Rolling shutter RUINS your photos & video: Let's fix it!

[@BackFocus11]

Need to pressure the industry to work harder on development of affordable global shutter sensors!

[@LarsLarsen77]

@@asificam1 You can't dim an LED. It's either on at full brightness or it's off. That's why they fake dimming with PWM.

[@mbaksa]

@@LarsLarsen77 That's not true. You can dim an LED, but it needs to be dimmed using constant current method, instead of regulating voltage.

[@TechnoBabble]

​@@LarsLarsen77 That is definitely not true, how do you think LED video lights work? I can use mine down at 10% power with my camera's shutter speed at 1/1000 of a second and see no flicker because the power delivery is DC instead of PWM.

[@TechnoBabble]

@@asificam1 Having DC power delivery for LEDs is not that trivial when you're talking about small devices like light bulbs and LED strips.

[@mbaksa]

​@@TechnoBabble It is not trivial as having to just put a small capacitor, but it is trivial in a sense that you can buy a cheap constant current regulator, and be able to dim LEDs without flickering. CC regulators usually use hundreds of thousands of Hz when regulating electricity (essentially they also use PWM, but very high frequency complemented with enough of capacitance makes smooth output).

[@mauricior2046]

Omg, Tony, you have no idea what a relief it is to hear you not only explain A very clear problem but also lay out a solution. I shoot a lot of sports and events at night time, and the artificial lighting has always been an issue. I appreciate the lesson! Thank you millions!

[@EJohnDanton]

Back in the day, as my Mum was an avid Royal watcher, when Charles and Diana wed, she wanted photos off the TV. I had to lower the shutter speed to 1/30 to prevent the flickering. The results were, well, OK for the time and my Mum got photos that her friends oohed and aahed over for days. My first commission at 16 :)

[@83442handle]

Video starts 2:28 Fix starts 6:20

[@gregfaris6959]

The rolling shutter distortion is time-domain aliasing, and as you would expect with sample-rate aliasing it is subject to the Shannon/Nyquist theorem, requiring a sample rate of 2x the event rate in order to eliminate the aliasing. What’s subtle here, and what is so well explained in the video, is that the sample rate here is not the shutter speed, but the total sensor readout speed. The “shutter speed” is the effective exposure time for any given band of the sensor, and will have an effect on motion blur, but the anti-aliasing speed needed to eliminate aliasing distortion is the total readout speed for the whole sensor. Thus, if the hummingbird flaps its little wings at 50Hz, a total readout speed of 100Hz is the minimum required to capture it without aliasing and thus motion artefacts. Anything less WILL produce these unwanted effects. Again, this is not the shutter speed we typically think of to “freeze” motion. That’s a different thing, based on arc-seconds of movement, and will differ according to magnification, viewing distance and a few subjective values for what we consider to be “sharp”. In many cases, some image blur is not only acceptable, but even desirable, and freeze-motion shots of things we know to be moving quickly may have an unnatural feel. Lest we imagine these artefacts to be something new in the digital world, we need look no further than the photos produced by Jacques Henri Lartigue, of the Grand Prix race in 1913. Using a camera with a curtain-type focal plane shutter, Lartigue produced famous photos of racecars with oval wheels, surprising many observers at the time. What shutter produces NO artefacts? The best shutters for air-to-air photographs, where there are usually spinning propellers or rotors, are between-the-lens, leaf shutters. This type of shutter produces no artefacts of any type. Granted, they are not very fast by today’s standard (usually maxing out at 1/500 sec/2ms) but the motion blur produced is usually more desirable anyway for propellers, and it is possible to calculate shutter speeds to produce ¼, ½, or a full rotation of blur. I use large-format film cameras for air-to-air when possible, for this reason. I have yet to see between-the-lens shutters offered for digital cameras, but I would not be surprised to see them offered soon, as more photographers wish to have this artistic control over motion artefacts.

[@natureslensartphotography]

Love the discussion. I'm not sure Nyquist theorem is really the issue at hand although it is similar. I say this because the data from the sensor should not be related to the time domain. A fast moving object is an object at specific point in time and digitizing this point it time creates a data stream that I don't believe is properly thought of as being part of the time domain just because it takes time for the data to be read. It peaks my interest and you may be right but it doesn't feel right. I'm going to see if i can research a what I think might be a better explanation of how to model this but thanks for peaking my interest either way.

[@natureslensartphotography]

I was thinking it is more like noise but that is not right.

[@mynameisben123]

Does it really work like this? I think you are mis-applying the Nyquist limit here. If you want the wing to look frozen you need the “sample rate” or the readout speed to be many many times faster than the wings flap rate. If your sample rate is just 2x the flap rate then the wing will be very very smeared. This isn’t digital signal processing. You can’t get away with just two samples per cycle. For a photo to have imperceptible rolling shutter you need the “sample rate” to be maybe 20-100x the flap rate, depending on how much rolling shutter is tolerable to you.

[@gregfaris6959]

@@mynameisben123 I may be misunderstanding your comment, but I believe you are the one who is confusing the effects of motion blur with aliasing. A completely sharp and frozen image is not the only acceptable result for moving objects. In many cases, a photographer may wish to have motion blurin a beating wing or spinning propeller, as it better conveys the sensation of movement than an un-natural-looking frozen image. Time-domain aliasing is another story though, and the resultant geometric distortions are grotesque and displeasing to most viewers.

