Video editing

P&Y

P&Y

Member
I've been shocked how much better some thermal videos I've seen posted are compared to what I see through my scope. Especially videos posted using the same equipment. I had chalked it up to environmental conditions and/or settings. Along with the fact a lot of the videos are taken at much closer ranges than I typically see.

Well, I was visiting with my friend the other day and had kind of an epiphany. He said the videos were edited and I was duped! A light bulb came on and I felt pretty stupid. I don't know anything about how all the tech works ([beeep] I can't even post photos here) but know I can clean images up on my iphone. Now I'm feeling fairly confident these videos were "enhanced".

Curious on your thoughts?
 
I do not post videos, but the image I see through mine are actually better quality that the videos posted.. I think you loose resolution when publishing a video.. Just my thoughts, I have bearing optics and I ray.. I have had a few others also..
 
There probably may be some video software that would allow enhancing the images, but I suspect it would be prohibitive in cost to use. I can tell you that my editing software is just Windows Movie Maker and it degrades the image I see through the ocular as well as the recorded image from the scope.
 

Originally Posted By: carvercalls……the image I see through mine are actually better quality that the videos posted.. I think you loose resolution when publishing a video.
I use editing software to shorten the actual video, cut out unnecessary footage and to add photos, text and music. As to enhancing the actual footage itself, my software doesn’t do that. Like Carver and DoubleUp mentioned, what I see through the scope is slightly better than the final edited footage. In general, footage is degraded somewhat when edited.

 
With the majority of scopes, the image through the eyepiece is considerably better than the video captured. The reason is the compression of the video files. Video file formats have become more efficient over time, but in general, a recorded video won't look as good as the view through the eyepiece. You then have to post them somewhere like YouTube, Facebook, and the video files go through another compression/conversion. Usually once the files are on social media, the quality has diminished even in comparison to what was recorded on the scope.

I don't own any ATN thermals, but in speaking with owners of ATN thermals, I have heard their thermals may be an exception where the recorded video can look better than through the eyepiece. I cannot confirm this. My guess is if true it has to do with the quality of the display. Bering Optics, as an example, has the highest compression rate of any thermal I have personally recorded with. This makes for smaller files which is nice, but it decreases the quality of the video image.

I have used lots of different video editing tools in various jobs. The better video software programs do have some video filters that can allow a person to clean up some artifacts, increase contrast, color, etc. Just as some audio programs can take out background noise, etc. Is it possible, some people are using tools like this, it is, but I personally don't think it a common occurrence on hunter recorded videos.

Humidity is the great equalizer. It is my personal belief the reason why many look so much better than others is humidity. One of my favorite things is when someone says it isn't humidity, it is when the dewpoint and the temperature are really close. This is the definition for how humidity is measured. This is why so many of the review videos for thermals are done in low humidity conditions. I do the opposite. For the SY35 review video which I recently released, I recorded videos in 3 different humidity levels ranging from mid 70's (low for our area) to as high as 100% and snowing to make sure I was demonstrating different levels of performance. If I had recorded them in 10-20% humidity, the videos would have looked way better. However, when a person would hunt with it in higher humidity, they would say it doesn't look as good. I also list the humidity on almost all of my videos.

As others have said, the majority of hunter captured videos on sites like this and on YouTube etc. are most likely not enhanced. I personally do not enhance the color, remove video artifacts, etc. but some people would call my adding sound, adding transitions, adding text and titles, as enhancements. My enhancements don't impact the quality of the scope recorded video image itself but is an attempt to make a more professional looking video.
 
Thanks for the info everyone. I feel better not thinking the advertising videos ect are probably not doctored up. I know humidity is a big factor and it's always humid in these here parts.
 
I can't say about the advertising videos which could very well be enhanced. I'm pretty sure though as Kirsch alluded to that they are done under optimal atmospheric conditions. I can tell you for sure that my videos are not as good as what I see through the scope.
 
Originally Posted By: P&YI've been shocked how much better some thermal videos I've seen posted are compared to what I see through my scope. Especially videos posted using the same equipment. I had chalked it up to environmental conditions and/or settings. Along with the fact a lot of the videos are taken at much closer ranges than I typically see.

