Flexiwings 2025

[dialtone]

I think the camera in the Mclaren is stabilised. Look how the track behind is nice and smooth, but the Red Bull and Mercedes cams are the opposite. The car is nice and static (bar the rear wing) but the track jolts and bumps out of focus.

Yeah, the camera is stabilized, the whole wing moves up and down even at lower speed where there shouldn't be any flex, but more according to suspension movement when they go on kerbs. I'm not sure FIA would be able to perform any sort of measurements via that, do they have another camera?

[catent]

I think the camera in the Mclaren is stabilised. Look how the track behind is nice and smooth, but the Red Bull and Mercedes cams are the opposite. The car is nice and static (bar the rear wing) but the track jolts and bumps out of focus.

Yeah, the camera is stabilized, the whole wing moves up and down even at lower speed where there shouldn't be any flex, but more according to suspension movement when they go on kerbs. I'm not sure FIA would be able to perform any sort of measurements via that, do they have another camera?

I noticed the same thing. That entire rear-end isn't just squatting at speed, it's also happening over kerbs at lower speeds.

[AR3-GP]

Nothing is coincidence in Formula 1.

[bluechris]

There is another thing in the video, its not only squating but the upper wing, i mean the DRS wing is going to the bottom wing as the speed increases. That is something 1st time i see in the flexy saga. Its not by much but it's there, watch it carefully as the gap between the wings decrease.
The overall flex of the whole assembly i think it's reduced from previous races but maybe this is because of the less loaded wing.
Finally is the only team that the base of the camera is not stable, nice trick also.

[SiLo]

THE MCLAREN CAMERA IS STABILISED - any flex from that shot cannot be inferred.

[bluechris]

THE MCLAREN CAMERA IS STABILISED - any flex from that shot cannot be inferred.

How it is stabilised when everything around the car is shaking? Even the sidepods are moving in the video.
Also in the 1st races the camera was rock solid but suddenly it's not? Connect the dots, it's easy to understand.

[f1isgood]

McLaren clearly don't want others to see what's going on with their car. They already lost with mini-DRS and are also suspect this year. This much is obvious to everyone with two eyes that are willing to see the obvious.

[lucafo]

THE MCLAREN CAMERA IS STABILISED - any flex from that shot cannot be inferred.

How it is stabilised when everything around the car is shaking? Even the sidepods are moving in the video.
Also in the 1st races the camera was rock solid but suddenly it's not? Connect the dots, it's easy to understand.

Silo is correct!
You can see the edges been cut.
Good way to finish this discussion... lol

[FittingMechanics]

THE MCLAREN CAMERA IS STABILISED - any flex from that shot cannot be inferred.

How it is stabilised when everything around the car is shaking? Even the sidepods are moving in the video.
Also in the 1st races the camera was rock solid but suddenly it's not? Connect the dots, it's easy to understand.

McLaren camera is stabilizing the background/track. So the car shakes/moves around while the road is stable. Other cameras seem to stabilize the car and the track shakes. Not sure if this is done digitally or the camera is just that stable on the car, but McLaren one is definitely digitally stabilized so the track doesn't shake. It's quite obvious if you watch the track/white lines.

Why is that, no idea? Maybe it's just a different spec camera? Maybe other teams (not in the comparison) have this stabilized track camera as well.

[bluechris]

THE MCLAREN CAMERA IS STABILISED - any flex from that shot cannot be inferred.

How it is stabilised when everything around the car is shaking? Even the sidepods are moving in the video.
Also in the 1st races the camera was rock solid but suddenly it's not? Connect the dots, it's easy to understand.

McLaren camera is stabilizing the background/track. So the car shakes/moves around while the road is stable. Other cameras seem to stabilize the car and the track shakes. Not sure if this is done digitally or the camera is just that stable on the car, but McLaren one is definitely digitally stabilized so the track doesn't shake. It's quite obvious if you watch the track/white lines.

Why is that, no idea? Maybe it's just a different spec camera? Maybe other teams (not in the comparison) have this stabilized track camera as well.

And that happened after 2-3 races in season? Ok

[FittingMechanics]

How it is stabilised when everything around the car is shaking? Even the sidepods are moving in the video.
Also in the 1st races the camera was rock solid but suddenly it's not? Connect the dots, it's easy to understand.

McLaren camera is stabilizing the background/track. So the car shakes/moves around while the road is stable. Other cameras seem to stabilize the car and the track shakes. Not sure if this is done digitally or the camera is just that stable on the car, but McLaren one is definitely digitally stabilized so the track doesn't shake. It's quite obvious if you watch the track/white lines.

Why is that, no idea? Maybe it's just a different spec camera? Maybe other teams (not in the comparison) have this stabilized track camera as well.

And that happened after 2-3 races in season? Ok

No one is talking about races, we are talking about that specific video comparing rear wings that was posted in this thread (and that you commented about).

That video is obviously showing McLaren camera stabilizing for the background while others are stabilizing the foreground (body). Why is that I have no idea, but it is a fact.