[@garrettsmith4574]

As a portrait, family, maternity, and newborn photographer I’ve never had an issue with rolling shutter but definitely glad to know these tips in case I do!

[@youknowwho9247]

It's possible to encounter this in people photography for sure. Try photographing a church wedding silently. :D

[@gyozakeynsianism]

One day you'll get a birthing job where the kid just shoots right out across the room and you'll thank Tony for this video.

[@garrettsmith4574]

@@gyozakeynsianism I just hope the doctor will be ready with their catchers mitt 🤣

[@gyozakeynsianism]

@@garrettsmith4574 That's the spirit! But you'll need something more like a bean bag chair.

[@talkingwithcars]

For me it's difficult to handle rolling auto footage and being able to view that video in true 4K format after upload. I've attempted the 180 rule and needed an ND filter for exposure and it still resulted in the same problem. The video uploads to youtube in 4k but doesn't play back in 4k on a 55" television. Can you assist?

[@TheDroneAngle]

Best explanation I've heard of rolling shutter. Now, I think I understand it.

[@pow9606]

I'm glad someone does. I don't quite understand how a mechanical shutter with a slow shutter speed of say 1/30 can have less rolling shutter than an electronic one with say 1/120 with regards to panning motions or moving subject.

[@evenhandedcommentor6102]

@@pow9606 The slower speed shutter replaces the rolling shutter effect with....the blurring effect. The bottom line might be that if you are getting a rolling shutter effect...slowing the shutter speed down will reduce the rolling shutter effect, but increase blur. what you can do is try to find the shutter speed with the least of both somewhere in the middle.

[@jws6181]

the stacked sensor from the Sony A9 with the silent shutter, has also less problems with rolling shutter??

[@martinsillen5998]

You don’t need an A1 or R3 to get less rolling shutter in silent mode. You can buy the much cheaper a9 and get fast sensor readout. Fast FF sensor has been around 4 years.

[@scb2scb2]

indeed you can get 3 cameras from sony today that are able todo it. The A1 is about 2x faster it seems then the others (including the R3). Getting a R3 at the moment is not possible they are not on sale so you have 3 options if you want silent shooting with less rolling shutter ff A9,A9II and A1.

[@scb2scb2]

@Benjamin Mesa Thats fine to each his own but there is added value in a stacked sensor thats why they are also moving to it. And yes the a7RIII is a lesser cameras as the R5 no doubt. And i still own one, I jus sold a R4 for a A1. The 7R3->7R4->A1 is about 100+ updates and changes its like comparing a R5 with a RP in way even many sony 'fanboys' don't see the massive steps between generations which is a pity.

[@scb2scb2]

@Benjamin Mesa fine but you do understand that was not the point of the discussion its not my job to convince anyone who hates a brand. I could tell you 'these menus' have been redone but clearly that won't help the discussion was rolling shutter.

[@ivanosski4654]

This is the kind of videos i like the channel for. I'm tired of gear videos. You are great teacher Tony.

[@charlesovatar]

I was shooting a wedding. I was behind the priest and decided to change to silent mode with my Sony a7r4. It was dim. I honestly thought it was the camera screen when checking my photos. When I came back home the banding was terrible. I couldn't find a solution on how to fix them. There was a link that said it can fix banding on raw files. It still doesn't work. So I had to manually fix the photos by photoshop. Using rectangle too with feather 20px ., and use the curves to adjust the dark bandings to match the light ones. It doesn't look 100% , but still better by around 60%.

[@MrKoenPieter]

and the camera manufacturers didn't speak about it and still they don't! Let's wait for a global shutter.

[@juniatamc]

AmI right assuming that a global shutter would allow for shorter exposure in studio photography with flashes? I currently use the short flash to freeze the motion of my fast moving objects in the studio, but get dark bands around the objects. Would love to solve this problem with shorter exposure.

[@igibbs2000utube]

I'm a concert photographer. On two occasions, I shot part of a concert with the silent shutter in the Nikon Z6 and Z6ii. 99% of the shots taken were ruined by banding. Just horrible. More recently, I was all excited to pre-order the Z9 (I really want better autofocus than the Z6ii) , but when it was announced that the Z9 has no mechanical shutter, I decided I needed to know more before putting down that kind of $$. As a concert photographer shooting stills, I'm not concerned about "slanting buildings" or "warped golf clubs" or "bizarre airplane propellers", but I am terribly concerned about "banding" when shooting concerts under LED/artificial lighting. So ... do you think the Z9's readout speed will prevent/eliminate banding? Will it prevent some banding, but there's a chance I'd still have to deal with banding in some situations?

