[videoblogging] Premiere Question: Missing frames?
Hey, all. I've been using Adobe Premiere for the last few months to produce roller derby DVDs, and I've had this nagging issue that I can't seem to resolve on my own. I figured maybe someone here has seen it and knows what it might be. Basically, when I capture footage, it looks fine. In the preview panes in Premiere, everything looks fine. When I send it to Encore to author it to DVD, or if I render an AVI and then send it to Windows DVD Maker, the action...especially the faster action...looks really choppy like it's missing frames. I've tried playing around with interlacing settings and gone digging through help and no avail. Any idea what else I might try? -- Rhett.
Re: [videoblogging] YouTube will lose half a billion dollars this year
I had assumed that they're trying their absolute hardest not to lose half a billion dollars and that they haven't been able to make it work yet. But perhaps you're right and they are indeed shackled by a GM-like existing situation with YouTube and don't know how to fix it. First off, having worked at Google, I know for a fact they're willing to let a project bleed a little while they figure out what to do. It can be as simple as their current model was an attempt that didn't work. I'm not trying to call them GM so much as to just say that Google is not the end all of online video. And you're also right that I hadn't considered that YouTube would just end because it doesn't work - as the third most popular website, and something that Google paid $1.7bn for, I didn't see that coming about any time soon. But with these kind of losses, maybe it will. Unless they can find another way to fund all that bandwidth from those tiny amounts of viewers that advertisers aren't interested in - bandwidth that they're already paying well below market rate for. Well, I definitely think that Google would seriously lose face if they didn't find a way to keep YouTube. They will not do that unless they have to. However, online video exists beyond YouTube and I'd argue it's the stuff beyond YouTube that's got the best chance at making real money. Others on here have noted some very simple ideas like a YouTube Business site...nobody is doing this, and they need to. I wasn't talking about Micropayment systems for direct payment, though - I was talking about the kind of dollar payments that people pay for media in places like the iTunes store. Yes, but as Clay Shirky points out, iTunes doesn't work because it competes in the marketplace. It succeeds because it stays separate from a free market in online media. Furthermore, the popularity of online video right now is in its ability to be linked, embedded, and discussed. If we were to micropay for videos, then I'd be paying money for following links. I'll stop following them or I'll join groups to circumvent that wall. This already happened with online text for the New York Times. That model went over poorly for them, and all you had to do was sign up for a lousy account. I don't know what that content is, and I'd assumed that the vast majority of the most monetizable commercial online video is published on YouTube as well as wherever else it might go, just to capture the audiences. So I didn't really understand the difference between the most monetizable online video and YouTube. IMHO, The Escapist (http://www.escapistmag.com) has one of the best online video systems going. Zero Punctuation and Unskippable are hits, they have plenty of internal ads which likely pay somewhat well, and they drive their own merchandise sales. But you're probably right, there are probably lots of other options that I hadn't considered which mean that advertising in online video will suddenly become very successful and ubiquitous and pay per view won't become the dominant model for funding it all as I'd suggested. It's worth remembering that advertising works in TV and print because television shows and popular publications are *co-created* with the advertising. That is, the content is designed to work well with advertisers, and the advertisements are tuned to work well with the content. You just can't do this in the YouTube model. At a place like The Escapist (or even a person's non-YouTube video blog), you can. -- Rhett http://www.weatherlight.com
Re: [videoblogging] YouTube will lose half a billion dollars this year
I think you're painting online video with an incredibly wide brush here, and it's pretty distortionary. These questions were once asked about text online, too, and the answer is that any of a number of business models have arisen. Content that has been worth money and isn't value-added through linking, such as books and academic journals, has successfully followed system of paying for titles/editions/subscriptions. Some text is most value-added when it can be linked...like news. That's followed some flavor of ad-supported. The overwhelming majority of text on the web is not seen as worth buying and/or is so ephemeral that its only value is in being linked to for a short period of time. It's remained free, in the sense that its authors tend to absorb costs for keeping it online. Video will be the same way. If YouTube is losing money, it doesn't mean that the advertising model is dead. What it means is something already known-- ads don't work with ephemeral content. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com Rereading my post, my final comments were supposed to be questions, not statements. Here are some more: As a layman, I don't understand how people will make money with advertising on online video. Surely at some point soon, pay per view will become the norm? Will the recession bring this on? With things like paypal and google checkout, isn't paying for things much easier now? Easy enough to make it worth the viewer's while doing it? And will that lead to a lot more long-form content, so people feel they're getting their money's worth? On 8-Apr-09, at 3:40 PM, Michael Sullivan wrote: in other news... http://blog.streamingmedia.com/the_business_of_online_vi/2009/04/disney-says-hulu-running-out-of-cash.html ;) On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 4:48 PM, Rupert rup...@fatgirlinohio.org wrote: This is from the Seattle Times last week. Credit Suisse analyst says YouTube will cost Google $470m. Bandwidth costs them $360m, content rights cost them $252m, but sales from advertising are only $240m (um, only). Oops. If YouTube and Google can't make it work, how the hell is anybody else supposed to? Google is actually hurting the whole online video market by providing video as a free 'loss leader'? While they can afford to prop up YouTube's failed business model by subsidizing their massive losses to the tune of half a billion a year, how can anybody else innovate sensible revenue models for online video? The Free internet is a massive illusion. http://tinyurl.com/c2akgl *YouTube set to lose $470M; most ad spots going unsold* According to a Credit Suisse analyst, the most popular video Web site owned by the richest Web site Google will lose $470 million this year because it sells advertising only on a fraction of its pages. For a site that generates as much online traffic as YouTube, it would seem a no-brainer that profit is streaming in. But according to a Credit Suisse analyst, the most popular video Web site owned by the richest Web site Google will lose $470 million this year because it sells advertising only on a fraction of its pages. YouTube sells ads on less than 3 percent of the Web pages that could carry commercial messages, analyst Spencer Wang wrote Friday in a note to clients. To boost that percentage, Google needs to standardize ad formats and better demonstrate that ads on YouTube help sell products, he wrote. Weakness at YouTube led Wang to cut his 2009 profit estimate for Google to $4.68 a share from $4.83, according to the report. Google stock has fallen more than a third from its 52-week high last May, hurt by slowing growth in the online-ad market and by the decline in the broader stock market. Despite the growth of YouTube's user base, there is little evidence to suggest Google has been able to materially monetize this usage, Wang wrote. In light of the current ad recession, experimental budgets are being trimmed. YouTube's sales will rise about 20 percent to $240.9 million this year, Wang estimated. The company may spend $360.4 million for bandwidth to distribute its video, and $252.9 million to pay content owners for the rights to show their material, he wrote. Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] YouTube will lose half a billion dollars this year
