They won't change it. The reason they have it more zoomed in is to give the sponsorships on the car/halo more screen presence to make more money off of it. It's unfortunate, but a reality.
Yeah static front cameras in a 1.2 km straight till the car arrives to the corner where they actually lowered their speed by 200km/h and then you see the car from a different angle but ofc, they are now doing 100 instead of 340, they really need to improve broadcast shots with all the resources they have in hands
It's not the low angle, is the use of very long lenses (somehow unavoidable, as you are filming from outside the track and the end of the straight). I would just remove that shot completely, subsitute with a lateral one or, even better, elicopter camera.
@@ThyAxeman i would say stand even further back and use an even longer lens for a tighter shot without playing with the zoom will give a sense of speed especially when you have it framed in a way that cars come in and out of the frame quickly instead of tracking it like out of a corner or over a hill
@@SpektrikMusic yes, super tight frame with an angle would be good as well. Maybe hard to do on some circuits due to surrounding areas (I'm thinking Monza's straights, do not have a lot of places where you could place a camera for such a shot).
I think it should be the last grasp to make them look fast. It's better for editing and comparing with less vibrations etc. And can cause more confusions if the track is too bumpy
@@is_fpr5f1 YES! I always remember seeing people believing that the cars from the 80's were faster because of the onboard cameras... When actually the change here weren't slower cars but faster cars and more advanced cameras...
Imagine if it didn't have all the tech that it has now. The camera shaking and audio that is synced up. You can see the vibrations and the raw footage of the car
Been crying out for static cameras for years. Even if it only makes up 2-5% of the total viewership time, it would make a HUGE difference. Especially at the likes of key moments such as the start of the race. Take Suzuka for example, put a static camera half way between turn 1 and 2 up in the stands so you can get a full view of the race start - grid, first turn and then into start of the S's. Turn 1 is where a lot of overtakes happen as well, absolute dive-bombs down there. People wouldn't know what hit em' and it would give you a better view of the race, and feel like you're actually there sitting in the stands.
there was a shot last year when Sainz was speeding down the straight away at Bahrain. It was filmed by a mostly stationary camera. It was the first time in 2 years of watching F1 that I went "holy crap theyre gong fast, id shit myself at that speed" Ireally hope they work on these things, stop making it look SO perfectly cinematic.
There was a shot I remember from one of the races at the back end of the calendar - it might have been Bahrain, where the camera held still on the empty last couple hundred metres of the straight and then picked up the cars as they appeared in frame and followed them to the corner - one of the only shots that has really stuck with me
@@zamin6060 yeah reminds me of Sainz and Leclerc going side by side into turn 1, they looked flippin quick. Miss when F1 looked fast and hope they had a good look at this video
Fully agree. I've done some research on this and i found the exact same effects. When in games the wide FOV is bad, you as a driver need 1:1 when it comes to visual feedback, things can't look further away from one angle and closer on the other. In games large FOV extends the appearance of straights, it also makes very easy to hit braking markers. But, turning in is more difficult and the road appears to be much narrower, making it hard to position yourself correctly But.. in replays.. things change. Once you are not in control, not in the moment, it looks slower than it did from the cockpit view, at flat projection. Increasing FOV and decreasing stability, increasing the length of the shutter and running at 25FPS (can be interpolated to 60Hz) increases motion blur. The so called "sports mode", fast shutter speeds and high framerate is not always the best choice. Things that move very fast should have motion blur to separate them from things that are not moving fast in relation to the camera.
I totally agree! Sport mode on televisions is no helping. I think that image stabilization is another thing to have in mind, in the old onboards you see the camera shaking (the whole car shaking) and that gives a raw/on the limit sensation. In the nowadays broadcast I miss a lot some old camera angles like the lovely side cockpit camera from 2005 season with a wide angle that you can see drivers hands and head in the same frame and also the front wing camera. Those two missing angles should comeback!
“Sport mode” really isn’t necessary when slow motion cameras exist. Let those cameras use the high shutter speed to show off the cars/athletes in slow motion.
@@Willie_Pete_Was_Here It's sad but the high fps conversion on tv's is an aesthetic trend. The worst thing is that regular people love to watch their movies and series totally altered by their tv's. Its a total lack of respect for the directors of photography and everyone who make the films. It kills the original vibe and look of the film... and with racing sports happens that they look slow on high speeds...
@@R3DCODE Gaming at low fps is horrible. Movies shot on film, faked to 50fps looks also horrible. I think netflix(not the tv itself) does this to every movie, yuck.
Another reason why the 360" cam makes it look faster is because it's closer to the ground. That's why I really like the nose cam for example. Also I'd much rather see way more Onboard even in the current format. It's just so much more exciting than the "always perfectly centered" Cam from 100m away.
They're starting to improve it slowly, like the new gyroscopic stabilized outboard camera, holy fffff is that so good to watch especially on non straight, curving parts of the track
3:43 FYI: The 360 degree camera cannot be used live as it is recorded to an SD card on the car, and not hooked up to any broadcast systems. Everything else in this video is ace though, well done 🙂
@@_wups2923 That would be good 🙂 I shared your video on my community feed here by the way, hopefully a few of my subscribers came over. Make more of these 🙂
@@yabdifootballchallenges7981 360 footage requires a lot of communication bandwidth to be transmitted and on top of that, a lot of processing power at the broadcast station to actually render it
In addition to the issues you correctly pointed out, I also think the stabilisation is so strong on the on-board cameras, that it removes the raw bumps and shakes a little too much. In addition, I wonder if the higher framerate actually makes the footage look a bit to smooth too; with the background lacking motion blur. Great video.
