Comments

Chienworks wrote on 1/27/2011, 12:47 PM
Personally i would take pictures hourly, or even more often. One per minute might be overdoing it, but 10/hour could be useful. You'll want to have lots to choose from so that you can maintain continuity. Weather patterns and light changes throughout the day. You'll want to be able to choose an image that follows the previous one nicely without too much jarring, even if they're not at exactly the same schedule.

The same thing applies to various "things" that can get in the way from time to time. Suppose one day there's a huge piece of equipment between the camera and the building for a few hours. You'd want to be able to choose a picture from before or after that period so that you don't have a single-frame blip of that equipment there.

Ideally you should dedicate a camera to this task. Lock it down on a tripod or something even sturdier, like bolting it to a beam, so that there's no temptation to move it or borrow it for some other task. Being able to disable the camera's automatic shutoff is a big bonus. A camera that tethers to a PC allowing the computer to operate it is very useful. Use an old discarded PC that you don't want for any other purpose and also leave it secured at the site.

If you can't get a camera controlled by the computer, then a camera that's always on delivering a live video feed is another good choice. Get some free capture software that grabs a frame and saves it at programmable intervals.
crocdoc wrote on 1/27/2011, 1:34 PM
Canon sells a remote device that can be configured for time lapse with their EOS dSLRs (TC 80N3). I'd get a second hand EOS still camera, set it up on a tripod with one of these remotes and set the interval to two shots an hour. The remote wakes the camera out of sleep mode before taking each shot, so batteries last a fair while (or you can get their AC adaptor and plug the camera into a wall). Even if you were to take a shot every minute you'll have plenty of space on the memory card so that you can stop in every couple of days to replace it.

The advantage to using a digital SLR is that you can choose a low or medium quality setting and still have a much greater resolution than HD video, so once you've put all of the stills into the vegas timeline you can then do some small pans and/or zooms to add a bit of interest to the finished time lapse.
Serena wrote on 1/27/2011, 10:56 PM
Yes, a DSLR is the right camera. Or even just digital compact. But be careful in selecting the frame rate --- talk to somebody who has done timelapse of structural building. An architectual contact did this on a multi-story building (days of film) and the result was useless because the motion was too fast. Unfortunately I can't remember the framing rate (I think 1/min). If you just want to see the building emerge from nothing, then fast is OK. If you want more of a record of the process (as they did), fast makes it all a blur of pixelated objects. Also be conscious of exposure setting - how will you handle varying light conditions? Auto or fixed?
farss wrote on 1/28/2011, 6:20 AM
Give that this is over 1 year I'd think there's a risk with simply leaving the camera powered up with the iris open. Unless some care was taken to ensure that at no time would the sun shine directly into the lens you might end up with damage to the sensor or iris or shutter.

I've have looked briefly into a purpose built system for doing this kind of work and it left the camera powered down until ti was time to take an image. The lower power controller would power the camera up wait a few seconds and then take the image then wait a few more seconds and power the camera down.

This system had a small SLA battery and the ability to keep the battery charged from a small solar panel. Whole thing fitted inside a Pelican case that could be afixed to pole.

Bob.
Dennishh wrote on 1/28/2011, 5:41 PM
Patryk Kizny who did this amazing video at http://vimeo.com/16414140 is one of the best time-laps photographers I have ever seen. It might be overkill for what you want to do but his tutorial page has a lot of great info. http://lookycreative.com/lang/en/category/know-how/timelapse-compendium/
I can't imagine how time consuming this must be but at the same time so rewarding.
Dennis
musicvid10 wrote on 1/28/2011, 6:42 PM
Ok, I can't take this.
You are discussing time-lapse, not time-laps.
"Lapse" is the time between the commencement of two events, "laps" are trips around an oval or circular track.
How about it? A little more attention to literacy, please?
gpsmikey wrote on 1/28/2011, 8:33 PM
Yes, but what would it be if it was of someone doing laps in the swimming pool working on their times ?? :-)

Loved the one of the chapel.