ads don't work with ephemeral content. Surely that's exactly where they do work? Most of the media we consume is ephemeral - TV, newspapers, online news, we see adverts alongside those things as they stream into our lives. On-demand video is largely different from that, isn't it? it's short and self- contained and chosen individually and unlike TV and news, it's not time-sensitive - it's actually less ephemeral. No; it's actually more ephemeral when you consider it from a position of total impact. The overwhelming majority of YouTube videos reach tiny numbers of viewers who consume it once. This bears no comparison to, say, TV or newspapers, which reach much larger audiences. It also bears no comparison to media where there are smaller audiences that accept repeat exposure. Such media are ripe for targeted product placement. But most YouTube videos simply don't make good raw material for an ad. The audience is small and not defined, the video will be seen once per viewer (who may not even make it the majority of the way through), the producer isn't available to exploit their relationship with the viewer to endorse things...it's basically an advertising void. But most of it - 97% apparently - is unmonetizable with advertising, because individual videos' viewing figures are too low - and maybe it's all too fragmented and uncategorizable, and perhaps advertisers are not prepared to see their adverts up against every little home video and copyright-infringing clip. Even if those things eventually collectively gather millions of views and last for a lot longer than most ephemeral advertising-funded media. Again, consider ephemeral from a standpoint of overall cultural staying power, and not just from how long something is on a screen once, and you'll see that the YouTube videos are culturally ephemeral. You actually touch on that issue in your above paragraph. According to Credit Suisse, YouTube seems to be making $50-100m from ads in videos, adjacent banners and sponsored videos. That's as good as they can do all year, and they have 40% of the total online video market worldwide, at a time when online video is booming? Right, and this is because they're monetizing wrong. Let's say that 40% of the car market, in terms of cars on the road, was GM's, and GM was found to be losing money badly. In reality, it's because GM loses $1 per car they sell because they do everything wrong. Is it valid to ask if cars as we know them will be viable? No. It's not that cars aren't viable. It's that GM is doing it wrong. Sure, online viewership is tiny compared to TV, but the gap between TV and online video advertising seems to be disproportionately large. This could have everything to do with a casual numbers game not showing the real details. Especially when you'd imagine that online video would provide greater opportunities for more targeted addressable advertising, supposedly the holy grail. Imagination isn't reality, though, and presupposition gets you nowhere. If YouTube isn't doing this sufficiently, then they're losing money. But the TV ad industry in the US alone is worth $80 billion, 60% of total advertising spend. Superbowl ads this year earned NBC over $200m - that alone is perhaps between 2 and 4 times as much as Google's making all year from YouTube video ads. Of course, it's distorting to use the SuperBowl in a good comparison here, because it's well known that the SuperBowl is basically tulip season for advertisers. People spend on those ads because they exist. It's similar to how city after city hosts an Olympic Games but never profits on the venture. That said, I understand where you're trying to go with this, but you keep treating this as a problem with online video when, in fact, it's a problem with YouTube. Your assumption is that, if YouTube can't do it, nobody can. That itself only makes sense if you can prove that the only people capable of doing it are YouTube and what supporting engineers Google gives them. Is online video really that unattractive to advertisers? How is that going to change? It seems to me that at the moment, short on-demand online videos are more attractive to the viewers than the advertisers, and therefore that viewers are likely to pay more for them directly than advertisers would. Again, it's not about online video. It's about different classes of video requiring different monetization processes. A huge class of online video, which I'd estimate as the overwhelming majority of YouTube videos, is completely worthless at making money. As for why micropayments won't work, I'll defer that to Clay Shirky, who said it far better than I ever could: http://www.shirky.com/writings/fame_vs_fortune.html At the moment, they don't have to make the choice, because 40% of the market is being subsidized by Google at a cost of $500m. No other business could sustain that kind of loss. That's what I mean about it
[videoblogging] Football chalkboard
Maybe a bizarre question, but one that was popping in my mind as I'm shooting sporting events these days. Let's say that I wanted to do a chalkboard kinda like John Madden uses when he's explaining football plays in instant replay. What would be nice is to basically just draw on the video and have some tool turn my real-time drawing into an animation. I have Adobe CS4 but I honestly can't think of a way to do that. Anyone got a good idea for this one? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com
Re: [videoblogging] Football chalkboard
Will it play back the underlying footage in real time and record as I draw on it? Because it was my understanding it'd stop playback if I did that. Losing the real-time factor would make doing it very tedious. -- Rhett. After Effects should do it. Schlomo Rabinowitz http://schlomo.tv - finally moving to wordpress http://hatfactory.net - relaxed coworking AIM:schlomochat On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 12:36 PM, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: Maybe a bizarre question, but one that was popping in my mind as I'm shooting sporting events these days. Let's say that I wanted to do a chalkboard kinda like John Madden uses when he's explaining football plays in instant replay. What would be nice is to basically just draw on the video and have some tool turn my real-time drawing into an animation. I have Adobe CS4 but I honestly can't think of a way to do that. Anyone got a good idea for this one? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Football chalkboard
I went looking for a YouTube video to illustrate, but I couldn't find one. So, basically, let me see if I can describe better. Let's say I have a still-shot of some players about to make a play. I want to draw on that, illustrating how the players are about to move, and I want my process of drawing on it to be recorded as a video or animation. Something like, say, After Effects, is good for letting you draw a line an then set keyframes to animate it, but what I want is to be able to draw and have the whole drawing process recorded. The cheap DIY way I can think to do this is with a screencast program. I'd load the still image up in something like Photoshop, run the screencast program, draw on the image with the paintbrush, and then I could crop the video so nobody saw I was using an art program. But there's got to be an easier way. -- Rhett. I think you¹re actually after two separate things... The first is to layer two feeds (video/graphics/animation) onto each other in real-time, being able to control either video independently of the other. The second is an animation tool to animate your drawing - I don¹t know your john madden example, so I hope I understood right! For the layering/playback I think you¹d have to look at some other apps outside adobe for that, I¹m sure there¹s something out there that broadcasters use. It¹s probably not right for what you¹re looking for, but it gives you an idea of what can be done: I use Modul8 (for visuals), one of its features being that you can add a layer onto a playing video, onto which you can draw. Whether you¹re drawing or not, the rest of the playback is unaffected... you can stop/play/rw/etc the underlying video just like always. If you find an app that can do something similar then you probably wouldn¹t need to pre-draw and get something to automatically animate your drawing? -- David Terranova www.davidterranova.com | blog.davidterranova.com | www.rebelrave.tv From: J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 12:36:49 -0800 (PST) To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Football chalkboard Maybe a bizarre question, but one that was popping in my mind as I'm shooting sporting events these days. Let's say that I wanted to do a chalkboard kinda like John Madden uses when he's explaining football plays in instant replay. What would be nice is to basically just draw on the video and have some tool turn my real-time drawing into an animation. I have Adobe CS4 but I honestly can't think of a way to do that. Anyone got a good idea for this one? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Football chalkboard