This seems like a very simple solution that can easily be added/changed to the broadcast, rather than changing the race format/regulation. Love those static camera shots
That happened to me but with monaco, I saw a video comparison of TV Shots and from people on the apartaments and Oh my god they Fly on those narrow streets.
Nice point of view, and it totally makes sense to have still shots so you can see the speed of the car passing by instead of having it sit still on the frame
Commenting for the TH-cam algorithm since I think this is such an important topic that I have thought of, and said before, but never seen discussed publicly
I really liked this video and how you presented it 1: you explained what makes f1 cars not look slower despite being faster 2: you offered a very nice easy solution 3: you were totally objectively in sharing your point of view 4: you werent toxic at ll unlike a lot of the current f1 fanbase who complain about the sport just because Edit: 5: lets not forget the pure *quality* of this video
Bravo! I wanted to add that there are only two senses that appeal to the viewer on TV; sight and sound. The other way to give the sense of speed is the sound of the cars. Your ears also play a part in the way your brain processes the speed of an object. I'm sure we've all seen (or heard) that video of the Mazda 747B flying down the straight. The F1 cars of old injected the pedal movements of the driver directly into your brain. You could hear the modulation and all out power of the cars which helped to display the absolute wow factor those cars had. Thank you for coming to my Ted-talk
Yeah, you are totally right! My wife didn't understood at first why I do watch F1 racing on TV, because she thought that those cars are slow and just driving around a "circle". I don't blame her for that! So I showed her older footage, onbard footage with speed-graphics, compare videos like (regular BMW vs. F1 car) and the old, but mighty "Speed Comparison: GT vs. F1"-video, which show the speeds at best - at least in my opinion! She got it and enjoys the races now, but always complains about how slow that looks on TV. We were about to attend a real F1 race, but Corona stopped our plan. But we'll do it hopefully next year! Those cares are fast as hell and the corner-speeds are incredible! You can't believe it, if you haven't seen those cars racing live! ... So: See you at the track! :)
Thank you very much. You speak right out of my soul, actually I have questioned this many times already and thought about it the same way, but I also find the vibrations on the older cameras so much more expressive about the speed of those cars. I mean modern onboard cameras are always so soft, like the car is barely moving on track, but in fact it is quite bumpy, so please give us this feeling on the TV as well. We want to see the raw speed of F1 cars, not a softer version of it. I think that's the reason why most people don't really like the V6 against the V8, V10 or V12, because it sounds a lot softer and less dramatic than the old engines used to and I guess this is were the excitement goes for many people
nice edit and really interesting analysis. Great video. The static camera shots from fans look absolutely insane, we need at least this from time to time in the live broadcast. One can only hope Formula1 takes notice. Great video mate.
i love that in the end you didnt say ''as insane as possible'' because that simply not needed. it is absolutly bonkers how fast those cars fly around the circuit so it cant be that hard to make it look ''as insane as it truly is'' awesome video dude!
Yes! So much yes. The 'Quake Pro' moment shook me awake; often when I watch a vid with that much FOV, it seems so fast that I wonder how someone can even play at that speed. I also think smaller cars would make the static shots look better. For some reason, the drive Alonso did in his old Renault at Abu Dhabi last year looked so so fast, yet the laptime was much slower. A small car doing 150 through a corner looks much quicker than a large car doing 200 through the same corner.
I actually like what they've done this year with the drivers eye view. All the shaking makes it look like they are constantly about to crash, which really makes it exciting to watch
The other thing that makes the old onboards look more real, organic and gritty that you missed: The cars weren't fat back then. They were small and light. They twitched and you could see it both laterally when breaking traction, and vertically when riding kerbs. Today's F1 cars are far too big and heavy; they have been ruined by the V6H and its battery pack.
Exactly, just exchanging the v6 hybrid for a 17year old V10 would make the cars massively lighter, honestly there is no reason for f1 to keep using these engines, they are in no way more road relevant than a V10, just cause they have a few cylinders less
@@E9X330 hell, the most road relevant engine would be inline engines. To encourage manufacturers to enter the sport, the only engine restriction should be the displacement of the engine to restrict the size.
Yep I've definitely fallen asleep during races, exciting and non-exciting simply because the camera makes my daily economy car look faster than F1..... As a cinematographer, I have no idea what these F1 guys are doing with such amazing equipment. Awesome Video though!
I think F1 shoots/broadcasts at a higher frame rate as well. If over the normal 24 frames per second, you get a smoother look but it also eliminates the natural motion blur which makes the cars look slower.
How to make F1 interesting again: 1. Bring back Maldonado 2. Give extra points for dangerous driving 3. Let some AH 64 Apache gunships fly along during a race and fire some misiles at cars 4. Change the driving direction during a race mutiple times so clockwise and then counterclockwise 5. Allow pitcrew to walk in other pits and pick a fight.
