.
There is also a discussion to be had about whether to keep developed files or not. While it should always be possible and easy to get to any photo - if developed: from RAW plus sidecar, if edited: from GIMP's XCF- it also makes it quite difficult to quickly access the final image, or the one I uploaded to my website because I also want to publish it somewhere else, or the one I adjusted for printing. Therefore, I keep all the final images around in the "jpg" folder and name them using a flexible system of suffixes. Basically, there is no strict system as long as it is clear what the image and its intention are. It is nice to have the final image appear first in alphanumerical sorting order. Here are some examples:
DATE_TIMESTAMP_final_no_wm.jpg: final image (this is usually the final photo, the way I like it most, no watermark therefore not directly for publishing,
DATE_TIMESTAMP_final_wm.jpg: same as above but with a watermark/signature and therefore suitable for publishing,
DATE_TIMESTAMP_bw.jpg: a black and white version of the photo if I feel like both versions, color and monochrome, work well,
DATE_TIMESTAMP_Ax.jpg: image in A format for printing on A4, A3, etc,
DATE_TIMESTAMP_dark.jpg or _bright.jpg: different exposures from the final image if they are worth keeping, for instance if it gives the image a different atmosphere,
no suffix at all usually means the jpg comes straight out of the camera.
Digikam and most other photo management software can group images. When I keep all developed and processed JPEGs in one folder, I can group them under the "_final_no_wm" version so that all the different varieties won't clutter the album but I can still quickly access all versions by expanding the group.
It's been 1.5 years since I started doing photography with RAW files and this workflow has worked really well for me. I have hardly modified it apart from renaming a few folders. I could see myself dividing my files even more in the future, say, between outdoor trips and events, but for now the quantity of photos is perfectly manageable as described in this blog post. I might look again into digikam's import functionality and what it can do for me but it didn't convince me the first time I tried so I stuck with using the CLI to create sub directories and copying the files from the camera's SD card to their respective folders.
Please head over to Google+ or Twitter @tobiaswulff to discuss this article or any of my photography and videography work. My Flickr and Vimeo pages also provide some space to leave comments and keep up to date with my portfolio. Lastly, if you want to get updates on future blog posts, please subscribe to my RSS feed. I plan to publish a new article every Wednesday.