Worth the money is kinda a new slogan for me. I finally broke down and bought CS4, and the process of the main editing for a roller derby bout was reduced to 25% of its original time using Premiere Elements. Seriously...8 hours versus 2! Ideally, I'd like to find a way to do it with the tools I have, though. It seems there'd be a way. Maybe I'll ask around at Creative Cow. -- Rhett. I dunno, your screencasting solution is a great one. Plus, buying a tool that just does that one thing sounds like wasted money. Of course, I think you want to do it a lot, so the money may be worth it. Schlomo Rabinowitz http://schlomo.tv - finally moving to wordpress http://hatfactory.net - relaxed coworking AIM:schlomochat On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 1:31 PM, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: I went looking for a YouTube video to illustrate, but I couldn't find one. So, basically, let me see if I can describe better. Let's say I have a still-shot of some players about to make a play. I want to draw on that, illustrating how the players are about to move, and I want my process of drawing on it to be recorded as a video or animation. Something like, say, After Effects, is good for letting you draw a line an then set keyframes to animate it, but what I want is to be able to draw and have the whole drawing process recorded. The cheap DIY way I can think to do this is with a screencast program. I'd load the still image up in something like Photoshop, run the screencast program, draw on the image with the paintbrush, and then I could crop the video so nobody saw I was using an art program. But there's got to be an easier way. -- Rhett. I think you¹re actually after two separate things... The first is to layer two feeds (video/graphics/animation) onto each other in real-time, being able to control either video independently of the other. The second is an animation tool to animate your drawing - I don¹t know your john madden example, so I hope I understood right! For the layering/playback I think you¹d have to look at some other apps outside adobe for that, I¹m sure there¹s something out there that broadcasters use. It¹s probably not right for what you¹re looking for, but it gives you an idea of what can be done: I use Modul8 (for visuals), one of its features being that you can add a layer onto a playing video, onto which you can draw. Whether you¹re drawing or not, the rest of the playback is unaffected... you can stop/play/rw/etc the underlying video just like always. If you find an app that can do something similar then you probably wouldn¹t need to pre-draw and get something to automatically animate your drawing? -- David Terranova www.davidterranova.com | blog.davidterranova.com | www.rebelrave.tv From: J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED]wlight%40weatherlight.com Reply-To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.comvideoblogging%40yahoogroups.com videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 12:36:49 -0800 (PST) To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Football chalkboard Maybe a bizarre question, but one that was popping in my mind as I'm shooting sporting events these days. Let's say that I wanted to do a chalkboard kinda like John Madden uses when he's explaining football plays in instant replay. What would be nice is to basically just draw on the video and have some tool turn my real-time drawing into an animation. I have Adobe CS4 but I honestly can't think of a way to do that. Anyone got a good idea for this one? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Football chalkboard
Doing it over a still would be fine. The flow would be video plays, stops on a still, I draw on the still, then the video starts again. I'll have to check this Skitch out. -- Rhett. Jay dedman wrote: Let's say I have a still-shot of some players about to make a play. I want to draw on that, illustrating how the players are about to move, and I want my process of drawing on it to be recorded as a video or animation. Something like, say, After Effects, is good for letting you draw a line an then set keyframes to animate it, but what I want is to be able to draw and have the whole drawing process recorded. The cheap DIY way I can think to do this is with a screencast program. I'd load the still image up in something like Photoshop, run the screencast program, draw on the image with the paintbrush, and then I could crop the video so nobody saw I was using an art program. But there's got to be an easier way. Im not sure how easy it is to write over moving video. Kent Bye sent me this tip: Well, I haven't found an easy way to do it over moving video. But what I have done is used Skitch to take a screengrab, and then record the annotations via skitch. That's what I did on this video: http://www.ebbandflow.tv/blog/index.php/2007/03/10/metavlog/ It'd also be possible to take a black screen grab the size of the screen, annotate the black screen with Skitch. And then composite it over the video using something like the Multiply Blend mode. You could either watch the video on the side, and try approximate the locations of the annotations. Or just do some generic annotations, and then resize and move around the composited movie. There's also ways for Adobe After effects to record mouse trackings and animate them, but that's really difficult to do with any fluidity. -Kent.
Re: [videoblogging] Football chalkboard
Maybe. My question originally began under the premise that I had somehow missed a simple feature in the Adobe CS4 suite that would already do it. -- Rhett. Rupert wrote: I think I must've missed the point of what you're trying to do. Would not my suggestion of a screen drawing program like ZoomIt/Magic Pen and a screencast be a million times easier, better looking and higher quality than taking screengrabs and drawing over them in skitch/photoshop and editing them into the video? Much more like a video chalkboard, and the drawing would be animated rather than just stuck on? On 19-Nov-08, at 7:25 PM, J. Rhett Aultman wrote: Doing it over a still would be fine. The flow would be video plays, stops on a still, I draw on the still, then the video starts again. I'll have to check this Skitch out. -- Rhett. Jay dedman wrote: Let's say I have a still-shot of some players about to make a play. I want to draw on that, illustrating how the players are about to move, and I want my process of drawing on it to be recorded as a video or animation. Something like, say, After Effects, is good for letting you draw a line an then set keyframes to animate it, but what I want is to be able to draw and have the whole drawing process recorded. The cheap DIY way I can think to do this is with a screencast program. I'd load the still image up in something like Photoshop, run the screencast program, draw on the image with the paintbrush, and then I could crop the video so nobody saw I was using an art program. But there's got to be an easier way. Im not sure how easy it is to write over moving video. Kent Bye sent me this tip: Well, I haven't found an easy way to do it over moving video. But what I have done is used Skitch to take a screengrab, and then record the annotations via skitch. That's what I did on this video: http://www.ebbandflow.tv/blog/index.php/2007/03/10/metavlog/ It'd also be possible to take a black screen grab the size of the screen, annotate the black screen with Skitch. And then composite it over the video using something like the Multiply Blend mode. You could either watch the video on the side, and try approximate the locations of the annotations. Or just do some generic annotations, and then resize and move around the composited movie. There's also ways for Adobe After effects to record mouse trackings and animate them, but that's really difficult to do with any fluidity. -Kent. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] The Death of the internet as we know it....