Fuck it, Modify the cars so they can drop spike strips and pools of oil. Mount laser guns onto the cars as well and, hear me out on this because this might be taking it too far, fan boost from FE
This needs to happen! Not only in motorsports but other sports as well, ie Cycling, athletics, speed skating and alpine skiing. give the viewer the sernse of speed and make it relatable to something "normal". Great Video!
This is an outstanding suggestion. Wider views provide much greater speed sensation. Additionally, F1 broadcasts should ramp up their use of visor cams with wider fields. Show the race from the driver's view more often, with more immersion. The technology is there, they just need to start exploiting it.
Mate, u stated the problem, showed what caused it, gave a solution and even tried out some examples, explained it in an informative and entertaining way. Thumbs up and a subscriber you've gained. well done, i wish to see more in the future!
after seeing the racing drone footage of AlphaTauri I believe that could be one of the best ways to capture future races. Its fast however youre still moving with the cars so its easy to see everything thats going on with the cars and the drones themselves and bring a new level of excitement along. The only thing i could say negatively about it is that i could see the older generation especially complaining about the motion of the drone and could cause some people to have some motion sickness, but as long as drone footage is an option and not being forced to watch the whole race with then i dont see why not.
You've just articulated something I've tried and failed to explain to people for years whenever the subject came up of why I can't be arsed to watch F1 on TV. The pan and zoom shots are the worst. Moto GP has a problem with it too. It makes everything look as serene and slow-motion as figure skating on ice.
This is EXACTLY what I wished they did for years. FOV of the onboard cameras kill the speed perception. And they have to make transmissions more "cinematic" with more wide angle curb cameras, specially on high speed corner and straights. I hate those burocratic shots they make. Great video, man. I wish this could get to them somehow.
Sound. Sound makes things appear faster and more powerful. There is a reason why car manufacturers have sound-engineers and why F1 fans love the V8 engines.
This is spot on mate! Audience (static) cams especially show really how freaking fast these things are in real life! F1 broadcast today is primarily focused on sponsor promotion and it's killing the thrill of watching honestly.
I'm sure there are already comments about this, but a higher frame rate will also make it much easier and exciting to watch! They announced this past week that F1TV will be in 50 FPS this season, compared to their current 30, which is a great move! Really excited to see it in a higher frame rate this season!
@@tirve why's that? Are you thinking about motion blur? You can have similar motion blur in higher frame rates as lower ones. Like at 60 fps you can use 1/60th shutter and it will have simmilar blue to 24 fps 1/48th
@@cinialvespow1054 no, lower fps (unless too low), will make the viewer fill in the blanks. Higher fps makes it much less tiring for the eyes though, and in some respect more life like (which was a big negative effect for that hobbit fantasy movie). I think just switching between static and wide-overview-type of camera setup, would enhance the experience much more and make the viewer feel like they're in the grandstands, and only switch to follow camera when something big happens or for slow motion etc.
Good take on the issue. Another reason it looked grittier in the olden days is image stabilization. The Montoya shot didn't have any and the vibrations made it feel more direct and a bit scarier. With perfectly stabilized images, you feel like you're on rails which does not help the immersion at all.
The larger cars also move less over the course of a lap, example, if the track is 6m wide and the car is 2m wide you move less than if the car is 1.7m wide, movement in the 2000s era was brutal at times visually. There's so many things that make them look slow these days, another is the cameras stability, basically eating all the bumps.
I have been thinking about this for so long! Its amazing how slow the cars can look on TV. I would happily watch them going around the track alone if I could sense their real speed.
Mate I spend months making videos and fail to get past 2k views yet you started your channel a month ago and blow up instantly? You must be doing something right! Great video, hope you can make something of this in the future!
You made some good points. I also think that they should use onboard cameras more often during the race, at least 50% of the race should be with onboard cameras, and in races like monaco it could be 80% onboard.
I personally want f1 to use more static camera just likes nascar, those shots when they come off the banks at certain tracks and you hear the machine gun like sound of all the cars going by at 180 plus mph is something I think f1 needs to do soooo much more to really show and sell the speed of the cars they try to tell us are the “pinnacle of motorsport”
the cars always looked fastest for me when the cameramen would lose track of them. i remember so many bad laps that were made exciting just because of that happening.
I think NASCAR has this sort of feeling right, where many of their on board cameras are shaking and give a real sense of instability in the drive, and may shots that they cut too regularly shake heavily as the cars drive by.
Even take a crash for example... The onboards make it seem like it was no big deal..... then you see a static or fan filmed cam angle and it's intense!
They have now solved it, altough in a much more complicated way. They have fitted cameras in a kind of gyroscope rig on the cars which stabilises the shot and lets you see all the forces of the cars.
I have this complaint about pretty much all motorsports on TV. I'm primarily an IndyCar fan so that's the most salient one to me and its most obvious at Indy. TV doesn't remotely do the speed justice, until you see them doing 230+ in person, you just don't comprehend it. I think their best camera shot to show their speed is on top of turn 4 looking down the front stretch and as the car disappears in the distance you see it suddenly turn left and dart across the screen faster than you'd believe, but they almost never hold that angle on screen long enough. They do a better job of showing the speed at Texas, because there are markers on the walls that as the camera pans to follow the car you get a sense for the speed based on those landmarks, which is awesome even though they're going 20ish mph slower than they can at Indy.
