Quote from: increasingdifficulty on June 06, 2017, 03:17

Not many buyers use a full 10 seconds of a hyperlapse. In fact, 2 seconds is more normal.

10 seconds is often not even practically possible, and adds so much time, but I would aim for 6 seconds at 24 fps = 144 images at least. Most agencies require a minimum of 5 seconds.

I usually do at least 160 images so I have some room to edit. Of course, if the situation lends itself to longer sequences with not much extra hassle, I do that.

I would rather give them 10 seconds so they have a "menu" to choose from...picking a part of that clip that best fits their needs.  I've been getting more into time lapse and all the workshops I take the instructors want only short clips...5-10 seconds.  It's hard to break my rules of uploading 20 second clips. A 20 second time lapse can take 30 minutes to 5 hours depending on what time of day you shoot.  Anyhow, just my 2 cents on duration.  Interestingly, if you walk into Costco to the TV section, most of the flagship TV's are playing time laps clips, and most are doing 3-5 second clips them move on to a new clip.  Basically a big B-roll kind of thing with 3-5 sec clips.

Timelapses and hyperlapses are not really comparable. The work that goes into a hyperlapse is more than 10-50 times as time consuming compared to just a timelapse. Very few locations are ideal for hyperlapses compared to timelapses. You need lots of space, and that space needs to be set up so that you can move in a perfect line or arc over a great distance. The post processing is very time consuming and at times you just have to throw away the project because it just doesn't work.

Come back when you've tried to do 10-20 hyperlapses with post processing and I'm sure you'll have a different opinion. 

But of course, if there's not much extra work and it's practically possible, it's always easier to shorten than to lengthen...

Well, you would use a tripod unless there are severe micro vibrations and you want/need a slow shutter speed.

There's a guy who shoots hyperlapses from boats / ferries hand held and the results are very good. Regardless, if I was going to use slow shutter speeds, I would definitely be using a tripod.

I did quite a few hyperlapses from boats on the river Thames in London.
The big problem is when some other boat goes through and makes big waves. It is a nightmare to fix in post, as the whole thing moves in all directions

One night, I was doing a hyperlapse of a church in my city. This church was illuminated by flood lighting. I had been shooting away for what seemed like hours - carefully moving the tripod step by step. Each individual shot was a long exposure so that it extended the duration of the shoot by quite a significant degree. When I was less than half way through shooting, the church's lighting was turned off. Woops - I didn't see that coming (I just assumed it would stay lit all night.) At that point, the only thing I could do was pack up and go home.

Thats a cool timelapse.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk