At <http://bloggingheads.tv>, their in-page flash video viewer offers 1.4X pitch-corrected playback -- but they may be accomplishing that by toggling to a second pre-accelerated video server-side.
It's crazy that more sites, and especially sites with lots of lectures like Google Video, don't offer this option.
I always use the 1.4x feature at BloggingHeads.tv, and it's amazing. The talk usually gets more engaging and easier to understand because you're paying more attention. It's not at all hard to understand people.
This definitely needs to become standard. In fact, one of the major reasons I'm rooting for HTML5 video replacing flash video is so that a browser can add this functionality.
I started the podcasting program at Tulane med school after Katrina. The informal consensus then (late 2005, early 2006, until the present) was that 1.5x was about right.
I'm doing this for a Database Systems course I'm currently taking. Sadly, the lecture notes are terrible. They're basically just visualizations for him to talk to and convey little to no information on their own. As such they're not only hard to read ahead with, but hard to use to review.
Does anyone have any good tricks for downloading WMV videos at faster than real-time? The Stanford Videos come as WMV or Silverlight, and it seems I can't get them to download any faster than real time. VLC has an option to write out to a file as it plays, but even without locally showing the video it doesn't speed up.
I got turned on to overclocking lectures from Peteris Krumins’ blog, http://www.catonmat.net/blog/how-to-save-time-by-watching-vi... Then I wrote a .NET Windows forms wrapper program around his method that controls the speed and pitch. Overclocking lectures is the only way to go.
You can do the same on mplayer on linux, pressing [ and ] to speed up / down the lecture. Being a non native English speaker, my current comfort zone is between 1.40 - 1.60 x.
When I was in college, taking a Shakespeare course, it was standard practice to go up to the music library (where they had LPs of nice productions of the plays) and listen at 45 rpms while reading along in the Riverside Shakespeare. Worked quite well.
Wow, I'm astonished how this seems such a good and unchallenged idea to you, guys! And you guys were so fond of the 'Teach yourself programming in 10 years' the other day...
There is an inverse linear dependency between the speed of swallowing information and how deep it penetrates your skull...
I mean, the (good) lecture already contains a great concentration of information and knowledge that you need to
thoroughly review (ideally from different angles while throwing in additional info and reason of your own).
Playing Defense Towers etc. while you're listening to a lecture? I understand that this technique is the cure for that but really, if you started by viewing the lectures while playing, my assessment is that you were not taking things seriously. And the whole idea that creeps out is that you're on a lecture-viewing marathon, trying to beat some sort of record...
It's often claimed by speed-readers that the faster you take in the info the more you understand, because you get to a point where you have a cohesive overview faster.
I've never heard anyone claim that slower intake was necessarily better and if it was then you'd be able to use the same technique to slow down a lecture to take twice as long.
A fast overview of the information laid out before you can mean indeed that you can grasp some high-level concepts before you loose your focus within the details. But it can mean no more than a summary, and maybe it can give you the intuition of where to focus more for the details (depending on the context and your personal approach); but this is usually limited to a very small segment of the presented info.
On the other hand, when I meant 'slow' I was not referring to the mechanics of the video, I was referring to the pace of acquiring the information, the meaning behind the spoken words/images succession. I think the fast-paced reception of the information can lead only to an illusion of understanding; pausing the video from time to time in order to look up for more information elsewhere, rewinding some sections, etc. were closer to what I had in mind, not the slowing down of the video, as you apparently understood. I'm sorry I was not clear enough the first time, I hope now I mended my argument a little...
This should be a standard feature of HTML5 audio and video support. I believe the Webkit-GTK guys are already working on it with their gstreamer backend.
21 comments
[ 7.3 ms ] story [ 37.9 ms ] threadIt's crazy that more sites, and especially sites with lots of lectures like Google Video, don't offer this option.
This definitely needs to become standard. In fact, one of the major reasons I'm rooting for HTML5 video replacing flash video is so that a browser can add this functionality.
As such, it's back to the textbook for me!
If you're using a mac, press ⌥ ⌘ →
"How to Save Time by Watching Videos at Higher Playback Speeds"
http://www.catonmat.net/blog/how-to-save-time-by-watching-vi...
Playing Defense Towers etc. while you're listening to a lecture? I understand that this technique is the cure for that but really, if you started by viewing the lectures while playing, my assessment is that you were not taking things seriously. And the whole idea that creeps out is that you're on a lecture-viewing marathon, trying to beat some sort of record...
You know, sometimes less is more...
I've never heard anyone claim that slower intake was necessarily better and if it was then you'd be able to use the same technique to slow down a lecture to take twice as long.
On the other hand, when I meant 'slow' I was not referring to the mechanics of the video, I was referring to the pace of acquiring the information, the meaning behind the spoken words/images succession. I think the fast-paced reception of the information can lead only to an illusion of understanding; pausing the video from time to time in order to look up for more information elsewhere, rewinding some sections, etc. were closer to what I had in mind, not the slowing down of the video, as you apparently understood. I'm sorry I was not clear enough the first time, I hope now I mended my argument a little...