If you don't want to leave the camera out all the time, what you need to do is create a ridged mount where you want the camera (bolted to a beam/building/whatever) that had an index system in the mount so that when you put the camera in the mount it is always pointed exactly the same. That makes it much easier to only have the camera there during the times you need to take the shots - you just need to make sure the mount locks the camera in the same position each time.

mikey
Serena wrote on 1/28/2011, 9:06 PM
If I'd been the first to respond I would have suggested that "doing time laps" was a question for Dr Who. But the opportunity passed.
musicvid10 wrote on 1/28/2011, 9:10 PM
"If I'd been the first to respond I would have suggested that "doing time laps" was a question for Dr Who. But the opportunity passed. "

Actually not, if you're jogging backwards . . .
john_dennis wrote on 1/28/2011, 9:26 PM
Here is an 8-hour time lapse that was assembled from still image sequences taken by a Canon G2 and G5 using a piece of software running on two laptops.

http://www.youtube.com/user/thedennischannel/#p/a/u/1/Uu5Q77HpXiM

I bought the cameras used on eBay and bought two licences for GBTimelapse software for less than $100 per copy. I used old laptops that others had turned in at the end of their lives. That was good, since one of them fell 12 feet on to the concrete. Both were in hostile environments for long periods. The cameras held up well. The software has a scheduler so it would only fire when people were working. The interval between shots was about 12 to 20 seconds.

This video was over six months with the Canon G5 at about 20 second between shots.

http://www.youtube.com/user/thedennischannel/#p/u/6/gOT2DRMVV7I

By the time it was compressed to two minutes most of the people disappeared and the machines just magically appeared. For the final I had too much data.

In both of these, the exposure and focus was set to Auto. In tight quarters, auto exposure can be a little flakey, as in this video:

http://www.youtube.com/user/thedennischannel/#p/u/5/jkU0f9Lr9LE

Actually, though I appreciate some of the beautiful work that people have done, time lapse is not the joy of my life. I was asked to do it and I made the best of it. It is a lot of work.
Sidecar wrote on 1/29/2011, 7:59 AM
You might consider the Digisnap controller from www.harbortronics.com. We use the 2800 series to control older point-and-shoot Nikon cameras that have a serial port on them. (Newer Point 'n shoots don't have the serial port.)

The Digisnap can control Nikon DSLRs like the D70 or better. Harbortronics offers a complete kit built around the Pentax DSLR, if you want to buy a system that's guaranteed to function.

Time lapse with still cameras is tricky. Consider using a uninteruptable power supply so if power fails you don't lose your settings.

Consider also putting your rig inside a steel box like a lockable file cabinet or similar. Drill a hole for the lens to see through,. May help the camera survive without being stolen.

Nikon also offers software for a computer controlled time lapse solution that allows the camera to be remotely triggered. It's designed for people who shoot tabletop catalog items. The pictures go to the computer, not the card in the camera. This is helpful, as the camera never fills up and needs less maintenance.

You need a Nikon DSLR, a laptop, the software and a box to put it all in.

The Digisnap device allows you to control when the camera turns on and off so you don't have to record down time like at night when nobody's doing anything. We usually use an interval of ten minute between shots if you want the "ants building something fast' effect over several months. Set the camera's resolution to just higher than your output resolution--over 1920 pixels wide. No need to shoot super hight rez stills,

Finally, some older Nikon point and shoots have built in time lapse functions so you don't need an external controller at all. Unfortunately, once you turn them on, they go night and day, so you have to edit out a lot of shots where the lights are out or nothing is going on and the card fills faster so there's more time taken downloading. But the upside is that the camera is very small and self contained. You still need to power it with an external power supply plugged into a UPS, though.

One other thought: if you use point and shoot cameras, don't try zooming to frame the shot. Use the camera's widest/default setting. If the camera loses power or you shut it down to pull the card for download, the lens will retract and you'll lose your zoom setting. Might as well leave it at default. It'll get there anyway. I tend to use aperture priority exposure and let the camera's shutter speed determine the exposure.
Dennishh wrote on 1/29/2011, 11:48 AM
Are you kidding me! Leave off an e when typing and you can't take it. There are more serious things to worry about in my life than this sh...t.
Steve Mann wrote on 1/29/2011, 12:52 PM
Here's one I did yesterday of an icicle growing outside my studio window.



I use a Canon 10D DSLR and the Canon intervalometer. Probably overkill, but it can produce some really nice time-lapse videos.

However, almost any Canon Powershot camera can be modified for time-lapse. Google "CHDK" and you'll find..... a google of articles on the Canon Hack Development Kit, which includes a time-lapse hack.

Steve Mann
john_dennis wrote on 1/29/2011, 8:25 PM
Steve,
I like everything about it but the " icicle growing outside my studio window."

Steve Mann wrote on 1/29/2011, 9:25 PM
Enough snow melted today that I can see my mailbox again.
Some of the icicles were getting downright lethal, so I took a rake to break them.
It will get up to 33-degrees tomorrow.
crocdoc wrote on 1/30/2011, 12:49 AM
"It will get up to 33-degrees tomorrow."

Same here! (33C)

ushere wrote on 1/30/2011, 3:29 AM
38c here!