I haven't watched f1 since I was a kid. But I remember even back then the onboards were very sparse and whenever one came on screen everyone would pay attention like it was a random gem. Long before TH-cam was around. Or you'd get that rare still shot showing them wizzing by. And the rest of the time was thr perfectly executed and perfectly boring panning zoom. If I were the director I'd depict the race mostly from onboards. I'd have a very clear and large map on the corner of the screen indicating which car was in pov. My goal would be to show the positions of cars in the race relative to the track and to depict events from.yhe pov of surrounding cockpits or even cameras mounted all around the car if possible. And the other kinds of shots would be secondary. It wouldn't even be about making it look a certain way. Just depicting the race. I have a suspicion that F1 suffers from a perpetual disconnect from the fans. It's like they don't understand fans or something.
The smaller more nimble cars from the 2000’s always looked way faster to me. The cars of today look like they’re on rails, the cars out of the 2000’s literally looked like they were flying on the track
great point, but lets be honest, its also boring cus for us plebs who cant afford ( or are in a country where we cant get) the exclusive F1 tv broad cast where you can watch the race from any camera, we are stuck watching the boradcast the TV channels pump out and most of the time they just follow the leaders who are obviously not going to be having lap after lap wheel to wheel battles with their rivals, so the action is boring. but that doesnt mean theres no action on track, the midfield is packed with overtakes and battles race long, we just never see it so the ffans are bored cuz they are here to watch racing, not watch 1 or 2 cars on their lonesome drive around a track. if they want that, theyll watch Time Attack...
Dude I had this exact thought especially when F1 started using the drone shot on the Brooklands corner at silver stone instead of cutting to different angles/cameras, it made them look so slow when they just followed them continuously
Those cameras placed in the curbs with the cars going over them are just perfect. It is just scary to watch and I love it
The one in Belgium just before eau rouge is fantastic
Also the the Suzuka turn 1
Lol one time the curb camera caught me off guard and I had a violent wince reaction when the cars drove over me hahaha
@@Darlexis 🤣🤣
I also love the cameras at the front wing. U can really feel the speed there
My dude, you NAILED IT! Absolutely spot on. I can only hope F1 is paying attention...
Yes, I was thinking about this for a long time finally someone makes a Video of this we must get that Video trending!
They won't change it. The reason they have it more zoomed in is to give the sponsorships on the car/halo more screen presence to make more money off of it. It's unfortunate, but a reality.
I know there not the same but gt7 also needs this
Also, the low cameras when they are coming towards you on a straight make it feel like they are going 50
my opinion: if they'd hold that shot until the cars comes in close and passes by, it'd look so, SO much better.
Yeah static front cameras in a 1.2 km straight till the car arrives to the corner where they actually lowered their speed by 200km/h and then you see the car from a different angle but ofc, they are now doing 100 instead of 340, they really need to improve broadcast shots with all the resources they have in hands
It's not the low angle, is the use of very long lenses (somehow unavoidable, as you are filming from outside the track and the end of the straight). I would just remove that shot completely, subsitute with a lateral one or, even better, elicopter camera.
@@ThyAxeman i would say stand even further back and use an even longer lens for a tighter shot without playing with the zoom will give a sense of speed especially when you have it framed in a way that cars come in and out of the frame quickly instead of tracking it like out of a corner or over a hill
@@SpektrikMusic yes, super tight frame with an angle would be good as well. Maybe hard to do on some circuits due to surrounding areas (I'm thinking Monza's straights, do not have a lot of places where you could place a camera for such a shot).
Another issue: vibration/shakey cam. The cameras today seem to have better padding/damping, so the video is smoother.
yh I remember when Mick Schumacher got a flat spot in the race in Monza and the camera started shaking so bad but made the car seem much faster
I think it should be the last grasp to make them look fast. It's better for editing and comparing with less vibrations etc. And can cause more confusions if the track is too bumpy
so they should only use up to the Go-pro 6 onboard
@@is_fpr5f1 YES!
I always remember seeing people believing that the cars from the 80's were faster because of the onboard cameras... When actually the change here weren't slower cars but faster cars and more advanced cameras...
I think you meant today's camera has better stabilization.
Quality video this!
Hi tommo :D
Yeah, honestly. I scrolled down expecting to see 200k+ subscribers and nearly a million views. It's gonna go big.
Is so low
hold up
wat a min
where did u come from?
Bwoah. It's Tommo.
Totally agree. Modern onboards are so much more boring to watch than they used to be.
Imagine if it didn't have all the tech that it has now. The camera shaking and audio that is synced up. You can see the vibrations and the raw footage of the car
@@nathanb4306 well you know i kinda dont want them to die every time they crash
@@justinz1412 unless its mazepin
@@joemama-mj5rt What? You need help.
@@justinz1412 I think he means camera tech not modern F1 safety tech
damn that was quality
2nd
Woah! It’s DaBaby!
@@engineergaming4295 *less goo*
ngl: I was confused when I realized that this was your only video you've made so far. Great content.
he's gotta be a smurf bro, ain't no way. this is a quality, well though-out and well put together video.
@@0xsergy german quali at its finest
@@0xsergy maybe he is someone else's editor
@@SIRTACONATOR007 no. read his channel bio
His about page explains that this was a challenge given to him by his professor to create a viral video.
