Skimming and not parsing I find problematic. I try to read each word so I don’t miss necessary qualifiers.
I often try to picture the events of the novel I’m reading in my mind, but I read a lot of 19th century literature so it sometimes takes some effort to imagine what the fashions and hairstyles look like, for instance.
I try not to skim too much, though; I dislike having to read the same paragraph twice.
Like bump, I experience books visually; almost as if I am experiencing the story as a participant within the story. I used to dread the movie adaptions because they never measured up to how I had already pictured things. I do read the words on some level. Egregious typos and poor editing will absolutely pull me out of the story, which I find annoying.
Technical works and textbooks I read differently. Unfortunately, I have yet to have the experience of “living” within a molecule. 
since I read up to 1500 words a minute ill read like whole chapters then I stop and then imagine what’s going on
That’s a good way to describe it; I was thinking of it more along the lines of books with well done language are more like high-production value television shows with great costuming, set design and effects, while books written with less awesome writing are more like watching something filmed by a local TV station or from some less wealthy country. Think modern-day Dr. Who vs. 1960s Dr. Who. Great stories all around, but a huge difference in production value.
Really poor writing tends to throw me out of the mental movie entirely like Sunny Daze also mentions, and reading becomes a grind where I’m consciously reading the sentences and trying to make sense of what the author’s trying to convey, because it’s not flowing in the least bit. This is like reading a textbook or something relatively non-narrative.
Interestingly, the most enjoyable books tend to be the ones without long descriptive sequences or too much detail. For example, the “Black Company” books by Glen Cook tend to focus a lot on dialogue and action without a lot of stage-setting description; stuff like hair color is not described or if anything like that is, it’s in conjunction with it being something notable that plays a part in the story. His writing is very much like a race-car; stripped down, and no-nonsense. He basically lets the reader fill in the details to the degree that they choose on non-essential things.
Other people, who I suspect read like elfkin477 pretty much have to have the descriptions- they’re not filling in anything that wasn’t explicitly described. I think my SIL is that way; she wrote a novel, and spent like 70% of the first two pages in detailed descriptions of people and things, and while well written, it was WAY too much in the context of the story; 90% of that description didn’t make any difference to the story or characters. She seemed genuinely baffled when I suggested she pare it down, probably because if she was reading the story, she’d need all that description to set the stage.
I am also a visual reader. It’s the main reason that I dislike seeing a movie based on a book I’ve read. The characters/places in the rarely look or sound the same as those I created in my mind as I read. The only exception was Kubrick’s “A Clockwork Orange”. That fit exactly what I had imagined, which only made the experience more surreal - as if that story isn’t surreal enough.
Pro tip: When you get to the end of that first line go back to the left side of the page and down one line. When you get to the bottom line on a page, turn to the next page and repeat the process.
I think you’ll find novels have a lot of depth you haven’t been getting.
Yes, I can visualize things quite easily. I just don’t find it necessary when I’m reading a book.
I don’t feel I’m getting a lesser experience because I’m reading the book directly rather than visualizing or vocalizing or mentally translating the book into German. I feel the opposite way; that it’s people who are reading a book some other way that are getting a diluted experience.