Yeah...the idea that there is competition at all in broadband is kinda silly. The barriers to entry are high and the market is best modeled as an oligopoly. Don't expect meaningful competitive levers. Expect cartel behavior. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com im not sure its the death of the internet as we know it. Im glad to see companies put transparent bandwidth limits...instead of secretly cutting off users that they dont like. Now there is room for other companies to offer more bandwidth as a competitive lever. as a customer, more bandwidth would be an option I would look for when choosing a provider. The problem is that in many areas in the US, there may be only one or two broadband providers. I have only one choice and the broadband limits suck. Jay -- http://jaydedman.com 917 371 6790 Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] who are the Green Video Bloggers?
Amy and I did a good 23 episodes on the topic. When my grandmother passed away in April, it was a harbinger of personal life chaos, though...involving a cat dying of cancer, funny rules regarding me getting my MS, etc. Anyway, we'll return to it someday. It's at http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com i'd be interested in who else out there is dealing with green issues as a videoblog, podcast, or web video show, whatever one calls it. if there is a list somewhere, please point me to it . thx, eric. www.realworldgreen.com .. Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] A Vlogger's Voice
I've put Freetime and Greentime on hold and I'm now working with the Broward County Derby Girls (http://www.bcdg.net) to produce video for their various needs. This will ultimately mean making a video podcast highlighting their bouts, but we're still working out some critical components of that. I've loved the experience, as it's given me an excuse to buy my first pro-grade camera, I'm editing a 2-camera setup, doing more chroma key work for promo materials, etc. Plus, I love roller derby and have watched it since I was a wee young cuss, and I think supporting roller derby is good for gender politics. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime Mike Moon wrote: With the help of Linkin Park's Faint, I threw together this little video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVl_OuaLzV0 Original post and better video available here... http://mikemoon.net/vlog/2008/06/12/a-vloggers-voice/ So what's your latest project? Mike http://vlog.mikemoon.net Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Popcorn popping, the truth
That's certainly a way to do it. That is, after all, how the cooking application of microwaves was discovered in the first place. Alternately, you could just heat the table, but it'd have to be pretty hot. I work in cellphone development. There is definitely not enough energy in a handful of ringing phones to pop corn. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime - Original Message - From: Jay dedman (snip) In the clips - which feature groups of friends from Japan, France and the US casually lounging around tables - a small handful of corn is placed in the middle of a circle of phones. After a few seconds of them ringing, to much delight, the magically puffed-up kernels start leaping into the air. (snip) I haven't seen the video's .. but .. if I were going to do (fake) something like this .. I would strip a microwave oven and place it *under* the table (non-metallic table) pointing straight up into the popcorn. Richard Amirault Boston, MA, USA http://n1jdu.org http://bostonfandom.org http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7hf9u2ZdlQ Yahoo! Groups Links
[videoblogging] Working with multiple cameras
Hey, gang. Thanks for the input on camcorders that work well in lower light. I'm very pleased with my new Sony PD-170. So, now I have two camcorders, and this means that, light conditions permitting, I'm doing more multiple-camera stuff. I just got done stitching together most of the footage from my first major multi-camera piece, and I've been noticing how much of my time goes syncing up the two cameras. Picking the right camera at the right time? That's easy. But every clip must by synced for both cameras before I can do that. I'm lucky that this is a sporting event with a lot of referee whistles, so I can use that to get two shots in sync, but it's still fairly tedious and time consuming. I'm curious...is there a better way to be doing this? I realize now why it's so much easier to run all the cameras to a common control room and have a director calling out the camera to switch to. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Looking for comments on Canon GL-2
FYI, there have been a bunch of reports about the casette loading mechanism going faulty with the GL-2. It could just be a bad factory run that's cleared out or something. I considered the GL-2, but I'm settling on a Sony PD-170 because of the strong reports of its powerful performance in low light, and I'm going to start shooting some roller derby bouts soon that will be in a dim skating rink. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime Richard Amirault wrote: - Original Message - From: Heath I know you said you needed 20X zoom, I'm not sure why you want that...but if you change your mind on that I HIGHLY recommend the Panasonic DVX100BIt's a really, really good camera I'm sure it is .. but it's out of my price range .. AND .. I really want at least a 20x optical. All my current camcorders (Sony consumer ... one Hi-8 and two mini-DV) have at least 20x optical. That long zoom has come in *very* handy when shooting from the rear of a room/auditorium. Richard Amirault Boston, MA, USA http://n1jdu.org http://bostonfandom.org http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7hf9u2ZdlQ Yahoo! Groups Links
[videoblogging] Canon XL-1 How many hours is too many?
Hey, all. I've been lucky and think I have a lead on an inexpensive used Canon XL-1. This is the first pro-level camera I've been able to afford, and the price is amazingly right. So, I'm feeling a little buyer beware. Most pro cameras have some sort of counter that tells you how many hours of action they've seen, so I'll be trying to locate that when I inspect the camera. My question, though, is how to interpret that number. How many hours of use is considered too worn for someone to want to buy used? -- Rhett.
