I agree that one cannot trust what one sees when looking at capture images of swing videos - especially when the frame rate is only 30 frames/second. I have seen swing videos where the clubshaft was bent 90 degrees. The reason is due to the fact that the camcorder is operating at 30 frames/second and it has multiple moving images occurring within that single frame time period (1/30th second) and the camcorder simply recreates a composite image according to the camera manufacturer's algorithm. Even the Bizhub Swingvision camera, which operates at 500 frames/second, may result in distortion when dealing with fast club speeds.
Here are capture images from that slow-mo section of the Sadlowksi swing video.
I put in image 1 for fun - to show his amazing clubhead lag.
Images 2-5 show the clubshaft movement through the impact zone. There was no frame that captured the clubshaft at impact.
Note how blurred the clubshaft images are - I cannot trust their accuracy even though this is a slow-mo swing video.
However, there is an interesting point. Look at the clubface sweetspot in relationship to the hand angle. I can believe that one can draw a straight line between the sweetspot and PP#3 and I can believe that the sweetspot is trying to get inline with PP#3. However, that GD photo of Jamie post-impact didn't look right to me - the hand angle didn't look right relative to the sweetspot. I still think that the sweetspot should have been where I drew the yellow line. I don't think that we can resolve this issue because even the GD photos, which were presumably taken with camera that has a very high shutter speed, may be distorting reality.
Know what you mean, interesting note and with many implications. Horse racing for instance.
But the GD photos are super sharp and one normally tends to go with that for accuracy no? Could the video blur be hiding a bend? it doesnt appear so but.. Why would the film show a sharp in focus bend instead of just a blur?
It shows a sharp focused clubshaft because the camcorder's inbuilt algorithm instructs the camera to produce a composite photo that is compositionally coherent when faced with multiple blurred moving images. It chooses one-of-many clubshaft images that occur within the time space of one frame as being a representative clubshaft image.
I think that one can trust the accuracy of the Tiger Woods Nike Commercial swing video because the frame rate was 4,000 frames/second. Interestingly, there is no clubshaft bend post-impact in that video.
I don't know if the GD photo series was made with a still digital camera, which can have a fast shutter speed of 1/8,000th second and where each image is a single frame captured at 1/8000th second. If the images were captured with a still camera operating at >1/8,000th second, then they should be accurate.
It sticks out my mind that GD used the Viper digital movie camera. Not sure of the frame rate they used but super high like the retail price which is around one million dollars. The viper has a mechanical shutter for a more film like look with no blur.
I wouldnt be surprised if the Nike commercial was shot on the Viper too. The Red camera which is out now wasnt around at the time of its shooting I dont think.
First time trying to attach photos so hopefully this will work.
Jeff, I am no LD expert, just a humble amateur. These pictures of me were taken in October 2008 by GolfGuru. I think they were taken up around the shutter speed you wanted on his Casio F1 camera that can take bursts at up to 1200 fps I believe.
Bugger, not sure I uploaded them. Idiots guide please?
Attached Thumbnails:
__________________ The student senses his teacher’s steadfast belief and quiet resolve: “This is doable. It is doable by you. The pathway is there. All you need is determination and time.” And together, they make it happen.
Regarding getting a frame at impact - I was just pointing to the one issue (especially seen when taking a divot) where the clubhead slows during impact and the shaft bends back - once the ball leaps off the face - the clubshaft springs forward.
__________________
Life Goal- Developing a new theory of movement based on Brain Science
Interests - Dabbling with insanity
Hobbies- Creating Quality
Regarding getting a frame at impact - I was just pointing to the one issue (especially seen when taking a divot) where the clubhead slows during impact and the shaft bends back - once the ball leaps off the face - the clubshaft springs forward.
Yes, of course. The divot/clubhead collision vs the tee'd ball/clubhead collision. One causing more shaft deflection than the other.
First time trying to attach photos so hopefully this will work.
Jeff, I am no LD expert, just a humble amateur. These pictures of me were taken in October 2008 by GolfGuru. I think they were taken up around the shutter speed you wanted on his Casio F1 camera that can take bursts at up to 1200 fps I believe.
If he's got the F1 then the still bursts are up to 60 frames per second. High speed movies on the other hand can make it to 1,200 fps. Although here I think fps stands for "fields per second". Apples and oranges. Film movie cameras would still be "frames per second" having a mechanical shutter and a true film frame
My Casio FH20 has a burst of still photos up to 40 fps which are far clearer than 280 fps in digital movie mode for some reason. No shaft blur what so ever. (The faster fps movie settings require a ton of light and are smaller files, despite the blur I find 280 to be the best rate.)
And yes in burst mode the shaft looks like a very in focus bent snake while in movie mode it seems a rather straightish looking blur. This when regarding the same person doing the same shot one after the other.
If this shaft deflection is an anomaly of high speed still photography then Hogan might have been wrong to change shafts after reviewing his photos for Power Golf. Ill let the sharpness of the focused still bursts rule and chose to think that Mr Hogan and Mr Kelley had it right. The shaft is a snake.
My Casio FH20 has a burst of still photos up to 40 fps which are far clearer than 280 fps in digital movie mode for some reason. No shaft blur what so ever. (The faster fps movie settings require a ton of light and are smaller files, despite the blur I find 280 to be the best rate.)
And yes in burst mode the shaft looks like a very in focus bent snake while in movie mode it seems a rather straightish looking blur. This when regarding the same person doing the same shot one after the other.
If this shaft deflection is an anomaly of high speed still photography then Hogan might have been wrong to change shafts after reviewing his photos for Power Golf. Ill let the sharpness of the focused still bursts rule and chose to think that Mr Hogan and Mr Kelley had it right. The shaft is a snake.
Here are four photos O.B. Left took at Cuscowilla in our private sessions last month. They illustrate his points . . . and mine. Also, they give insight into the 'Shaft Bend' questions Mike O. asked above. FYI, these are Stiff shafts -- not Super Stiff or Tipped -- but they are Stiff (and not of the 'Super Senior' variety ) .
Downstroke
Release
During Release
Impact Interval
Readers who wish to enlarge can click on the thumbnails below. Left click and use the 'pg up' and 'pg down' keys to navigate between the photos.
) . 
Hybrid Mode
