A Little Hustle and Bustle

[JimFox]

After the sunset on New Years Day in Huntington Beach California, I took my cameras from the beach and set them up on the pier for some Timelapse goodness.

The lighting on the pier at night was pretty wonky, and while I color corrected it to look decent, I decided B&W might just be the way to go.

So this is the same timelapse repeated in here. The timelapse was done in camera with a 1 sec gap. The photos were shot at 1/50th of a sec.

The first timelapse is played at 100% speed as it was compiled in camera. After the transition about 20 secs in, I repeated the same video, but slowed it down by 50% in Movavi. I am kind of leaning towards liking the second version of the timelapse better. It feels like they are skating almost. The first one at 100%, it's almost like the people are moving too fast.

So I would be interested in everyone's thoughts on this. Since timelapse is purely subjective, there is no right or wrong speed I think. Because it can be affected by the gap between photos chosen by the photographer. And then also in the video editor, the photographer can choose what speed to have the final video play at.

All comments are welcome,

Jim

 

[Ben Egbert]

I prefer the second one and might slow it down even more.

I can share and like the way I post Youtube, but not the way you do.

 

[JimFox]

I prefer the second one and might slow it down even more.

I can share and like the way I post Youtube, but not the way you do.

Thanks Ben, I appreciate that.

What do you mean? Having the video embedded into the post where you can actually see the video itself I think is to be preferred over just seeing a blind link like yours have been. Or did I misunderstand what you meant?

 

[Ben Egbert]

You are correct, I agree I would prefer the embedded version, but it does not allow share or like. The link takes you to Youtube where those features are available. Am I wrong? Give it a test?

 

[JimFox]

It looks like you have to click on the view on Youtube button to get the regular Share and Like options for YouTube itself. So you are correct.

Let's see you embed your next timelapse like mine are so you can see it in the post.

 

[Ben Egbert]

Here is a sharable link

 

[JimFox]

That looks so much nicer Ben then just a text link. I would suggest to keep posting yours that way.

 

[Ben Egbert]

Can you share or like this version?

 

[JimFox]

I can, if I click on the words YouTube at the bottom of your video. If I just click on the full screen icon in the lower right I can't.

In full screen mode, mine as the Share button in the upper right, but yours in full screen as a Copy Link button instead.

How are you getting link that you are embedding here?

Maybe it doesn't matter that much. The only way to Like the video is to have clicked on the words YouTube so you actually go to YouTube to view it.

 

[Ben Egbert]

If I click on the Youtube icon, it goes full screen but does not show any like buttons and share does not work. But when I click again on the Youtube Icon, it goes back the embedded version.

The way I did the embedded version was to open Youtube and navigate to the video and click the copy video link in the double boxes.

 

[JimFox]

If I click on the Youtube icon, it goes full screen but does not show any like buttons and share does not work. But when I click again on the Youtube Icon, it goes back the embedded version.

The way I did the embedded version was to open Youtube and navigate to the video and click the copy video link in the double boxes.

It's odd that it seems to be reacting differently for us. It's probably not a big deal at this point, the important thing is to have it being able to be seen in the posts here in FocalWorld and not just a text link.

 

[Ben Egbert]

Gotcha, I will use this method.