[videoblogging] Low light action shooting
Hey, gang. Yeah, yeah...I know that I post on here only when I have questions. I'm bad. Anyway, I'm currently exploring a new project that could involve a lot of low-light shooting, and I'm trying to assess my various options. By low light, I'm talking about a level of ambient lighting you might find at a nightclub or something similar. I've recently purchased a Sunpak for my camera, and this might actually be enough for my purposes (shooting generally no more than 10 ft from the action), but I have the extra concern that the camera light may be too distracting to the principles and bystanders at the venue. So, I'm trying to consider what other options I might have. I'm currently using a Panasonic PV-GS150, which I believe is a 1/8 x 3CCD camera. It's had a history of being quite thirsty for light. I'd love to upgrade to something with larger CCDs, but I don't exactly have $1,500 to just throw around, and this is not a paying gig (none of my video work is). People here have a history of doing amazing things on a shoestring budget, so if you have a setup for low light action shooting that's worked well for you, I'd love to know. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
Re: [videoblogging] Low light action shooting
I'd be for web production as well as possibly DVDs at something better than 320x240, most likely, and this footage will be the mainstay of a piece that could run 15-60 minutes. I'm considering an XL-1 if I have to...even buying a used one will basically be a very serious investment...but it'll beat the hell out of rental prices down here. At $350/day, the rentals will add up. I don't understand using stills cameras, though. I need video, as these will be action sequences. Could you explain further? -- Rhett I guess it depends on what you're using it for, and what resolution you need. If you need DV, you could shoot on a 3CCD Sony or Canon prosumer camera - my XL1 is pretty good in low light, and I think the more expensive Sonys and Panasonics aren't bad, either. I mean, it's going to look dark. If it's really dark, you could shoot with a camera that has Night Shot - Infra Red - cheap and effective, but it's pretty ugly. If you need HDV, you could use a Canon HV-20 - the low light is very good, especially in 25P mode. If you're shooting for TV, then you can't do better than a Digibeta camera, which great in low light, but that's expensive to rent and you might need someone to operate it, too. But if you're just shooting for web at 640x480 or lower, then you should seriously consider using a good Canon digital stills camera. The Canon Powershot Ixus 860 that I have is *incredible* in low light. It shoots really, really good quality images with great color. It even has certain built-in color modes that can give night scenes a real edge. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv/ Creative Mobile Filmmaking Shot, edited and sent with my Nokia N93 On 22 Apr 2008, at 16:40, J. Rhett Aultman wrote: Hey, gang. Yeah, yeah...I know that I post on here only when I have questions. I'm bad. Anyway, I'm currently exploring a new project that could involve a lot of low-light shooting, and I'm trying to assess my various options. By low light, I'm talking about a level of ambient lighting you might find at a nightclub or something similar. I've recently purchased a Sunpak for my camera, and this might actually be enough for my purposes (shooting generally no more than 10 ft from the action), but I have the extra concern that the camera light may be too distracting to the principles and bystanders at the venue. So, I'm trying to consider what other options I might have. I'm currently using a Panasonic PV-GS150, which I believe is a 1/8 x 3CCD camera. It's had a history of being quite thirsty for light. I'd love to upgrade to something with larger CCDs, but I don't exactly have $1,500 to just throw around, and this is not a paying gig (none of my video work is). People here have a history of doing amazing things on a shoestring budget, so if you have a setup for low light action shooting that's worked well for you, I'd love to know. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Low light action shooting
Could you give some examples of what you're referring to when you're talking about levels and gradients in post? Are there techniques that have worked particularly well for you? -- Rhett. You can shoot at 15fps, which is what you'll end up with very likely on the web anyway. That'll give you plenty of exposure and the blurry look is not unpleasant. You can also do a lot with levels and, even, gradients, in post. Joly People here have a history of doing amazing things on a shoestring budget, so if you have a setup for low light action shooting that's worked well for you, I'd love to know. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links --- WWWhatsup NYC http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com --- Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Low light action shooting
Sound won't be an issue. For the record, this is for roller derby, and I'll probably be mixing together sound gathered in different ways, and a commentator voice will be some of the most featured sound. The idea of buying a really nice still camera and using its video feature is compelling. I might have to ask around among friends to give it a try first. Budget-wise, it beats the hell out of shelling out for an XL1. -- Rhett. Possibly he needs a real camera for this... but in my experience real cameras often can't match the low light performance of a little pocket camera. Sometimes the sound is even better from an in-camera mic on a pocket stills camera than it is from an in-camera mic on a DV camera. And I've often found that a Canon or a Kodak digital stills camera will shoot nicer looking video than a medium priced DV camera. I agree that it's good to have an expensive camera for professional quality work. But smaller cheaper cameras can sometimes be better for different situations and requirements. And you can be less obtrusive, too. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv On 22 Apr 2008, at 17:41, Heath wrote: Most digital still cameras will shot short or longer video clips. Often for as long as you have space on your flash drive. But it sounds like you need a real video camera. I just bought the Panasonic DVX100B, I upgraded from a Panasonic PV-GS180, I did a comparriosion shot with my new camera and my old one in low light, and I have to say the new camera BLEW away my old one. For these small consumer camera's you can only do so much with low light, even putting a light on top may not help alot with artifacts, etc. I will be honest, I didn't think there was that much of a differance until I had the footage side by sideit's literaly like night and day. I can't link to the footage right now, as I am at work and Flickr is blocked but if you go to my site and click on my flickr badge and go to my photo stream you can see for yourself. Heath http://batmangeek.com http://heathparks.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd be for web production as well as possibly DVDs at something better than 320x240, most likely, and this footage will be the mainstay of a piece that could run 15-60 minutes. I'm considering an XL-1 if I have to...even buying a used one will basically be a very serious investment...but it'll beat the hell out of rental prices down here. At $350/day, the rentals will add up. I don't understand using stills cameras, though. I need video, as these will be action sequences. Could you explain further? -- Rhett I guess it depends on what you're using it for, and what resolution you need. If you need DV, you could shoot on a 3CCD Sony or Canon prosumer camera - my XL1 is pretty good in low light, and I think the more expensive Sonys and Panasonics aren't bad, either. I mean, it's going to look dark. If it's really dark, you could shoot with a camera that has Night Shot - Infra Red - cheap and effective, but it's pretty ugly. If you need HDV, you could use a Canon HV-20 - the low light is very good, especially in 25P mode. If you're shooting for TV, then you can't do better than a Digibeta camera, which great in low light, but that's expensive to rent and you might need someone to operate it, too. But if you're just shooting for web at 640x480 or lower, then you should seriously consider using a good Canon digital stills camera. The Canon Powershot Ixus 860 that I have is *incredible* in low light. It shoots really, really good quality images with great color. It even has certain built-in color modes that can give night scenes a real edge. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv/ Creative Mobile Filmmaking Shot, edited and sent with my Nokia N93 On 22 Apr 2008, at 16:40, J. Rhett Aultman wrote: Hey, gang. Yeah, yeah...I know that I post on here only when I have questions. I'm bad. Anyway, I'm currently exploring a new project that could involve a lot of low-light shooting, and I'm trying to assess my various options. By low light, I'm talking about a level of ambient lighting you might find at a nightclub or something similar. I've recently purchased a Sunpak for my camera, and this might actually be enough for my purposes (shooting generally no more than 10 ft from the action), but I have the extra concern that the camera light may be too distracting to the principles and bystanders at the venue. So, I'm trying to consider what other options I might have. I'm currently using a Panasonic PV-GS150, which I believe is a 1/8 x 3CCD camera. It's had a history of being quite thirsty for light. I'd love to upgrade to something with larger CCDs, but I don't
