how much of TV content these days is sped up, I mean it’s easy enough to put together advertisements and change the speed and have pitch remain the same. If you look away and just listen and think about it there’s compression of the content.

what’s the tricks with video, do you drop frames and repeat some, I suppose the quick changes from different angles or whatever makes it easier.

if a lot of content is sped up, (not sure maybe ‘time-compressed’ or content-compression is the right term), then what is the effects on viewers (other than apparently getting more in less time)

or are a lot of the idiots on TV on speed or something, or is TV the new speed.

or am I just just getting old and slow, and los/t/ing my mind.

> is TV the new speed

Flickering attracts attention, even when the flickering is so fast that it’s not consciously visible. I’d like to see an MRI study comparing the brain scans of a person seeing seeing two seemingly identical images – one on a photography and one on a TV screen. I’d lay good odds that the one on the TV screen is associated with a much higher level of brain activity.

I can’t watch many movies in the cinema because the flickering is awful. So bad that I can easily count the frames during rapid motion such as dancing.

> what’s the tricks with video, do you drop frames and repeat some

Don’t think so. They have more and more annoying scene cuts.

I have aspergers and have sensitive hearing

TV sounds awful and so does FM radio

I dont watch any TV

CrazyNeutrino said:

I have aspergers and have sensitive hearing

TV sounds awful and so does FM radio

I dont watch any TV

I eat asparagus but my hearing is such that movie and TV soundtracks are incomprehesible to my ear.

If you’re referring to the rapid cuts and deleted content as found in the Bourne movie’s fight scenes, I think the technique worked although it is being pushed to the limit. Otherwise, some movie’s flashy editing is a bit over-done.

We are certainly seeing higher and higher edit rates or “content compression” on the whole.

There is a discussion here – http://www.empireonline.com/forum/printable.asp?m=1679785

WRT cinema, there is a transition (no pun) from frame rates of 24p to 48p going on. But my main gripe is with excessive volume of the sound in most movies.

Ian said:

my main gripe is with excessive volume of the sound in most movies.

Mine too. One could be excused for thinking that with the available tech, sound engineers could make the voices more audible than the rest.

one thing I have observed with TV is that there are no natural periods of silence

every channel is a wall of noise, 24 hours X 7 days of noise

and the content is crap

roughbarked said:

Ian said:

my main gripe is with excessive volume of the sound in most movies.

Mine too. One could be excused for thinking that with the available tech, sound engineers could make the voices more audible than the rest.

Yeah, that too.

Supposedly in regards to ads they aren’t allowed to make them louder than the tv show but they can make the entire ad as loud as the loudest parts in tv and movies

Cymek said:

Supposedly in regards to ads they aren’t allowed to make them louder than the tv show but they can make the entire ad as loud as the loudest parts in tv and movies

Maybe so but that is the main reason why I cannot watch commercial TV.

So they wasted their time on me.

roughbarked said:

Cymek said:

Supposedly in regards to ads they aren’t allowed to make them louder than the tv show but they can make the entire ad as loud as the loudest parts in tv and movies

Maybe so but that is the main reason why I cannot watch commercial TV.

So they wasted their time on me.

I’d be interested in just how effective tv advertising is nowadays, you can easily fast forward them if you pause live tv and the same if you record the show. They are the bread and butter for the stations but I wonder if advertisers get the same value for money as they did before all the PVR devices. Some ads are so annoying they could actually annoy you enough to not buy the product

a lot of advertisements the speed (tempo) is increased and pitch remains normal. I’ve played with many audio tracks taking them down in speed (blues tracks), explored the limits, and sometimes messed around with increasing the tempo.

generally about a -3% is no problem, and just rarely i’ve found as much as 15% to be not just alright but an improvement (for me), for example “Little Willie – Otis Taylor(15percent slower leveled etc)” that is what the file is called. I just checked that file put it through Audacity +15% and compared it with the youtube version.

to cram more into advertizements there seems to be a lot of this going on, but I think too some TV programs, which means manipulations of moving images involving the audience’s perceptions and feelings of what is natural movement, or acceptable and probably pleasurable/entertaining (unnatural) movement.

I guess there are a lot of tricks they use, and there’d be some overlap with compression algorithms used with digital TV these days which can push say five channels down one carrier. They cut a lot of data out, it’s made redundant and for this it is patched up some how to make it look alright, sometimes it doesn’t.

I mean way back with steve austin in six milion dollar man viewers got accustomed to him going slow and we all knew he was meant to be understood to be going really fast, and I felt he was going really fast when running after a speeding car, and much later there was the matrix. That involves slow = fast.

