No sense of speed in F1 camera work

No sense of speed in F1 camera work

Author
Discussion

wolfracesonic

Original Poster:

7,370 posts

133 months

Saturday 22nd March 2014
quotequote all
Not sure if right forum but........Is it just me who gets no sense of speed when watching F1 races on TV? The cars could be cornering at 50mph for all I can ever make out, they only seem to look fast(or slow) when trundling round after Bernd in the safety car. This just dawned on me after watching some clips of the Bergrennen hillclimb on Youtube, the sense of speed is palpable, especially from some of the single seaters and Radical type machines. What do you think, or is it just me?

Codswallop

5,252 posts

200 months

Saturday 22nd March 2014
quotequote all
I agree. No sense of speed on most tracks (Monaco and Canada exempted imo).

I believe it's an unfortunate side effect of having extremely wide tracks with several miles of run off either side. Usually means the cameras are mounted far away, and combined with nothing close to the track to aid perspective, sense of speed is lost.

It's like doing 60mph on a motorway versus a country road - it's the same speed, but when you have the scenery blurring past right next to you, it feels much, much faster on the country road.

thetrash

1,848 posts

212 months

Saturday 22nd March 2014
quotequote all
You have to watch lower level cars round the same track to appreciate the speed of the F1 cars.

Mobile Chicane

21,083 posts

218 months

Saturday 22nd March 2014
quotequote all
thetrash said:
You have to watch lower level cars round the same track to appreciate the speed of the F1 cars.
Exactly this. It's only when I started driving these tracks myself that F1 made any sense at all.

Censorious

15,169 posts

240 months

Saturday 22nd March 2014
quotequote all
Agreed.

It's because of the panning and zoom functions, makes it look slow.

vescaegg

26,552 posts

173 months

Saturday 22nd March 2014
quotequote all
This truly highlights the difference between a very fast car, and an F1 car.

Ridiculous.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=K2cNqaPSHv0

technoluddite

143 posts

223 months

Saturday 22nd March 2014
quotequote all
vescaegg said:
This truly highlights the difference between a very fast car, and an F1 car.

Ridiculous.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=K2cNqaPSHv0
That clip also shows the problem with the modern F1 filming style: close cropped, track and zoom kills all notion of speed. In contrast, that clip, with a static, fixed zoom clearly show hows fast the cars are, because the car is passing /through/ the shot.

The insistence of having the car effectively static within the frame at all times (presumably sop we can clearly see the sponsor logos) kills the sensation of spped. Footage from the 80s and early 90s shows the speed to greater effect because, even in tracking shots, the zoom didn't maintain the size of the car within the frame to such a degree, so you could the car moving towards and away from the camera.

glazbagun

14,430 posts

203 months

Saturday 22nd March 2014
quotequote all
Yeah I've often wondered why F1 doesn't feature more static cameras dotted around to give viewers some idea of the spectacle they're witnessing.

zac510

5,546 posts

212 months

Saturday 22nd March 2014
quotequote all
Also the onboard cameras seemed to have no damping and this gives a different impression of the speed of the lap. Arguably modern laps are faster but people think the drivers are doing it easily because the cameras are so well damped.

MGJohn

10,203 posts

189 months

Sunday 23rd March 2014
quotequote all
This is nothing new. Always been that way.

Not just Motor Racing either. Many televised sporting events create this false impression. Even horse racing. Stand at Tattenham Corner as the Derby field pass by and the actual speed they are travelling at can only be appreciated that way. Unbelievably fast for the first time observer at Epsom Downs or .... Silverstone. You will not believe the speed which two dimensional TV footage can never truly convey to the viewer.

Better still, standing on the footbridge at places like Clearways or Mallory Park in the 1960s as a Grand Prix Honda, MV-Agusta, Norton or Gilera machines approach and pass directly underneath you at full bore is a fantastic experience the TV cameras can never reproduce. Same Clearways footbridge as an F1 car passes underneath is another unforgettable experience. Mind you, the clear throated megaphone individual exhaust pipes of those bikes and some of the cars back then is, for numerous reasons, a noise few have experienced in more recent decades.

Nothing stays the same.

In closing, I enjoy the new F1 cars. The sight, sounds and performance. Yes, even after only one race. OK, the noise is not the same but to this observer's eyes and ears, just as interesting and enjoyable as all those cars in past formulae. That actual hardware and technology of the current formula cars is far more interesting than that of the stale and static formula which ended in in 2013 after one or two too many years without change.