Re: [videoblogging] Re: 1000 True Fans
So, what do you do when you have zero true fans? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime I think this is just about right on. I've estimated I have about 300 of what Kevin Kelly calls true fans, and I am earning about 1/3 of my living with my self-publishing (in print and eBooks). Over the past three years it has been my objective to shift my position left-ward on the long-tail, increasing access to my fans, and increasing my income, largely using interactive video over the internet to connect more closely with those who can pay me for my helping them care for their historic buildings. This past year it really seems to be working and Kevin's essay 1000 True Fans crystalizes my thinking on this and gives me new criteria for measuring my success, and two new ways to push in that direction. Andrew, thanks for posting this. John by hammer and hand great works do stand by pen and thought best words are wrought by cam and light he shoots it right www.HistoricHomeWorks.com Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Net-Neutrality
All the libertarian ideals are great, but practical reality has produced the likes of Ron Paulwho is stridently anti-abortion. there's goes my rights! He is personally against abortion because of his experiences as an obstetrician, and yet his Constitutional ideals prevent him from advocating a federal ban on abortion. There are your rights! http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.2597: While it does not technically institute a federal ban on abortion, it absolutely sets up a federal position on the status of a fetus as living. Wave that state's rights nonsense all you want, but those of us who've been around the block know what this is. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Net-Neutrality
Game theory is actually very cold and mathematical and doesn't actually have to focus on people at all. It simply assumes that any agent in the system, given an understanding about what benefits it gets from each action, selects the action that has the chance to create the best benefit. It's a study of how local decisions create global states, nothing more. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Yes thats because my assertion was wrong. I got confused about what dislike about Game Theory. I probably dont understand it well enough to correct myself, I just dont think social darwinism completely explains behaviour, and I thought that often even when game theory looks at colabborative situations, its cant quite get away from certain beliefs that people are really always competing. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah...I didn't understand the assertion, either. Game theory absolutely can be used to demonstrate when multiple parties will collaborate or collude. In fact, game theory models explain at what level of personal gain a party can be expected to cheat on a collusion. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Net-Neutrality
An externality can be thought of as a side effect. The basic principle of market economics is that the costs of the production and consumption of a good are reflected in the price paid. This is generally called a price signal, and it's why free and frictionless markets are so good at moving to equilibrium. The problem, however, is that externalities are generally things that fly under our radars. For example, for a very long time, all forms of air pollution went without any regulation or oversight. In essence, it was free to belch soot into the air. Eventually, this created both public health and environmental issues. Because the human cost of the pollution was never placed into the cost of making the goods/energy that produced the pollution, people were effectively paying too little for their goods, and the result was that an excess of pollution ended up having a cost in other ways. A core belief in the right to unregulated commerce is that if I sell it and someone buys it, it's our right to do, but if the service or production of the good has an effect on third parties, then the libertarian notion of not forcing others is broken and requires attention. This, for many of us, is the argument for regulation, oversight, and the general existence of the democratic state. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Your post was very interesting, Im still learning about economics, could you explain this stuff about externalities? Does it have anything to do with, for example, if the finite nature of resources was factored into the price from the start, the masses may never have got to command the equivalent of thousands of horses to move them around? Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The problem I see here is externalities. If the costs of externalities were baked into every transaction, this would be true. All too often, it's not. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Net-Neutrality
Bell is not an example of an entity in a free market. Bell obtained a government-enforced monopoly through the patent system and government regulations and licensing that (effectively) prevented other companies from entering the market to compete against Bell. In some countries (like in Europe), there were laws in place that mandated that only one specific company was allow to provide telephone services. It doesn't matter how a monopoly forms. You can use the same predictive models for pricing and aggregate output regardless. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
Re: [videoblogging] Net-Neutrality
I would tend to agree, too. Just look at the history of rural electrification to see the failure of private industry and market forces to electrify rural areas, a critical step in providing the society we now enjoy. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime But the libertarian argument falls apart when it comes to shared, public services like military, roads, water, electricity, public transportation, and I contend...broadband internet. Jay -- http://jaydedman.com 917 371 6790 Professional: http://ryanishungry.com Personal: http://momentshowing.net Photos: http://flickr.com/photos/jaydedman/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/jaydedman RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Net-Neutrality
Meanwhile, in terms of education, medicine, and pretty much everything else, public run is a synonym for crappy and busted. You can select an equal number of targets where privatized implies an equal quagmire. The magic of market forces has nothing at all to do with hoping people act for the good of the whole. That is a strawman argument, for over 200 years ago it was explained It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. Yes, but this isn't the end-all, and even P.J. O'Rourke, who recently wrote _On The Wealth of Nations_, will quickly admit that Smith actually wasn't a huge fan of the marketeering class. Smith is also quoted as saying that merchants never get together, even for recreation, without their conversations turning to how to extort the public. So when was the last American government that wasn't corrupt? Do you look back to the days of JFK? FDR? Lincoln? How many of your good leaders do we get each century? How is that working out for you? You know the definition of insanity. This is hollow rhetoric, as was your first paragraph. There's a litany of the corruptions of the private sector, too, and it rarely was through competition or boycott that they were halted. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
Re: [videoblogging] Re: National Protests of Scientology by Anonymous this Sunday