[@MrKoenPieter]

as far as we know now only a global shutter eliminates banding. Camera manufacturers want to make some money from the models they sell now and only then they will change to global shutters. The solution is there but we have to wait

[@igibbs2000utube]

@@MrKoenPieter since the time I made my comment above, I've bought a Z9 and have shot several concerts with it. So far (knock on wood), no banding issues to report. That said. I am looking forward to the day global shutters are prevalent in flagship cameras. :)

[@RonaldLadao]

For still electric silent shutter photos, You didn't mention it in the video. (edited, forgot to mention this is for stage theater hot lights) On my Canon EOS R, When I have certain stage lighting. If I notice banding in my shots. I have to figure out what's the light "frequency", which most of the time is 60hz. From there, I have to use the multiples of 60 to try to match up the stage light sync. So I'm usually be shooting in 1/125, or 1/250 of a shutter speed to help minimize the banding when using still electric silent shutter photos on the EOS R.

[@marc5279]

It seems to me the if the problem was this easy to solve, this would be how we'd all be working around it. And it clearly isn't. i cant see why this would fix the problem. Sensor readout is the time the sensor needs for the pixels, from top to bottom, to start reading. The shutter speed only indicates the amount of time each pixel has to keep "reading" until they stop. This means, if you shoot at 1/250 and if the sensor readout is about 0.05sec (1/20th), that when you take a photo, the pixels from the top of the frame will end the exposure before the pixels from the bottom even start the reading (because the readout is slower than the exposure). Counterwise, in a 1sec exposure, the readout would finish way before the first pixels that started reading, the ones on the top, end the 1sec exposure. Now going back at your "60hz flickering fix with 1/250", as how i understand this all works... It seems to me that the pixels from the top would start the exposure earlier than the ones on the bottom, no matter what shutter speed you're using. If the readout is 1/20th, this means that the 60hz light has done three full flickering cycles by the time the camera has ended the readout... And each pixel has done a exposure of an incomplete cycle (1/250 < 1/60) at different stages of these cycles, so you should have 3 full flickering bands on the photo. This wouldn't happen if you shot at 1/60th because each pixel, no matter at what given time starts the exposure, would read a full flickering cycle, gathering the same amount of light as any other form another part of the sensor. Following that, you should have flickering in a 1/50 exposure because each pixel gathers a bit more than a full cycle at different stages of it, and the light gathering from each pixel varies again. So, when bumping up the exposure time, yes, the multiples of 60 theory makes sense, but when the exposure needs to be under 1/60, it seems to me that you have nothing to do to solve it other than having a super fast readout, again, the exposure has nothing to do at this stages.

[@RonaldLadao]

@@marc5279 TL:DR I think I forgot to mention in my post. That it was theater stage lighting that use hot lights, and not LED lights??? (Not familiar with the technical terms of theater stage lighting). Since LED lights act differently than the old hot theater stage lights.

[@RonaldLadao]

@@marc5279 Also, I have to photograph low budget stage theater, and high school theater rehearsal shows. That's how I notice this problem. And how I fixed it.

[@marc5279]

@@RonaldLadao ye, big hot lights flicker quiet softly, and banding must appear really subtle, I cant see why you have any flickering issues in the first place... But if you say so, and that you experinced a fix doing this, i must be missing something here

[@draganbalzic4493]

Try doing pans with a film camera with a horizontal traveling shutter (Nikon F3) and then do the same shots with a camera with a vertically traveling shutter (Nikon FM2). Critical analysis of the images will show two very different types of distortion.

[@garymeredith2441]

Tony on a nikon Z9 how do you eliminate rolling shutter , a friend of mine has sent me some photos of a mallard in flight and it was horrendous .

[@TroupeGoal]

I'm glad to finally know what people who always talk about this problem actually is, but I suspect I'm so used to seeing it that I'm not too concerned about it

[@keensoundguy6637]

Unless it is the main subject of a video, most people are indeed not too concerned about it. Examples such as that of the airplane propeller distortion can frequently be seen in television programs and commercially released (Hollywood, etc.) movies.

[@nicholasdjgive7671]

@@keensoundguy6637 know how to make

[@MattTrevett]

Where did you get the sensor readout time data from?

[@cfsrueda9349]

As a sports photographer I’ve noticed that when I shoot soccer at night, The R6 is great but sometimes you can notice this problem in moving subjects

[@youknowwho9247]

Try shooting tennis. The electronic shutter in the R6 is unusable there. :/

[@michaelripple8371]

Excellent explanation I always heard the term 1 million times but never exactly knew what it was

[@ickledotco]

Hello Tony, I notice it most with a fast moving rugby ball, either falling from the sky or a split second after it’s been kicked. I have the mechanical-electronic shutter dilemma your excellent video described and haven’t really found a solution. Thank you.

[@InWhoseOpinion]

How does t g e shutter help? The sensor is still scanned, one line at a time, from top to bottom.

[@jojojohn2416]

Hi, a request. Can you do a complete tutorial of Fujifilm XS10. Thanks

[@audreyrice996]

Is there any way to fix the image of the hummingbird in Lightroom, or Photoshop?

[@angelfoto4795]

We can make sensor with simultaneously reading and in fact we did a lot back them, it was called CCD. The JFET-LBCAST sensor had really fast speed reading too.

[@mbaksa]

There are also global shutter CMOS sensors, which use 5 transistors per photosite ("pixel") instead of 3, and that way they essentially have analog memory, which can be read when shutter is closed.