Been crying out for static cameras for years. Even if it only makes up 2-5% of the total viewership time, it would make a HUGE difference. Especially at the likes of key moments such as the start of the race. Take Suzuka for example, put a static camera half way between turn 1 and 2 up in the stands so you can get a full view of the race start - grid, first turn and then into start of the S's. Turn 1 is where a lot of overtakes happen as well, absolute dive-bombs down there. People wouldn't know what hit em' and it would give you a better view of the race, and feel like you're actually there sitting in the stands.
It would probably help them to sell out the grandstands as well if you're offering the occasional glimpse at how fast they seem in person
@@pz189 How dumb you must be to not realize how incredibly fast they go? When you know they go 340km/h
@@pz189 The cornering speed is the most amazing thing, along with deaccelareation of F1 cars.
there was a shot last year when Sainz was speeding down the straight away at Bahrain.
It was filmed by a mostly stationary camera.
It was the first time in 2 years of watching F1 that I went "holy crap theyre gong fast, id shit myself at that speed"
Ireally hope they work on these things, stop making it look SO perfectly cinematic.
Yeah, that's a brilliant camera angle
There was a shot I remember from one of the races at the back end of the calendar - it might have been Bahrain, where the camera held still on the empty last couple hundred metres of the straight and then picked up the cars as they appeared in frame and followed them to the corner - one of the only shots that has really stuck with me
@@zamin6060 yeah reminds me of Sainz and Leclerc going side by side into turn 1, they looked flippin quick. Miss when F1 looked fast and hope they had a good look at this video
@@zamin6060 yeah it's the shot used in the final lap of the second F2 sprint race last week. Brilliant shot.
Do you have a link?
I really miss the thermal image cameras from 2013 too, being able to see the warm spots on the tires was fascinating
Fully agree. I've done some research on this and i found the exact same effects. When in games the wide FOV is bad, you as a driver need 1:1 when it comes to visual feedback, things can't look further away from one angle and closer on the other. In games large FOV extends the appearance of straights, it also makes very easy to hit braking markers. But, turning in is more difficult and the road appears to be much narrower, making it hard to position yourself correctly But.. in replays.. things change. Once you are not in control, not in the moment, it looks slower than it did from the cockpit view, at flat projection. Increasing FOV and decreasing stability, increasing the length of the shutter and running at 25FPS (can be interpolated to 60Hz) increases motion blur. The so called "sports mode", fast shutter speeds and high framerate is not always the best choice. Things that move very fast should have motion blur to separate them from things that are not moving fast in relation to the camera.
I totally agree! Sport mode on televisions is no helping. I think that image stabilization is another thing to have in mind, in the old onboards you see the camera shaking (the whole car shaking) and that gives a raw/on the limit sensation. In the nowadays broadcast I miss a lot some old camera angles like the lovely side cockpit camera from 2005 season with a wide angle that you can see drivers hands and head in the same frame and also the front wing camera. Those two missing angles should comeback!
“Sport mode” really isn’t necessary when slow motion cameras exist. Let those cameras use the high shutter speed to show off the cars/athletes in slow motion.
@@Willie_Pete_Was_Here It's sad but the high fps conversion on tv's is an aesthetic trend. The worst thing is that regular people love to watch their movies and series totally altered by their tv's. Its a total lack of respect for the directors of photography and everyone who make the films. It kills the original vibe and look of the film... and with racing sports happens that they look slow on high speeds...
Speaking about games: the 24fps isn't really needed. Reconstruction motion blur can do the job at 120hz
@@R3DCODE Gaming at low fps is horrible. Movies shot on film, faked to 50fps looks also horrible. I think netflix(not the tv itself) does this to every movie, yuck.
Another reason why the 360" cam makes it look faster is because it's closer to the ground. That's why I really like the nose cam for example. Also I'd much rather see way more Onboard even in the current format. It's just so much more exciting than the "always perfectly centered" Cam from 100m away.
They're starting to improve it slowly, like the new gyroscopic stabilized outboard camera, holy fffff is that so good to watch especially on non straight, curving parts of the track
3:43
FYI: The 360 degree camera cannot be used live as it is recorded to an SD card on the car, and not hooked up to any broadcast systems. Everything else in this video is ace though, well done 🙂
Thank you :) Well, they should hook it up to the broadcast system some day ;)
@@_wups2923 That would be good 🙂
I shared your video on my community feed here by the way, hopefully a few of my subscribers came over.
Make more of these 🙂
@@PJTierney Thanks man, I appreciate that :)
But why though?
@@yabdifootballchallenges7981 360 footage requires a lot of communication bandwidth to be transmitted and on top of that, a lot of processing power at the broadcast station to actually render it
"F1 needs to do something before people fall asleep"
*Cries in American*
In addition to the issues you correctly pointed out, I also think the stabilisation is so strong on the on-board cameras, that it removes the raw bumps and shakes a little too much. In addition, I wonder if the higher framerate actually makes the footage look a bit to smooth too; with the background lacking motion blur. Great video.
BEN?! Wow I was not expecting to see you on a formula 1 channel, that was a nice surprise
increase fov
This seems like a very simple solution that can easily be added/changed to the broadcast, rather than changing the race format/regulation. Love those static camera shots
wieviel Akzent willst du haben ?
Wups: Ja
Immerhin hat er's mit kaum Fehlern gemacht 🤷
Can someone translate it to me?