First off, it's a false binary to say psychiatrists become the good guys by anything I say. This is, in fact, buying Scientology's argument. They offer true mental health and oppose psychiatry; I oppose them, therefore I am pro-psychiatry. It doesn't follow. I could easily protest both sides for the faults they offer. I'd also say that, if you're looking purely for a body count, psychiatry is way behind compared to a number of religions, even after you axe out two pieces of low hanging fruit. That's historical ignorance, however, and it's irrelevant here, because as I've already mentioned, I am not pro-psychiatry. I'd also say that this isn't about promoting some form of spiritual truth over another. This is about an organization that trains its members in fraud and tactics designed to obstruct justice. This is about things like Operation Snow White, which was a targeted, wide-scale attempt (with some success) at the infiltration of our government, for which Mary Sue Hubbard was convicted of a felony. This is about attempting to frame the mayor of Clearwater for hit-and-run charges because he opposed the Church of Scientology. This is about dead agenting and Avagrams. Look...if people want to believe they're several trillion years old and that Jesus Christ is a reincarnation of Xenu, that's their call to make. I'm hep with that. I have been known to worship a mysterious clip art of a man smoking a pipe. That's fine. I can even marginally tolerate their pricing structure, although I have no love for TM, Kabbalah Center, Est, or any other pay-to-be-better structure. Scientology has, and continues, to go too far, however. It does not play well with others, something that virtually every other religious organization in America has figured out how to do. -- Rhett. Richard H. Hall wrote: Steve and Rhett, First of all, when Psychiatrists become the good guys in any argument, I find myself tending to be on the other side. In fact, in my opinion, now that I think about it, the Psychiatric model of mental health, pharmaceuticals, and commerce has done a lot more damage in the world than Scientology, or any religion (besides maybe Christianity and Islam). Second, I'm 50 years old, and I've spent way too much time in my life trying to find the truth, and, let me tell you, there are more versions of what you describe of the scientologists within the christian/other religion/spiritual/new age/whatever world that you can shake a stick at. Many people want to know the truth, and they prefer to find someone/thing that will tell them what it is so they don't have to think about it, and they will give anything to anyone to find peace in that way. Sounds fucked up, but I'm not sure if I begrudge them. I'm not saying what the Scientologists do is good, I'm just saying, that, it's not unusual, nor unusually evil, in this complex, really bad, really cool, and perfect world. ... Richard On Feb 8, 2008 4:38 PM, Steve Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I reckon its because: Unlike other religions it has a more blatant business model involving charging for access to their version of the holy scriptures. It doesnt have the benefit of hundreds or thousands of years to obscure the origins of the texts. Having been a science fiction author does not help L Ron Hubbards score on the prophet credibility benchmark ;) They have a very aggressive policy towards those that are against their faith, L Rons paranoia influenced his creation rather a lot it seems. Still they are more likely to send you a threatening legal letter than tie you to a chair ;) They attack psychiatry in a very direct manner, and psychiatry is, along with the associated drugs, a large and protected industry in the US of A. If the things about Hubbard Ive read are even half true, it doesnt take long to see why he had it in for psychiatry, his personality reads like a long list of symptoms of mind illness. There are not so many scientologists, or nations wedded to scientology, to give them the power that quite a few religions enjoy. If a presidential candidate attacked them, he would not lose his base. Kids arent indoctrinated about them in schools, arent taught to tollerate them, or to see their beliefs as less crazy and creepy, or more 'genuinely spiritual', whatever that means. They havent got the 'one god' thing going for them. I know sci-fi has gone down well in recent decades, boy how I dont miss the 90's alien conspiracy obsessions for example, but its not yet proven to be a sound foundation for a credible modern religion. I dont know of any other religions that have questionnaires that ask whether you speak slowly. One thing they do have in common with other religions is being involved in the drug rehab business. I dont know much about their program, the wikipedia entry makes interesting reading. My favorite religious drug rehab story was
Re: [videoblogging] Re: National Protests of Scientology by Anonymous this Sunday
Having watched Steve Fishman's video deposition in full, I can no longer support this point of view. I guess I should first off mention that I have no love for the Catholic church in its current incarnation, so even given what I'm about to say, there is no inherent hypocrisy. There are three problems I see with Scientology. The first one is something Steve Fishman refers to as spiritual informed consent. The Catholic church is, for the most part, transparent. It's easy to know what you'll be getting yourself into if you want to join their program. The curricula for first mass are pretty easy to find, the theology is covered through a number of public documents, and the plan for your life is something the Catholic church encourages you to know. Scientology does not practice this. Scientology declares you as ill and claims that they will make you well. The methods by which they will do this, however, are incredibly secretive. The steps to your becoming a Clear are not laid out for you completely for you to examine and decide. Everything is given to you one grade at a time and must be accepted as absolute authority. This is the only path to becoming truly mentally and spiritually healthy allowed under Scientology. To paraphrase Fishman, this does not allow you informed consent. If a doctor tells you you're sick and require a surgery to become well, he also has to tell you what the surgery is, what effects you can expect, what the risks are, and you also retain the freedom to get a second opinion. This isn't offered on the Bridge, and it's a feature that isn't all that common in religions anymore. It's actually far more akin to groups like the Masons or the OTO, and they've come under a great deal of fire as a result. In fact, the Masons have been on a campaign of making themselves as transparent as possible so that they can show they're really a friendly society no different from the Moose, Elks, or Oddfellows. The next problem has to do with the way in which those who leave Scientology are treated. Try leaving the Catholic church today and see how hard it is. Sure, you might be treated by some as being on the path to perdition, but how many private investigators are going to follow you around and document your behavior? Will you be monitored for signs that you're criticizing the Catholic church? Will the Catholic church attempt to destroy your reputation if you speak out against them? I think not. The third problem is the direct criminal behavior they use to further their goals. Fishman, despite a Church of Scientology smear campaign, has reasonably demonstrated that the Church of Scientology trained him to commit the forms of fraud for which he was found guilty. Furthermore, the obstruction of justice charge against him was due to actions his Scientology Ethics Officer instructed him to do. This is to say nothing of famous moments in the Church of Scientology such as Operation Snow White, during which they attempted to frame the mayor of Clearwater, FL for hit-and-run charges. The government infiltration was vast. Mary Sue Hubbard went to prison over it. There were even attempts to petition the UN to have some enemies of the Church of Scientology accused of genocide. Now, it's true that the Catholic church has committed atrocities. Heck...there's even reason to believe they were tacit during the Holocaust. But it's important to understand that I wasn't alive during those times and, if I were, I'd have found their behavior atrocious and I'd be protesting them. This is the modern age, and I see no reason why this level of behavior is tolerated in a civil and democratic society. Bad behavior from the Catholic church is no longer tolerated, either, and I think it's fair to call out bad behavior when it happens. -- Rhett. I think it's weird that so many people are up in arms over Scientology, when other religions have been practicing equally cult-like behavior for centuries. And the fact that this 'anonymous' group is most concerned over their tax-free status is hilarious. Look how much money the Catholic church pulls in every year, tax-free. I'm not making a judgement call, just stating the obvious here. Scientology is like any other successful business/religion. They found their target audience, aggressively marketed to them, and are reaping the benefits. Celebrities are already so full of themselves, how could a religion that proclaims them to be God possibly fail to get their attention? -- *Adam Quirk* / Producer, Wreck Salvage LLC / [EMAIL PROTECTED] /+1 551.208.4644 (m) / imbullemhead (aim) On Feb 8, 2008 3:47 PM, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There's some here in Indy ... but I dunno if I want the scary Scientology people to be able to film me filming them filming the protest ... somehow I'm pretty sure that ends with me being tied to a chair in over lit basement room being forced to confess my deepest fears and flaws to an
RE: [videoblogging] Re: TrafficGeyser.com ?