[@judithwinkler1553]

Chelsea's hummingbird problem is also my problem. What solution do you suggest for that?

[@shankargawali6783]

I have roling shutter problem in my phone any solution?

[@kevinwang7894]

Shooting stringed instruments with rolling shutter actually looks pretty cool :D

[@HokgiartoSaliem]

In photo I still not seen any rolling shutter in my EOS M (2012). In video also not seen, but I don't do quick panning and cek it in slow motion.

[@BadRadBR]

Great stuff! You mentioned that there are 'plugins' that can reduce rolling shutter. Can you recommend a couple? Thanks!

[@ILasaroff]

To avoid flickering at home whenever I buy lights from IKEA I go with my camera and test every bulb with typical video/photo settings to make sure I do not see banding i.e. their switching frequency is high enough such that it does not show up.

[@thomastuorto9929]

Pretty smart & probably something every filmer should do if they live close enough to where they purchase their lights. How do you do this. Do they have them on a working display or you take them out & put them in a lamp display? (I never been inside a Ikea)

[@ILasaroff]

@@thomastuorto9929 yeah Ikea was just an example but could be any local household store with lights on display. Even if they are not on display just explain the situation and ask for assistance they will show you lights. There certain things that although you can buy online it's better to try for yourself at the physical store. In the end of the day a good set of LEDs will last for 10-15 years.

[@Photovintageguy]

I have a lumix s5 if you use aps-c crop mode for video (crop) or photo (med 12mp tele) the Rolling shutter drops from 21ms to 10.5ms. keep that in mind if it becomes an issue.

[@przybylskipawel]

Is it possible that readout speed on Sony a6600 is so bad, that it caused distortion of the shape of the body in the still picture of the chickadee just moving across the perch?

[@sjice69]

Was about to drop some money on the Sony A7RIV. Guess I need to do some more research because I plan on doing videos as well as pictures with it.

[@jerry2357]

Even with film cameras, you could get a similar effect if a focal plane shutter was used. For instance, there is the famous photo by Jaques Henri Lartigue entitled "Delage Automobile, ACF Grand Prix, Dieppe circuit, June 26, 1912", where the car has an oval wheel and the watching bystanders are leaning in the opposite direction at an alarming angle, resulting from a slow focal-plane shutter and panning. However, this isn't a problem, because the effect just gives the photo real dynamism, making it a fantastic work of art.

[@bala1000mina]

hank you so much Tony! Really I needed to learn about the rolling shutter and you taught it very well and in details! Good luck!

[@TimeToCheckReality]

FYI: Some LEDs have drivers that do not flicker. If they do significant power conditioning to control the LEDs, it will be less or non-existent. The ones with the little orange "filaments" have minimal conditioning. Look at the bulb with your cell phone camera and you can see the bands in the image.

[@plejra]

That's right! Good quality flashlights and lamps don't use drivers with PWM (Pulse-width modulation) which causes the flickering at specific shutter speeds. Also good old incandescent lamps don't have this problem.

[@youknowwho9247]

How much better is the a9 than the R5? How much worse is it than the a1? Hard to find precise data on readout speeds anywhere.

[@TechnoBabble]

A9 is about 2.5x faster. The R5's readout speed is ~1/60 and the A9 is ~1/150

[@MarkBennettCameraCrisis]

Great video - superb info and great editing.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Glad it was helpful!

[@shadyninja1]

Does Panasonic gh5 have a global shutter

[@mbaksa]

No. Only relatively fast rolling shutter - 13.9ms from first to last line of pixel.

[@shadyninja1]

@@mbaksa thanks

[@johnadams3038]

Is it not possible to calculate rolling shutter based on sensor/camera specs and just use a simple algorithm to reverse the rolling shutter effect?

[@TechnoBabble]

No, you would also need to know how fast the camera is moving and how fast all objects in the photo are moving in relation to the camera.

[@johnadams3038]

@@TechnoBabble I’m pretty sure they can make AI for this particular issue

[@TonyAndChelsea]

For static subjects tilting because of camera movement, yes. But it's pretty impossible when you have moving subjects and a stationary background, for example.

[@SargsyanTigran]

The video quality is so good! What camera are you using to film this?

[@tc7486]

Thanks for that. Now I can at least slightly grasp what that is.

[@bluekeybo]

How does rolling shutter relate to shutter speed? If my sensor readout is 1/30 s, does that mean that I can get blurred results of a moving subject as if I'm shooting at 1/30 s even though I may be at say 1/200 s?

[@marc5279]

Sensor readout is the time the sensor needs for the pixels, from top to bottom, to start reading. The shutter speed only indicates the amount of time each pixel has to keep "reading" once it starts. This means, if you shoot at 1/250 and if the sensor readout is about 0.05sec (1/20th), that when you take a photo, the pixels from the top of the frame will end the exposure before the pixels from the bottom even start the reading (because the readout is slower than the exposure). Counterwise, in a 1sec exposure, the readout would finish way before the first pixels that started reading, the ones on the top, end the long 1sec exposure. A slow readout would give you deformations on a fast moving subject and high frequency flickering lights. The blur you apply on top of that is determined by the exposure time... So a slow readout with a short exposure has the best numbers to destroy your photos with rolling shutter and banding. On the other hand, a fast readout pared with a sufficient long-enough exposure shouldn't show any issues. But keep in mind, they are not related and one doesn't affect the other, the readout stays always the same, and the exposure "softens" its effects the longer it gets. Hope it helped

[@Xingqiwu387]

Excellent presentation and analysis! Thank you so much for clearing up this somewhat arcane subject.

