Why I don't speed my videos up

[bugo]

Because sped up videos make me dizzy.  I did speed up my Tisdale Parkway/Gilcrease Expressway video to double speed, but that's because the video was longer than 10 minutes and I wanted to put it up on the 'pube.  And besides, videos in real time are more realistic than 4x videos.

[Alex]

I don't care much for the sped up videos, but understand why people go that route. I like detail and don't get that with the high-speed imagery...

[agentsteel53]

I'm processing a Jeff Royston video from 1985 and the only way I can keep from falling asleep at 1x speed is by noting the time stamps for when there are quality signs to be found... and by posting to the board at the same time!



excellent!  now to extract more

[Bryant5493]

When I first started making my vids, I didn't like the sped up look. But it's grown on me now. It works best for long tours. Short tours can be done regular speed.


Be well,

Bryant

[Freewayjim]

Personally I think they are boring as hell in real-time speed which is why I do speed them up.

[Chris]

Me too, and I don't like 8+ minutes videos either, which means real-time videos can only be a couple of miles long. Although some people speed it up to like 8x, that's way too much imo. Anything around 4x is best, somewhat slower in very interesting locations (like a view on skylines or mountains).

[huskeroadgeek]

I recently found a video on youtube that had film of a trip somebody took in the 70s in Colorado and I was initially excited because I like watching old road videos. But I was disappointed when I watched it because it was sped up so fast that it was impossible to read any of the signs or for that matter to even tell exactly what area the video covered. I'm fine with sped up videos as long as it's to a level that signs are still readable.

[Truvelo]

Personally I think they are boring as hell in real-time speed which is why I do speed them up.

Yes, I find that as well although in some cases it does mean things like signs can be read easily. I made some videos back in 1999 using an old 8mm analog camcorder. This one is in real-time. The first 15 seconds are boring but it becomes more interesting. File size 6.4MB (or 6,4MB for Chris )

....But I was disappointed when I watched it because it was sped up so fast that it was impossible to read any of the signs or for that matter to even tell exactly what area the video covered. I'm fine with sped up videos as long as it's to a level that signs are still readable.

That's the compromise you have to make. Either the video is boring or you speed it up but miss out on fine details when you want to freeze the video. A primary reason years ago to speed up videos, especially back in the days of slow internet connections, is to reduce the file size. A 4x speeded up video uses only 1/4 of the number of frames if the frame rate remains the same. This video is 4x and I ask anyone to try and pause the video and read any of the signs. File size 18.2MB. Imagine the file size this would be if it was 25fps real-time.

[BigMattFromTexas]

Haha, I don't have videos, so I don't speed anything up, but I prefer normal speed, and if their speed up, I don't like them like über fast...
BigMatt

[Freewayjim]

Haha, I don't have videos, so I don't speed anything up, but I prefer normal speed, and if their speed up, I don't like them like über fast...
BigMatt

I agree, uber-fast is not enjoyable, unless it's for some type of effect (depending what that is of course). 3.5x to 4.2x seems to be the sweet spot although I will go slower (2x-3x) on street tours and non freeway videos. Sometimes I'll speed it up a tick faster to make it sync with the music better but not if I can help it.