I keep saying the same stuff over and over when it comes to analyzing videos. I can't immediately find a post that lists what makes a video acceptable for analysis, so I will just reproduce on here. I will give 1 point for each of the following that the video has:
- Stationary camera and background
- Camera does not zoom
- Motion perpendicular to the camera
- You can see the object in every frame (nothing obscuring the motion)
- Interesting physics content
- Downloadable (some videos I can't "get off the web")
- No repeating frames
- Not badly interlaced (or would that be deinterlaced - I get confused)
This gives a max score of 8 points. I think it would be best to just apply this to a select portion of a video (not necessarily the whole thing). I will call this the VAS.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
"Everything that slows us down and forces patience, everything that sets us back into the slow circles of nature, is a help." -May Sarton
It's unbelievable how much more amazing the world becomes in slow-motion. You've probably seen some high speed cameras that shoot at astounding frame rates, such…
(NOTE: It appears that I really blew it with this one. I'm the bozo in this story. After lots of discussion, a few equations, and a bunch of time scribbling on paper, I'm convinced that I got this one wrong in a big way. No excuses; I should have done the analysis much more carefully before posting…
Before going to the playground Saturday to investigate non-intertial frames, SteelyKid and I went over to campus to do some experiments in relativity. Galileian relativity, that is:
What you see here is SteelyKid sitting on a rolling lab cart with a camera bolted to it. She throws a ball up in the…
I managed to trash yet another laptop - the city commute through the subways seems to be pretty hard on computers! - so while I'm sitting and slowly restoring my backups, I was looking through the folder where I keep links to crankpots that I'd like to mock someday. I noticed one that I found…