I’m wondering about the tricks to make faster (more crammed) content look, appear or feel acceptable.

anyway, my interest more is of how film and TV may influence human brains and make us both ‘hungry’ and oblivious to the speed of the cramming.

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

Cymek said:

Supposedly in regards to ads they aren’t allowed to make them louder than the tv show but they can make the entire ad as loud as the loudest parts in tv and movies

Maybe so but that is the main reason why I cannot watch commercial TV.

So they wasted their time on me.

I’d be interested in just how effective tv advertising is nowadays, you can easily fast forward them if you pause live tv and the same if you record the show. They are the bread and butter for the stations but I wonder if advertisers get the same value for money as they did before all the PVR devices. Some ads are so annoying they could actually annoy you enough to not buy the product

Yeah done that before.

bob(from black rock) said:

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

Maybe so but that is the main reason why I cannot watch commercial TV.

So they wasted their time on me.

I’d be interested in just how effective tv advertising is nowadays, you can easily fast forward them if you pause live tv and the same if you record the show. They are the bread and butter for the stations but I wonder if advertisers get the same value for money as they did before all the PVR devices. Some ads are so annoying they could actually annoy you enough to not buy the product

Yeah done that before.

Some ads are so annoying they could actually annoy you enough to not buy the product

I wonder if they will research that one?

CrazyNeutrino said:

bob(from black rock) said:

Cymek said:

I’d be interested in just how effective tv advertising is nowadays, you can easily fast forward them if you pause live tv and the same if you record the show. They are the bread and butter for the stations but I wonder if advertisers get the same value for money as they did before all the PVR devices. Some ads are so annoying they could actually annoy you enough to not buy the product

Yeah done that before.

Some ads are so annoying they could actually annoy you enough to not buy the product

I wonder if they will research that one?

Years and years past they put subliminal messages in to pull you back on track.

• I’d be interested in just how effective tv advertising is nowadays, you can easily fast forward them if you pause live tv and the same if you record the show.

I would think that a good advertiser would aim to make ads that either conveys the message clearly, even while in fast forward mode, or are so interesting they tempt you to stop fast forwarding to see what is going on. After all, you have to be watching the screen to fast forward…

furious said:

• I’d be interested in just how effective tv advertising is nowadays, you can easily fast forward them if you pause live tv and the same if you record the show.

I would think that a good advertiser would aim to make ads that either conveys the message clearly, even while in fast forward mode, or are so interesting they tempt you to stop fast forwarding to see what is going on. After all, you have to be watching the screen to fast forward…

Products especially phones use sneaky methods to get people interested, oh look this tech site got hold of leaked photos of the new iphone someone “left behind” in a local Macdonald, yeah I’m sure.

transition said:

a lot of advertisements the speed (tempo) is increased and pitch remains normal. I’ve played with many audio tracks taking them down in speed (blues tracks), explored the limits, and sometimes messed around with increasing the tempo.

generally about a -3% is no problem, and just rarely i’ve found as much as 15% to be not just alright but an improvement (for me), for example “Little Willie – Otis Taylor(15percent slower leveled etc)” that is what the file is called. I just checked that file put it through Audacity +15% and compared it with the youtube version.

to cram more into advertizements there seems to be a lot of this going on, but I think too some TV programs, which means manipulations of moving images involving the audience’s perceptions and feelings of what is natural movement, or acceptable and probably pleasurable/entertaining (unnatural) movement.

I guess there are a lot of tricks they use …,

I’m wondering about the tricks to make faster (more crammed) content look, appear or feel acceptable.

anyway, my interest more is of how film and TV may influence human brains and make us both ‘hungry’ and oblivious to the speed of the cramming.

Years ago, when commercial radio stations played vinyl records (remember those?), they would quite often play the 45 rpm singles at 47 or 48 rpm.

This raised the pitch and tempo of each track by just a small amount. The effect was to make you, the listener, think that the music the station played was somehow ‘brighter’ than if you played the same record at home and, therefore, you’d keep listening to the station.

The other effect was that, over the course of a day, quite a few seconds could be gained, which meant they could squeeze more ads in.

CrazyNeutrino said:

one thing I have observed with TV is that there are no natural periods of silence

every channel is a wall of noise, 24 hours X 7 days of noise

and the content is crap

There is a similar concept in FM radio broadcasting, where any period of silence is known as “dead air”. The phrase usually refers to broadcast silence caused by technical problems, but also applies to any other period of broadcast silence, such as when the announcers stop talking (for example) for longer than the time it takes to take a breath. Dead air is considered equivalent to a cardinal sin in radio broadcasting, as it seriously (and irrationally) perturbs the majority of the audience.