I dont understand
@@adartadart6458 of course I said : how much accent do you want? Wups: Yes
@@symple1002 i understand what youre saying now but i dont get the joke
@@adartadart6458 need to be german to understand the joke
2:29 I’m just now realizing how fast they are going into Eau Rouge and Radillon. Gosh😳
That happened to me but with monaco, I saw a video comparison of TV Shots and from people on the apartaments and Oh my god they Fly on those narrow streets.
"F1 races will always be boring"
Imola GP: "is that a challenge I hear?"
The 360 cam truly shows the immense speed and tight walls that is often taken for granted
So that’s why when you set fov bigger on games you feel like you are moving faster
Nice point of view, and it totally makes sense to have still shots so you can see the speed of the car passing by instead of having it sit still on the frame
Commenting for the TH-cam algorithm since I think this is such an important topic that I have thought of, and said before, but never seen discussed publicly
3:00 imagine mounting cameras in the chicane curb like at spa
The old onboards are shaking, the cars were quirky, now it feels like they are on rails and go by 120 km/h
Camera stabilisation for you. If they reduced the stabilisation you'd feel it was going faster as well.
I really liked this video and how you presented it
1: you explained what makes f1 cars not look slower despite being faster
2: you offered a very nice easy solution
3: you were totally objectively in sharing your point of view
4: you werent toxic at ll unlike a lot of the current f1 fanbase who complain about the sport just because
Edit: 5: lets not forget the pure *quality* of this video
Bravo! I wanted to add that there are only two senses that appeal to the viewer on TV; sight and sound. The other way to give the sense of speed is the sound of the cars. Your ears also play a part in the way your brain processes the speed of an object. I'm sure we've all seen (or heard) that video of the Mazda 747B flying down the straight. The F1 cars of old injected the pedal movements of the driver directly into your brain. You could hear the modulation and all out power of the cars which helped to display the absolute wow factor those cars had. Thank you for coming to my Ted-talk
How have i only seen this now... this was TOP quality mate
the new one looks so stable too the shakiness of the old footage makes it seem more raw too
Yeah, you are totally right! My wife didn't understood at first why I do watch F1 racing on TV, because she thought that those cars are slow and just driving around a "circle". I don't blame her for that! So I showed her older footage, onbard footage with speed-graphics, compare videos like (regular BMW vs. F1 car) and the old, but mighty "Speed Comparison: GT vs. F1"-video, which show the speeds at best - at least in my opinion! She got it and enjoys the races now, but always complains about how slow that looks on TV. We were about to attend a real F1 race, but Corona stopped our plan. But we'll do it hopefully next year! Those cares are fast as hell and the corner-speeds are incredible! You can't believe it, if you haven't seen those cars racing live! ... So: See you at the track! :)
hey, that camera pan that makes it look fast also shows MORE sponsors, its a WIN-WIN for everyone I guess!
Great vid!
Man dropped one video and got 400k views. God tier video btw
Thank you very much. You speak right out of my soul, actually I have questioned this many times already and thought about it the same way, but I also find the vibrations on the older cameras so much more expressive about the speed of those cars. I mean modern onboard cameras are always so soft, like the car is barely moving on track, but in fact it is quite bumpy, so please give us this feeling on the TV as well. We want to see the raw speed of F1 cars, not a softer version of it. I think that's the reason why most people don't really like the V6 against the V8, V10 or V12, because it sounds a lot softer and less dramatic than the old engines used to and I guess this is were the excitement goes for many people
nice edit and really interesting analysis. Great video. The static camera shots from fans look absolutely insane, we need at least this from time to time in the live broadcast. One can only hope Formula1 takes notice. Great video mate.
i love that in the end you didnt say ''as insane as possible'' because that simply not needed. it is absolutly bonkers how fast those cars fly around the circuit so it cant be that hard to make it look ''as insane as it truly is''
awesome video dude!
Yes! So much yes. The 'Quake Pro' moment shook me awake; often when I watch a vid with that much FOV, it seems so fast that I wonder how someone can even play at that speed.
I also think smaller cars would make the static shots look better. For some reason, the drive Alonso did in his old Renault at Abu Dhabi last year looked so so fast, yet the laptime was much slower. A small car doing 150 through a corner looks much quicker than a large car doing 200 through the same corner.
I actually like what they've done this year with the drivers eye view. All the shaking makes it look like they are constantly about to crash, which really makes it exciting to watch
nice f1 challenge 99-02 soundtrack.
The close up shots of the cars in full frame also drive me nuts. It's impressive like you said. But makes it hard to see where the cars are on track
Dude this guy needs to make more videos like this cuz...that was perfecto
The other thing that makes the old onboards look more real, organic and gritty that you missed:
The cars weren't fat back then. They were small and light. They twitched and you could see it both laterally when breaking traction, and vertically when riding kerbs. Today's F1 cars are far too big and heavy; they have been ruined by the V6H and its battery pack.
Exactly, just exchanging the v6 hybrid for a 17year old V10 would make the cars massively lighter, honestly there is no reason for f1 to keep using these engines, they are in no way more road relevant than a V10, just cause they have a few cylinders less
@@E9X330 hell, the most road relevant engine would be inline engines.
To encourage manufacturers to enter the sport, the only engine restriction should be the displacement of the engine to restrict the size.