[@kennygo8300]

One of your best informative videos. I shoot 99% stills. I use the mechanical shutter to limit rolling shutter.

[@paulbrooks2796]

Help me understand this here, I have a Canon 90D, The EOS 90D comes with an electronic shutter that can achieve a maximum speed of 1/16,000 seconds and a mechanical/electronic 1st-curtain shutter with a maximum of 1/8,000 seconds. So does that equate to 1-16th of a second and 1-8th of a second. Ta

[@MikedieONE]

no thats one/sixteenthousandth of a second and one/eightthousandth of a second 1-16th of a second = 1/16 1-8th of a second = 1/8

[@paulbrooks2796]

@@MikedieONE cheers just realised as i posted the amount of zero's lol

[@sonicvboom]

@@paulbrooks2796Lol

[@tokyowarfare6729]

I was looking for a camera to do photos from a vehicle. I thought bigger sensors where the way to go due to more light coming in etc until I did read a comment on the A6100 about the rolling shutter, started investigating and wow, it is certainly an issue!. I'm moving back to investigate M4/3 cameras unitl global shutter sensors reach consumer market which seems like never happening.

[@joelwolski]

Rolling shutter is not new to mirrorless, or even digital photography. Early film cameras with slow film emulsions would display the same effect. It eventually became the accepted norm for moving subjects. If you look at old (like 20s-30s) grad prix posters, the painter will have painted the car with oblong tires leaning forward. This photographic quirk became a technique adopted by painters and cartoonists (look at Roadrunner's legs when he's running) to express movement to the viewer. I personally solved the "problem" by putting my camera on a tripod and only photographing things to don't move fast.

[@goestas]

I'm willing to be educated, but this sounds like balderdash for so many reasons, so could you name your sources? Or are you just punking us (in which case, well done -- no one called you out for a year!). Because motion picture cameras don't work that way. And, as you write, the graphic expression of movement through distortion is a creative technique.

[@playandteach]

Fantastic content, thanks. Golf clubs though DO bend significantly during the swing, especially with more powerful players - though they do use stiffer shafts.

[@michael-4k4000]

Good point, especially if you use graphite golf shafts like I do, they bend a lot more.

[@kylerk343]

So let’s say I’m at a concert that has crazy lights that create these black bars. My camera is black magic 6k it has global shutter. How do I fix that on that camera. The led wall changes constantly lol also I want to shoot in slow motion and regular 24 fps thank you all

[@EarthAndSky4u]

Global shutter now on Sony

[@gordonyz4]

Z6 has about 1/38s in 12 bit raw mode (indistinguishable with 14 bit above ISO 200) already works fine for day to day and slower paning

[@djack4125]

Shooting BIF, rolling shutter rarely appears with my R5. Informative video, Tony.

[@TherconJair]

BIF?

[@TonyAndChelsea]

(BIF = birds in flight) and yeah that's our experience, too. We just bought the 600 f4 for the R5 if that shows our level of confidence. I've sen tilty trees in panning shots, and that crazy hummingbird shot, but MOST of Chelsea's hummingbird shots were fine.

[@TherconJair]

Oh, birds, I generally just flip them off at the beach 🙃

[@lightonthelandscape]

Same experience. I have a 600mm F4 paired with an R5. When using electronic shutter, I get really good results. Rolling shutter is rarely an issue with BIF (not enough to upgrade to the R5 II or R3). This news pleased my wife, and we can now afford to put granite counters in our kitchen :)

[@Speak_Out_and_Remove_All_Doubt]

I'm amazed there isn't an option where a camera takes 2 or 3 images and then replaces the dark bands with the data from the next frame.

[@seth.heerschap]

New mobile phone cameras that have HDR modes do this. They take a stack of photos all with slightly different ISO setting and then blend them together. It would be interesting to test these phones and see if the bands go away.

[@Speak_Out_and_Remove_All_Doubt]

@@seth.heerschap phones are doing such cool things to get around the fact they are small sensors with tiny lenses, I would like to see some of those features come to 'proper cameras'.

[@seth.heerschap]

@@Speak_Out_and_Remove_All_Doubt pretty much all of these features you can do in post with a real camera, with the added benefit of lower F stop, higher resolution, better dynamic range. But stacking is a very common feature in astrophotography and when you want to get the sky and subject without anything overexposed. But I really do love the quick edit and post that smart phones have these days. They're improving much faster than professional cameras I think.

[@skycladsquirrel]

I just shot a show with the Sony A7RIV and the A7III. Rolling shutter in the IV ruined a lot of my shots. I find the A7III was faster due to less Megapixels. It was more reliable. Thanks for the great video. I returned the RIV.

[@blenderbachcgi]

Psst. CCDs are better than CMOSes.