Well, I was visiting with my friend the other day and had kind of an epiphany. He said the videos were edited and I was duped! A light bulb came on and I felt pretty stupid. I don't know anything about how all the tech works ([beeep] I can't even post photos here) but know I can clean images up on my iphone. Now I'm feeling fairly confident these videos were "enhanced".

Curious on your thoughts?

I edit every single video I post, thermal or not. The problem your friend doesn't understand is somehow trying to manipulate a factor after the video has already been taken.

I have some of the most BADA$$ $hit anyone would ever see, 7 coyotes rolling in killing 5 of em, but guess what, my Manfrotto pan bar has a setting on each side of the handle, and one accidentally got pulled from AF to MF, so my 305 at the time was unfocused. There is no possible way I can ever fix that issue in an editing program, NO WAY, so no ones ever seen it. My F*** UP, My loss, bad deal.

Thermal is the same way, If you look as some of the video's I post, I'm not throwin a di** around saying look at how big mine is, but look at the range, look at the clarity, look at the focus that was constantly manipulated every step that Coyote took until it's death. Look at the Trijicon video we did that has like 70 million views, because of the time we took to actually show people what these units were capable of by recording through the eye piece... Who else did that? I guarantee if you tried it, it would be a one time deal then you'd say screw this...
Now with the clarity of onboard systems, and using a decent editing program that will render a video with optimal visual, not some windows movie maker program, PLUS the force multipliers of discipline, letting that Coyote get close, manipulating the focus, holding the weapon steady before and after a kill shot, waiting for atmospherics to be pristine during many hunts.

None of that is easy. But it's easy for someone to say it's all edited in. Same thing with lifting, Everyone wants the muscle, no one wants to do the work to get it, and then when they do, everyone tells you, your build is edited, to make them feel better about themselves.
 
Hey, don't feel stupid – we've all been there! 😄Your friend's point about enhancements makes total sense. Sometimes, those seemingly magical thermal videos have had a touch-up. As for tech, don't worry; you're not alone. Learning the ins and outs takes time. By the way, if you're looking for final cut alternatives, I came across some cool options that work on Windows too. They might help you experiment with enhancing your own videos.
 
Last edited:
P&Y said:
I've been shocked how much better some thermal videos I've seen posted are compared to what I see through my scope. Especially videos posted using the same equipment. I had chalked it up to environmental conditions and/or settings. Along with the fact a lot of the videos are taken at much closer ranges than I typically see.

Well, I was visiting with my friend the other day and had kind of an epiphany. He said the videos were edited and I was duped! A light bulb came on and I felt pretty stupid. I don't know anything about how all the tech works ([beeep] I can't even post photos here) but know I can clean images up on my iphone. Now I'm feeling fairly confident these videos were "enhanced".

Curious on your thoughts?
Click to expand...
You're definitely onto something about those enhanced thermal videos! I've noticed the same thing and honestly felt a bit bamboozled at first when comparing them to what I see through my own scope. Most people don't realize that many of these videos go through some serious post-processing - contrast adjustment, noise reduction, and sharpening can make a massive difference in thermal imagery. What you see in real-time through your scope is the raw feed, while these videos have often been tweaked to look their absolute best for social media. Environmental conditions and range absolutely play a role too, but you're right that editing is the secret sauce making those videos pop. I actually tried using some basic video editing software on my own thermal footage last month, and the difference was night and day - looked like completely different equipment. Your friend hit the nail on the head - we're all getting a bit duped by fancy editing!
 
Well, unless you can be more specific on which videos you believe are being enhanced, then we really don't know. I'm pretty confident that 6mm06, Pa Mick, Jmeddy, and a few others who post videos on here regularly aren't doing anything to enhance the videos. Most of us are doing good to just get the video posted. Can you point out which videos you are referencing?
 
I don’t know if my videos are good or bad but you’re right Owen. I download my videos from my Pulsar right to YouTube or to my iPad then to YouTube. I’m happy to be able to do that ! No enhancement done here.

Humidity definitely makes the difference !
 
Last edited:
I don’t enhance any video footage at all, no manipulation of quality of footage. I take video directly from the scope (or SD card from one scope via a dvr recorder) and put directly into the editing program. The only thing I do as mentioned before, is to add transitions between scenes, like page fade etc, add text to give viewers an understanding of the gear I use, distance etc., and add music. No footage manipulation at all.
 


Write your reply...
Back
Top