@@junsengjs inline engines are extremely counterintuitive when it comes to using them as stressed part
wow i was sure you would have like 200k subs atleast. And its the first video. Great job man
Yep I've definitely fallen asleep during races, exciting and non-exciting simply because the camera makes my daily economy car look faster than F1..... As a cinematographer, I have no idea what these F1 guys are doing with such amazing equipment.
Awesome Video though!
I think F1 shoots/broadcasts at a higher frame rate as well. If over the normal 24 frames per second, you get a smoother look but it also eliminates the natural motion blur which makes the cars look slower.
didnt even thought about this. great video, im new in F1 so this really puts into perspective. Btw that Tyler1 audio clip in 2:17killed me 😂
The F1 2002 music in the background...
ive been wondering why older onboards look faster for so long!! thanks for making this
Your thumbnail is from the F1 2020 montage😂 I noticed it instantly
Idk how someone could dislike this
This is definitely what F1 needs. The cars are faster than ever before, but nowadays they seem like computer simulations, boring to watch.
f1 2002 soundtrack, what a memories
How to make F1 interesting again:
1. Bring back Maldonado
2. Give extra points for dangerous driving
3. Let some AH 64 Apache gunships fly along during a race and fire some misiles at cars
4. Change the driving direction during a race mutiple times so clockwise and then counterclockwise
5. Allow pitcrew to walk in other pits and pick a fight.
Let fans throw all sorts of stuff onto the track
Fuck it, Modify the cars so they can drop spike strips and pools of oil. Mount laser guns onto the cars as well and, hear me out on this because this might be taking it too far, fan boost from FE
Mario Kart +18 it's a necessity
This needs to happen! Not only in motorsports but other sports as well, ie Cycling, athletics, speed skating and alpine skiing. give the viewer the sernse of speed and make it relatable to something "normal". Great Video!
This is an outstanding suggestion. Wider views provide much greater speed sensation. Additionally, F1 broadcasts should ramp up their use of visor cams with wider fields. Show the race from the driver's view more often, with more immersion. The technology is there, they just need to start exploiting it.
Ahhh I recognise that music, F1 2002 childhood memories, I loved the slipstream mechanics in that game too.
2:15 had me dying lol, this is some top tier shit
Mate, u stated the problem, showed what caused it, gave a solution and even tried out some examples, explained it in an informative and entertaining way. Thumbs up and a subscriber you've gained. well done, i wish to see more in the future!
after seeing the racing drone footage of AlphaTauri I believe that could be one of the best ways to capture future races. Its fast however youre still moving with the cars so its easy to see everything thats going on with the cars and the drones themselves and bring a new level of excitement along. The only thing i could say negatively about it is that i could see the older generation especially complaining about the motion of the drone and could cause some people to have some motion sickness, but as long as drone footage is an option and not being forced to watch the whole race with then i dont see why not.
I don't watch much if any f1 but if it was broadcast with racing drones I'd watch it weekly!
You've just articulated something I've tried and failed to explain to people for years whenever the subject came up of why I can't be arsed to watch F1 on TV. The pan and zoom shots are the worst. Moto GP has a problem with it too. It makes everything look as serene and slow-motion as figure skating on ice.
The motion blur on the 360 degree camera feels as if I was seeing the track through the eyes of the driver.
This is EXACTLY what I wished they did for years. FOV of the onboard cameras kill the speed perception. And they have to make transmissions more "cinematic" with more wide angle curb cameras, specially on high speed corner and straights. I hate those burocratic shots they make.
Great video, man. I wish this could get to them somehow.
Sound. Sound makes things appear faster and more powerful. There is a reason why car manufacturers have sound-engineers and why F1 fans love the V8 engines.
This is spot on mate! Audience (static) cams especially show really how freaking fast these things are in real life! F1 broadcast today is primarily focused on sponsor promotion and it's killing the thrill of watching honestly.
I'm sure there are already comments about this, but a higher frame rate will also make it much easier and exciting to watch! They announced this past week that F1TV will be in 50 FPS this season, compared to their current 30, which is a great move! Really excited to see it in a higher frame rate this season!
I actually think this goes in the opposite direction of making it look fast (even tho I enjoy the extra fps when watching)
@@tirve why's that? Are you thinking about motion blur? You can have similar motion blur in higher frame rates as lower ones. Like at 60 fps you can use 1/60th shutter and it will have simmilar blue to 24 fps 1/48th
@@cinialvespow1054 no, lower fps (unless too low), will make the viewer fill in the blanks. Higher fps makes it much less tiring for the eyes though, and in some respect more life like (which was a big negative effect for that hobbit fantasy movie).
I think just switching between static and wide-overview-type of camera setup, would enhance the experience much more and make the viewer feel like they're in the grandstands, and only switch to follow camera when something big happens or for slow motion etc.
Good take on the issue. Another reason it looked grittier in the olden days is image stabilization. The Montoya shot didn't have any and the vibrations made it feel more direct and a bit scarier. With perfectly stabilized images, you feel like you're on rails which does not help the immersion at all.
The larger cars also move less over the course of a lap, example, if the track is 6m wide and the car is 2m wide you move less than if the car is 1.7m wide, movement in the 2000s era was brutal at times visually.
There's so many things that make them look slow these days, another is the cameras stability, basically eating all the bumps.
