time-lapse

nho

nho

Well-known member
say I have footage of a clock, it's 30 minutes of just the clock. It will only allow me to increase the video speed so much until it won't let me anymore. Is there any way to bypass this so I can lapse as fast as I want to? only let's me take 30 minutes and bring it to about 10 minutes :\
 
Tools>Scripting>Render Image Sequence. It'll render a series of stills; if you set the step time to 3, it should give you about ten minutes' worth. You'll have to assemble the still pics on the timeline, but you can do that easily enough by going to File>Import, choosing the first pic, then checking "Open image sequence" at the bottom of the dialog box.
 
There are two ways to speed up a clip - the Velocity Envelope and the Playback Rate. You should be able to get it down to 10 minutes with either one. The velocity envelope will go 3x. So a 30 minute timeline at 3x would be 10 minutes. The Playback Rate can be use for up to 4x. So a 30 minute timeline could be dropped to 7.5 minutes. You can use BOTH to get up to 12x so a 30 minute timeline would be dropped to 2.5 minutes.
 
Funny, I was just about to post that same question... Will try the velocity envelope, have never heard of it before. Guess I need to spend a little quality time with my vegas Manual ;)
 
think you may have misunderstood. I was saying that it ONLY lets me bring it to 10 minutes. I want a 30 minute clip down to like 10 seconds lol. is that possible?
 
nho said:
think you may have misunderstood. I was saying that it ONLY lets me bring it to 10 minutes. I want a 30 minute clip down to like 10 seconds lol. is that possible?
Click to expand...

Using the two methods combined as I described will get you down to 2.5 minutes (so you can go significantly farther than "ONLY down to 10 minutes"). If you render that out, apply both again, you will be down to 12.5 seconds. If that's still not far enough, render it out again and you'd be able to go down to almost 1 second the third time.
 
I agree that multiple passes is a way to go. I've done it that way.

The reason I suggest using an image sequence is because you can do it one step and there will be no generational loss.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top