[@charlieross-BRM]

@@blenderbachcgi I learned the ropes on a large CCD camera, the Sony DSR-300 DVCAM. $30K around the year 2000(ish). So this whole rolling shutter/banding thing puzzled me when I started playing with my own consumer video cameras starting in 2014.

[@stuartmeador8993]

Thanks for the tips... Helps us understand why most electronic flash photography is discouraged with electronic shutter use.

[@Bloodshade]

Wait, is that why some of my photos will randomly feel squeezed at the end of a few burst shots? Legitimately don’t understand why that happens, I try to not touch the lens so I don’t know where the distortion comes in from

[@MrPiffSmiff]

Nikon Z9 now has fastest readout speed sensor in consumer Mirrorless cam. So fast they didn't need to put mechanical one in it. Have you had a chance to test it yet Tony?

[@tonynicolaci3244]

Does NTSC or PAL matter? I believe NTSC is used in the US and everywhere else you are supposed to use PAL to eliminate flicker. Is this correct?

[@Alexrocks1253]

As long as the shutter speed is staying at the hz rate of the place. For instance in the US and Japan it should be 1/60 to avoid flicker and 1/50 in Europe and elsewhere to avoid that flicker. I have shot NTSC 30fps video in Europe with a 1/50 shutter and there was no flicker, so as long as you can hit the shutter speed needed for the lights, do it Some mismatches can’t be avoided though like you can’t use a 1/50 shutter with 60fps video because the shutter is too long but you can use 1/60 with 50fps video.

[@PaulKretz]

I love these tech videos! ❤

[@HectorSuzy]

@Tony & Chelsea Northrup Do you know what readout speed the XT3 and XT4 has?

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Sorry, I don't know. For the cameras I listed, I photographed that one flickery bulb and then counted the lines lol. Some day I'll have to do that for a bunch of cameras.

[@Csmotion]

You really went in depth with rolling shutter, great video.

[@judithwinkler1553]

Suggestion: Would be great if you could do a video on hummingbird photography.

[@Lofote]

All right except that people still seem to think the flickering only ovcurs with led lighting, like led is a bad new tech..but it also happens with other sources like foot example fluorescent

[@TechnoBabble]

Yeah, it definitely also happens with flourescent, sodium vapour, and cheap incandescents at a high enough shutter speed.

[@charlieross-BRM]

I've had fluorescent (the u before the o guys), lighting give me blurred vision and that quickly led to some disorientation. I worried it was me until I got outside from the store and started feeling clear headed again. Just some locations though, not all ceiling tube lighting.

[@positiveandhealthy2728]

Omg how come I didn't run into you before! I loved the video!

[@gyozakeynsianism]

The content is always good here. :-)

[@pawelmod3292]

I'm surprised that you have mentioned only "expensive" cameras having fast sensor readout like Sony A1 or Canon R3. Why you did not mention A9 and A9II which have also much better readout speed compering to "regular" cameras? ;-) For example A9 (mark I) has 1/160 of the second readout speed and could be bought in Europe for "only" 2500 Euro. And by the way, that camera is on the market from 2017. That being said the fast readout speed for stacked sensors works only for stills, in video the stacked sensor doesn't eliminate the rolling shutter distortions... These days everyone is explaining rolling shutter limitations when in fact Sony users are aware and free of these issues from 4 years now :-) Somehow it wasn't issue for Canon users before releasing Canon R3 ...

[@MrCat-rk9ir]

longer or faster shutter speed to eliminate rolling shutter on stills? Isn't it faster shutter speed should have less rolling shutter?

[@mbaksa]

To reduce or eliminate flickering of LED lights (brighter and darker bars in video) use longer shutter speed. It might seem counterintuitive, but the point is that the sensor readout time is constant so longer shutter speed will result in more "averaged" flickering, with less distinctive horizontal bars (or no distinctive horizontal bars). That's why you might not see any horizontal bars with 1/50 or 1/60 s, but might see at 1/1000 s. That's also why the frequency of flickering (it's actually result of a PWM brightness control) of an LED light matters - the higher the frequency, less chance of noticing horizontal bars. To reduce other effects of rolling shutter, shorter shutter speed will mean that the object (or scene) is moved less during the exposure, and therefor other rolling shutter effects should be less noticeable (imagine propeller rotating 3 degrees instead of 20 degrees between the beginning and the end of a readout).

[@TonyAndChelsea]

What mbaksa said. Plus shutter "speed" is a misnomer; the shutter always moves at the same speed.

[@bobw222]

Hmmm... Chelsea's picture isn't as bad as some might think. It looks to me like some of that is just motion blur. Hummingbird wings don't flap up and down when hovering, they swing front to back. Around 4:47 in you can see this. Take a shot with a film camera with a slow shutter speed and the blur becomes really obvious. I guess it is a question of whether you are trying to get the wings caught dead still with no blur. If that is the case then superfast shutter speed may be the only answer.