I have been thinking about this for so long! Its amazing how slow the cars can look on TV. I would happily watch them going around the track alone if I could sense their real speed.
This’s pretty much it, you cracked the code my bro
Damn, imagine having a single video on your channel, but having it reach this level of quality and attention.
Mate I spend months making videos and fail to get past 2k views yet you started your channel a month ago and blow up instantly? You must be doing something right! Great video, hope you can make something of this in the future!
I work with cameras/video for a living and this video is 100% on the money.
You made some good points. I also think that they should use onboard cameras more often during the race, at least 50% of the race should be with onboard cameras, and in races like monaco it could be 80% onboard.
The way he speaks while obviously having a smile on his face, nice to hear. quality production 👌
Great Video! If only F1 would take notice.
I personally want f1 to use more static camera just likes nascar, those shots when they come off the banks at certain tracks and you hear the machine gun like sound of all the cars going by at 180 plus mph is something I think f1 needs to do soooo much more to really show and sell the speed of the cars they try to tell us are the “pinnacle of motorsport”
Wow, the quality of this video was… phenomenal
I was thinking about this a lot recently. Video sums it up really well. Thankyou. Hope it gets picked up!
Shutterspeed is also a big big difference in feel of speed
Great video and I loved 0:44 soundtrack from F1 2002 game :D
the cars always looked fastest for me when the cameramen would lose track of them.
i remember so many bad laps that were made exciting just because of that happening.
Very quality vid mate! Enjoyed, subbed and looking for more!
I think NASCAR has this sort of feeling right, where many of their on board cameras are shaking and give a real sense of instability in the drive, and may shots that they cut too regularly shake heavily as the cars drive by.
100% agree with this. never understood why we didn't get a wider angle onboard camera!
the amount of times i've fallen asleep during a race...
Only ever happened to me when you have to wake up at like 6 am to watch it which is very annoying.
@@k4lashni7ov35 same with me when I try to keep up with USA GP
@@k4lashni7ov35 Most of the races were 11pm - 3am for me, even harder
@@MrSaxophoneGamer ouch dude
@@MrSaxophoneGamer oh shit, where are u from buddy?
This is why I just wanna watch the aerial helicam view of the whole race . Much more interesting
Well it also SOUNDS fast in the past as well.
Me before watching video: stationary offboard camera, higher fov onboard
Even take a crash for example... The onboards make it seem like it was no big deal..... then you see a static or fan filmed cam angle and it's intense!
They have now solved it, altough in a much more complicated way. They have fitted cameras in a kind of gyroscope rig on the cars which stabilises the shot and lets you see all the forces of the cars.
My thought exactly even in moto gp they never show static cameras for you to get a real sense of the speed.
I have this complaint about pretty much all motorsports on TV. I'm primarily an IndyCar fan so that's the most salient one to me and its most obvious at Indy. TV doesn't remotely do the speed justice, until you see them doing 230+ in person, you just don't comprehend it. I think their best camera shot to show their speed is on top of turn 4 looking down the front stretch and as the car disappears in the distance you see it suddenly turn left and dart across the screen faster than you'd believe, but they almost never hold that angle on screen long enough. They do a better job of showing the speed at Texas, because there are markers on the walls that as the camera pans to follow the car you get a sense for the speed based on those landmarks, which is awesome even though they're going 20ish mph slower than they can at Indy.
i always wanted at least one static camera in a key position like eau rouge or 130r
I haven't watched f1 since I was a kid. But I remember even back then the onboards were very sparse and whenever one came on screen everyone would pay attention like it was a random gem. Long before TH-cam was around. Or you'd get that rare still shot showing them wizzing by. And the rest of the time was thr perfectly executed and perfectly boring panning zoom.
If I were the director I'd depict the race mostly from onboards. I'd have a very clear and large map on the corner of the screen indicating which car was in pov. My goal would be to show the positions of cars in the race relative to the track and to depict events from.yhe pov of surrounding cockpits or even cameras mounted all around the car if possible. And the other kinds of shots would be secondary. It wouldn't even be about making it look a certain way. Just depicting the race.
I have a suspicion that F1 suffers from a perpetual disconnect from the fans. It's like they don't understand fans or something.
The smaller more nimble cars from the 2000’s always looked way faster to me. The cars of today look like they’re on rails, the cars out of the 2000’s literally looked like they were flying on the track
great point, but lets be honest, its also boring cus for us plebs who cant afford ( or are in a country where we cant get) the exclusive F1 tv broad cast where you can watch the race from any camera, we are stuck watching the boradcast the TV channels pump out and most of the time they just follow the leaders who are obviously not going to be having lap after lap wheel to wheel battles with their rivals, so the action is boring. but that doesnt mean theres no action on track, the midfield is packed with overtakes and battles race long, we just never see it so the ffans are bored cuz they are here to watch racing, not watch 1 or 2 cars on their lonesome drive around a track. if they want that, theyll watch Time Attack...
Thank you for this. I think they need to occasionally cut to a static camera at some high speed corners, so that we get to see the car on rails.
Wow, really good video, informative, and actually interesting..
Dude I had this exact thought especially when F1 started using the drone shot on the Brooklands corner at silver stone instead of cutting to different angles/cameras, it made them look so slow when they just followed them continuously