Yes, a change can be a refreshing one in my books. This one certainly is.

anonymous-user

60 months

Sunday 23rd March 2014
quotequote all
vescaegg said:
This truly highlights the difference between a very fast car, and an F1 car.

Ridiculous.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=K2cNqaPSHv0
The YouTube description is wrong in this instance, they aren't GT cars on the left, it's a trackday. But the speed difference is still mind blowing to witness side by side.

DHB07

80 posts

127 months

Thursday 27th March 2014
quotequote all
I was jsut thinking about this the other day whilst watching some "Classics" on Sky F1.

Helicopter footage was used for at least 25% of the footage. You can see the gaps closing under braking and the small differences in line choice. You can work out the angle of the corners too, and most of all, see the speed they're carrying. So much better to watch!

P.S. That Eau Rouge footage is fantastic!

andyps

7,817 posts

288 months

Friday 28th March 2014
quotequote all
One place where the cornering speed of the cars does often show is at the slowest track on the calendar - Monaco. It may be partly because of the closeness of the barrier but the shot which is generally shown at some point in the race of the cars flicking around the corners after the tunnel and round the swimming pool really highlight how rapidly they change direction.

It is when you are standing trackside somewhere like Hangar Straight just before Stowe that you can really see the speed, and also the incredible braking capability of an F1 car.

Amirhussain

11,496 posts

169 months

Friday 28th March 2014
quotequote all
Mac. said:
vescaegg said:
This truly highlights the difference between a very fast car, and an F1 car.

Ridiculous.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=K2cNqaPSHv0
The YouTube description is wrong in this instance, they aren't GT cars on the left, it's a trackday. But the speed difference is still mind blowing to witness side by side.
I could watch the F1 cars all day....

350Matt

3,756 posts

285 months

Friday 28th March 2014
quotequote all
didn't one of the german track have a camera on motored rails on one of the corners so it could knack oorf at an impressive rate?
I remember thinking at the time what great camera angle it gave and a real impression of speed

is this still in use?

rufusruffcutt

1,542 posts

211 months

Friday 28th March 2014
quotequote all
350Matt said:
didn't one of the german track have a camera on motored rails on one of the corners so it could knack oorf at an impressive rate?
I remember thinking at the time what great camera angle it gave and a real impression of speed

is this still in use?
Yes it was Hockenheim, from the exit of the hairpin at turn 6. Not sure if they still use it. Silverstone had a good one that flew over the top of Brooklands also.

thechosenfamily

332 posts

161 months

Friday 28th March 2014
quotequote all
I have a good mate who is a TV camera man and we discussed this some time back.

There are a couple of reasons for this.

1. The speed and range of movement required to pan an F1 car on a modern TV camera would create nausea to a viewer and in extreme cases cause the camera man to loose his balance through getting disorientated looking into the viewer, I believe this happened at a DTM race at Brands Hatch once much to the amusement of the crowd.

2. You can only have so many cameras to a track and they need to cover as much as possible with that number, hence the number of long shots and focus pulls.

I do agree though that a few more static cameras could help here though. its the only way NASCAR sees exciting sometimes.

Alicatt1

805 posts

201 months

Friday 28th March 2014
quotequote all
DHB07 said:
P.S. That Eau Rouge footage is fantastic!
Sitting at La Source and feeling the F1 cars accelerate down to Eau Rouge cloud9

Driving down from La Source to Eau Rouge in a road car looking at how steep the climb up is eek

Spa is a wonderful place to be smile

FiremanRob

9 posts

128 months

Friday 28th March 2014
quotequote all
On some of those desert like tracks, the shots look just like you would see on any F1 game on your xbox or the like.

PabloTheOrange

1,073 posts

181 months

Friday 28th March 2014
quotequote all
Sometimes on the ovals you'll see a camera stay still instead of panning and have the cars whizz past at whatever speed (usually in the range of 150-200 mph). Problem is this requires being close to the track and apart from street circuits (where the speed is generally lower so less effect) I can't think of many situations this'd be appropriate bar maybe Abbey at Silverstone?

ETA, also helps if there a bunch of them together, single cars passing by gives an impression of speed, but not necessarily impressiveness!