Last seen: Aug 17, 2026
That test is important. A normal trim is easy, but a 50 percent slow-motion section raises the question of whether the speed gauge should also advance...
Directly usable telemetry saves me the most time. I stop adding gauges if the workflow needs too many separate tools.
That would be extremely useful, especially if the metadata and recording setup are documented.
The safe rule is simple: do not assume a visually identical file is metadata-identical. A transcoder may decode the video and audio and write a new co...
That matches my priorities. The number of extra telemetry steps matters more to me than having every possible color tool.
Keep both originals. GPX is convenient for interchange, but FIT may contain fields that a basic GPX export does not preserve. I would archive the orig...
For an honest route display I would break the line across a real recording/data gap rather than imply travel along a path that was never recorded.
Fair point. Storage is cheap compared with discovering later that the one export I kept omitted a field I now want.
That split is useful: embedded data when available, external track when the camera file is not the best source.
Yes for many projects. The main requirements are a usable track and a reliable way to align its time with the video.
Keep the original video, the original activity/telemetry files and any project/export files that show how they were aligned. Old metadata is much hard...