Can't compare things that are stabilized in a different fashion.

[bluechris]

McLaren camera is stabilizing the background/track. So the car shakes/moves around while the road is stable. Other cameras seem to stabilize the car and the track shakes. Not sure if this is done digitally or the camera is just that stable on the car, but McLaren one is definitely digitally stabilized so the track doesn't shake. It's quite obvious if you watch the track/white lines.

Why is that, no idea? Maybe it's just a different spec camera? Maybe other teams (not in the comparison) have this stabilized track camera as well.

And that happened after 2-3 races in season? Ok

No one is talking about races, we are talking about that specific video comparing rear wings that was posted in this thread (and that you commented about).

That video is obviously showing McLaren camera stabilizing for the background while others are stabilizing the foreground (body). Why is that I have no idea, but it is a fact.

Can't compare things that are stabilized in a different fashion.

What is so difficult to understand or you try to save them for your personal reasons?
What i said it's crystal clear. In 1st races the same camera was super stable and after all the fuzz, the camera is loose and you cannot see clearly their flexing.
See Melbourne is you don't believe what i say.

https://x.com/McLarenF1_News/status/1901662677522399675

Japan
https://g.co/kgs/GGCVq7S

I don't remember the race exactly when the camera "updated" but it's something, don't you think?

[SiLo]

And that happened after 2-3 races in season? Ok

No one is talking about races, we are talking about that specific video comparing rear wings that was posted in this thread (and that you commented about).

That video is obviously showing McLaren camera stabilizing for the background while others are stabilizing the foreground (body). Why is that I have no idea, but it is a fact.

Can't compare things that are stabilized in a different fashion.

What is so difficult to understand or you try to save them for your personal reasons?
What i said it's crystal clear. In 1st races the same camera was super stable and after all the fuzz, the camera is loose and you cannot see clearly their flexing.
See Melbourne is you don't believe what i say.

https://x.com/McLarenF1_News/status/1901662677522399675

Japan
https://g.co/kgs/GGCVq7S

I don't remember the race exactly when the camera "updated" but it's something, don't you think?

Neither of these shots are stabilised, so some conclusions can be drawn. I was just pointing out that the specific video previously shared had background stabilised video, so you cannot infer any flex from it because the camera was not focused on a the car in a static manner. It might have just been done in post so the video could be shared online.

I'm not really sure what you are arguing here, you've missed the point of my post entirely. Thank you for sharing extra videos, they are helpful.

[bluechris]

No one is talking about races, we are talking about that specific video comparing rear wings that was posted in this thread (and that you commented about).

That video is obviously showing McLaren camera stabilizing for the background while others are stabilizing the foreground (body). Why is that I have no idea, but it is a fact.

Can't compare things that are stabilized in a different fashion.

What is so difficult to understand or you try to save them for your personal reasons?
What i said it's crystal clear. In 1st races the same camera was super stable and after all the fuzz, the camera is loose and you cannot see clearly their flexing.
See Melbourne is you don't believe what i say.

https://x.com/McLarenF1_News/status/1901662677522399675

Japan
https://g.co/kgs/GGCVq7S

I don't remember the race exactly when the camera "updated" but it's something, don't you think?

Neither of these shots are stabilised, so some conclusions can be drawn. I was just pointing out that the specific video previously shared had background stabilised video, so you cannot infer any flex from it because the camera was not focused on a the car in a static manner. It might have just been done in post so the video could be shared online.

I'm not really sure what you are arguing here, you've missed the point of my post entirely. Thank you for sharing extra videos, they are helpful.

I dont understant the stabilize that you say. To me its crystal clear, in the 1st races the camera was super solid fixed on a strong point, later the camera is shaking... thats all, there is no magic here and the cameras are the same as hardware.

[SiLo]

What is so difficult to understand or you try to save them for your personal reasons?
What i said it's crystal clear. In 1st races the same camera was super stable and after all the fuzz, the camera is loose and you cannot see clearly their flexing.
See Melbourne is you don't believe what i say.

https://x.com/McLarenF1_News/status/1901662677522399675

Japan
https://g.co/kgs/GGCVq7S

I don't remember the race exactly when the camera "updated" but it's something, don't you think?

Neither of these shots are stabilised, so some conclusions can be drawn. I was just pointing out that the specific video previously shared had background stabilised video, so you cannot infer any flex from it because the camera was not focused on a the car in a static manner. It might have just been done in post so the video could be shared online.

I'm not really sure what you are arguing here, you've missed the point of my post entirely. Thank you for sharing extra videos, they are helpful.

I dont understant the stabilize that you say. To me its crystal clear, in the 1st races the camera was super solid fixed on a strong point, later the camera is shaking... thats all, there is no magic here and the cameras are the same as hardware.

In software after the video is downloaded from the car, video editing has taken place to stabilise the video for the background, so the horizon, track and surrounding elements are more stable. Because the camera is fixed to the car and is static, this then makes it look like the car is moving up and down a lot, when in reality it's not.