[@shahabh2108]

4:23 So finally it's time to show the R5 weaknesses vs a fast readout stacked sensor camera! Why now? Well cause finally there an stacked sensor out by Canon! Sofar in every single comparison video of Sony A1 Vs R5 Tony was claiming R5 is identical or even better! So the A1 is overpriced.... But now this show how even an almost 5 yrs old A9 can beat R5 in the area it is advertised to work best; sport and fast action shooting. R5 is a great camera but not an sport camera. That's why A9ii is over 4k$ and A9 still over 3k.

[@gordonyz4]

1/60 is not really bad for normal shooting most people are not going to notice in most situations. But if you look for it distortion is there.

[@shahabh2108]

@@gordonyz4 Sure but should not be confused with a stacked sensor camera. But in mechanical shutter mode it can produce 12fps even for action, that's why R5 already crushed 1Dm3 which was only 2fps faster but only 20mp so R5 was a way better deal considering it's price. But almost nobody was allowed to do that comparison maybe! So all compared it with A1. Usable 30fps of 50mp for fast actions is no joke man! Sony has it's own weaknesses like the ergonomics. But the sensor is superior.

[@sonicvboom]

The R5/ 5D was never designed for fast-actioned sports/ racing though... The *R3* / 1Dx Mk 3 I reckon is more a sports photography camera.

[@shahabh2108]

@@sonicvboom Never said they were, I'm saying when someone is comparing a none sports oriented camera with a sports oriented camera and says the latter is worse in sport shooting then something is wrong with his experiment.

[@MrPiffSmiff]

Z9

[@jaffarbh]

Based in the UK, I simply change the shutter speed for video to 1/50th or 1/100th to eliminate flickering. I guess you would need 1/60th and 1/120th in the US to achieve the same.

[@MN12BIRD]

LED lights don't flicker at the AC line freq though, they run off DC (conversion in the bulbs electronics) and have a controller chip in them to pulse them X times per second (usually at least I think that's how it works anyway) they definitely flicker at a higher hz than 60hz.

[@TechnoBabble]

@@MN12BIRD Correct, a lot of small or cheap LED lights is PMW to control their brightness, which causes them to flicker hundreds of times a second and it's based on the AC frequency.

[@rjpadbatan669]

The other day I was shooting hummingbirds and I had my shutter speed at 1/8000, aperture at f8 and ISO 800. Of course the pic looked dark but since I shot in raw and the amazing dynamic range on R5, the bird turned out brilliantly sharp. Yet, the wingtips were not tack sharp like I hoped for. I suppose its because of the phenomena you described in the above video?

[@evenhandedcommentor6102]

I would guess that blur is more about action too fast for the shutter speed. Yes 1/8000 is fast, but so are hummingbird wing tips. Rolling shutter distorts where the wing tips are more than making them blurry.

[@digitalkiteaerial]

your explanations are on point. thank you

[@lnewbyliveca]

Does Chelsea always keep her camera in the refrigerator?

[@marekszymanek9721]

What's weird about that? We all store our equipment in refrigerators! Don't you too?

[@TonyAndChelsea]

It was a joke from a previous video... her Canon R5 kept overheating :D

[@gyozakeynsianism]

This is a great explainer, but I still can't understand how a mechanical shutter is able to reduce rolling shutter effects. How is a mechanical shutter that opens for 1/x seconds going to solve the readout problem? The sensor still needs to read the image from top to bottom. Anyone have a good explanation? EDIT: I think I figured out what's up. I think even when we're using the mechanical shutter, behind it is an electronic shutter: it's always electronically turning on the photosites (where each pixel is recorded), collecting photons, then reading the pixels out line by line to the processor and the memory card (vs. a global shutter, which can dump all the pixels onto the memory nearly instantly). The difference is, the mechanical shutter prevents the rolling effect DURING exposure. That is, the image is exposed at all photosites at the same time (ignoring the mechanical shutter's own "rolling" effect at faster shutter speeds); then the pixels still get dumped to the memory card line by line, but that process starts AFTER the mechanical shutter has closed. During the part of the process that might result in slanty buildings or warped propeller blades, there are no photons being delivered to the photosites. This is just a guess. If you actually understand this stuff, I'm all ears!

[@faisalsheraz8101]

One of the best explanations I have seen about rolling shutter issues...

[@ezrakoper]

I more or less understand the electronic shutter bending however not so much why mechanic shutter resolves it. Mechanic shutter move at same speed it 1/8000 or 1/1000. The only difference is the distence between the 1st and 2nd curton. So why is it better?

[@positiveandhealthy2728]

Imagine this would be a ordinary school lesson ☀️

[@TacticalCactusMedia]

It is (at least in my classroom)!

[@mikemiller9657]

It seems like a rolling shutter hardware fix for electronic shutters would be to turn on light collection for all pixels at time 0 and to turn off light collection for all pixels at time 0 + shutter speed. Then read out the pixel values at your leisure. This would solve the slow readout speed problem. I haven't read any discussion of this solution. Could there be a problem with needing pixel memory until the values can be readout? Again, I have seen no discussion of these issues. Is adding pixel memory hard?

[@marckriggins2171]

I observed that the Nikon D810 is still recommended as a high quality camera in 2021, according to some pros. Both you and Chelsea had this model in 2015. I think it is useful, not only, to pursue the latest models, but to underscore value in some former flagship models. I love my D810, which produces excellent results in landscape/seascape imagery. I am aware of its video limitation in only being HD and that manual focus is the better choice for video, due to its intermittent focus results. I am not one to bother with video, because I tell the story in stills and time lapse...Of course, I would not be blabbing if you and Chelsea were not influential in my further knowledge in photography. Thank you for your informative content! As a side note, do you host viewer's photos for critique on composition or editing value?

[@nandav8494]

No canon camera bashing ?

[@viviennenoble4035]

The shafts on golf clubs are made to be flexible some more than others, so they will definitely bend, so that look is nothing to do with rolling shutter,

[@amirmireskandari1520]

Awesome video, very helpful, as always. Although, I am wondering why is Chelsea putting her camera in the fridge! :)

[@TonyAndChelsea]

It was a joke from a previous video... her Canon R5 kept overheating :D

[@aspecreviews]

When I was about 13, I picked up my first CMOS-based video recorder. I immediately noticed the rolling-shutter effect and came up with the idea of CMOS-EVO (CMOS evolved) technology to run rolling shutter removal in the camera using artificial intelligence.

[@swashyhimself]

got a link?

[@MaverickChristian]

A Sony a9 is cheaper than a Sony a1 and has a very fast sensor readout (due to the stacked BSI CMOS sensor).

[@maoraharon21]

i love the graphic examples awesome video!

[@gregoryfricker9971]

Is there actually such thing as a global shutter or is it just the case that it’s so mild as to be negligible.

[@gregoryfricker9971]

@@aceflibble thank you

[@CiroPerez]

I still don't get it. Why do you get rid of the problem with a mechanical shutter? No matter you have a physical shutter in front, the read speed of the sensor is still slow, so you should have the same effect... Why you dont have it (in pics) with the mechanical?

[@mbaksa]

Ciro - when sensor is not exposed, when it's hidden behind the mechanical shutter, photosites ("pixels") on sensor keep the electrical charge, until it's purged after the readout. That means that what was captured during the exposure, that is what it will be read out. Exposure is separated from readout in this case. So, at least with longer shutter speeds, the whole sensor is exposed to the light almost at the same time. It's not a real global shutter, but it's close to it. With faster shutter speeds, it depends on the speed of the shutter, and not on the readout speed. With electronical shutter, the (rolling shutter) effects depend on the sensor readout speed, and with stacked sensors with DRAM, like on A9, A1 or R3, it depends on how fast can charge from photosites be converted, digitized, and transferred to the DRAM. Since transferring to DRAM is much faster than the full sensor readout, sensors which utilize DRAM can achieve similar effect to mechanical shutter, and therefor more similar to global shutter, than to regular rolling shutter sensors without DRAM.

[@CiroPerez]

@@mbaksa , "when sensor is not exposed, when it's hidden behind the mechanical shutter, photosites ("pixels") on sensor keep the electrical charge, until it's purged after the readout". This is a great explanation!. Thank you very much!! and thanks for taking the time to explain it. Much clearer now, thanks!

[@brucedeo1981]

Im using e-Shutter in sports, (R6) and i still haven't find any problem. If i look really hard, in SOME pictures i might see the pattern, but i would say the issue in RL is totally non-issue.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Yeah the R6 has a really good readout speed and I'm comfortable using the electronic shutter for sports. You will see the effect in professional sports for fast-moving sideways subjects, like if a pro kicks a soccer ball, it'll end up really wonky. You can also get flickering under artificial lights, depending on the lighting.

[@mikeearussi]

One of your better videos.

[@hauke3644]

I was worried about distortions when shooting flying cole tips, but it’s hardly noticeable, although my Olympus camera not even has a back-illuminated sensor. But the smaller sensor size certainly helps with a fast readout. Rolling shutter isn’t a problem on Smartphones either. Another solution: a central shutter such as in Hasselblad lenses.

[@johnsoncityaerialphotograp7201]

Tony and that “gangster lean” rolling shutter..

[@plejra]

Actually decreasing shutter speed won't work in budget cameras like Sony A6100. The only reasonable thing that might work is to shoot in lower res. This increases sensor readout speed.

[@colinhoward2200]

Not if you have a stacked sensor?!!

[@jacobwetherby]

Quick Solution for camera manufacturers: The sensor should scan top to bottom, right to left, instead of right to left , top to bottom....this would dramatically reduce the pan jello effect... the "awnser" though, would be an "instant" sensor... maybe each line of resolution on the sensor captured all at once, or each line in one full "swipe"... gl

[@jacobwetherby]

or the sensor needs to scan so often, that it's basically an "all at once" sensor

[@josephdoesathing]

I thought this video was going to be about fixing rolling shutter in Stills and Videos but pretty much I took back that I need money and I need to buy a New Camera with fast read out, like a A1, R3 and A9, a bit disappointed is a understatement.

[@gquesp]

Fujifilm x-h2s

[@myown6898]

dont forget that new sony cameras have a feature called variable shutter that can counteract the flickering of the lights

[@kurtissutley1485]

Posted a hummingbird photo with the distorted wings on our camera club Facebook page, as an example of rolling shutter. Got a request from a member to teach the club how to produce this "cool" effect. Go figure.