Sure...because nobody ever made good videos but suffered from a lack of promotion. Making good videos and assuming the world will beat a path to your door is like opening a restaurant without advertising it. Good food or not, nobody knows you're there. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Make good videos. people will watch. Use service to get people to watch your videos is the absolute wrong way to go about it. Jim Kukral From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Iliya Krempeaux Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 2:05 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: TrafficGeyser.com ? From what I've heard of TubeMogul, it seem like a useful service But does TubeMogul provide SEO services?... which is what I think John was after (when asking about trafficgeyser.com). (My guess is he wants to get people to his site to watch his videos... rather than pushing his videos to other sites and have people watch them there.) See ya -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. http://ChangeLog.ca/ Motorsport Videos http://TireBiterZ.com/ Vlog Razor... Vlogging News... http://vlograzor.com/ On Feb 4, 2008 10:58 AM, marotblat [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:marotblat%40yahoo.com wrote: I don't have first hand experience with traffic geyser's subscription service, but I do know about TubeMogul's free service (I'm part of the founding team). We now also have a subscription service for corporate users. TubeMogul allows you to distribute to the top sites, which also gives you the ability to see your viewership stats across sites in one location. There are a bunch of new features, too, such as promotion of your video to social bookmarking sites and seeing all your comments in one place. Ask me if you have questions! Mark Rotblat [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:mark%40tubemogul.com http://www.tubemogul.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com , johnleeke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Have you had any experience with trafficgeyser.com It is a service with a monthly fee to get your videos at the top of Google results. John Leeke www.HistoricHomeWorks.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Whole Foods TV
I would say not to count on Whole Foods to do this. I like them, and regularly shop at the one a quarter mile from my home, but my perception of working with them on doing a video has told me that they're happy to carry a greenwashed product as long as you buy it. Here's my story. Back around September, Amy and I approached our local Whole Foods about doing a video with them as part of our Greentime videoblog. We wanted to do a piece on how we successfully use our Whole Foods to buy much of our regular groceries yet don't break the bank doing so. Much of this was going to focus on using the bulk foods bins to buy in bulk (a great way to reduce packaging and get only needed amounts of a product) as well as buying seasonally and being more mindful about food and food purchases. We received nothing but enthusiasm from the store manager on up to his regional manager and ultimately the manager of PR for the entire state. But, because this was going out on the Internet, it required national corporate approval. At this level, their PR department regularly failed to return calls and became sluggish on emails to the point of being unresponsive. They asked for a full prospectus of the video, which I gladly gave. The prospectus explained that we wanted to teach people how to shop sensibly at Whole Foods and to encourage people to think of Whole Foods as a place they could get many of their groceries, rather than treating it as a specialty store with heavy markups. The focus would be on using parts of the store people often overlook, and would in general be very positive about our experiences with Whole Foods. We had suggested that *only if it would further cast Whole Foods in a positive light* we would divulge price information and our grocery budget. We also promised to give them final editorial approval and explained that we'd be flexible to their needs. After weeks of phone tag and being ignored in general, I finally got a response-- We don't do price comparisons. That was it. The *optional* part of a video that we'd do only if it were *positive* and which was *at their discretion* was too much for them. We basically agreed to find a middle ground between our experiences and observations and being a total out-and-out shill for them. And they wouldn't provide us a little bit of access to one store with a manager that was already welcoming us with open arms. When I sent an email back to the PR rep a day later asking if she'd overlooked our promise to use price comparisons only if Whole Foods desired, I got an automated email saying that she was no longer with the company and that email responses from her replacement would be a month or more delayed, and a sentence that basically said Don't call us. We'll call you. So, our experience has told us that Whole Foods at the top level doesn't want you to see much behind the scenes. They want you to see only what's in a product's labeling and to accept their promises that they're doing the right thing. Amy and I are still working out how to do that video without access to the store, since it seems that some parts of it could be done without them. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime The US health supermarket, Whole Foods, has a videoblog now: http://wholefoodsmarket.com/socialmedia/secretingredient Its just cooking segment, but the blog layout is nice. Id like to see video showing where their food comes from. like here's a new product we are carrying. here's a trip to the place where it was made. I increasingly am skeptical of organic/fairtrade-claims on packaging. Video would be a good way to bridge this gap. Jay -- http://jaydedman.com 917 371 6790 Professional: http://ryanishungry.com Personal: http://momentshowing.net Photos: http://flickr.com/photos/jaydedman/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/jaydedman RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9 Yahoo! Groups Links
[videoblogging] Sales Recepts - Fair Use?
In light of what I mentioned about Whole Foods, I'm curious about something. What is the legal status of a sales receipt or the information printed on it? Can it be argued to contain copyrighted or protected information? Is it a public document? Is it *mine* once I have it? Does display of one fall under fair use? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Sales Recepts - Fair Use?
It might seem ridiculous to you, but knowing one's legal options before making a video that may be critical of an organization that has already declined to support you means making sure your ducks are in a row, because we don't want to have to take it down or take someone's threats seriously. For example, if the store's logo is printed on it, and I show the logo, could they come after us on a technicality? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime I think this is a little ridiculous, however having said that, there *are* things on a receipt that *may* be an issue. For example, coupons, advertisements and store promotions. Michael --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In light of what I mentioned about Whole Foods, I'm curious about something. What is the legal status of a sales receipt or the information printed on it? Can it be argued to contain copyrighted or protected information? Is it a public document? Is it *mine* once I have it? Does display of one fall under fair use? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Making a living with videoblogging
My first piece of advice would be to not have high expectations. There are a number of people on here making good scratch from their videoblogs, but I'm not sure how many of them actually expected they'd be able to make a living of it. It seems to be something you kinda have to fall ass-backward into unless you've got a serious business plan already. That also means there's not a huge probability that you'll make big full-time dough just from a videoblog. That said, I'm not really the guy to be giving advice on this topic, since I myself haven't found a huge amount of success, either financially or in audience numbers, from running videoblogs. If you can get sponsorship or investors, that's really a place to start. They may want creative control and you may feel like you're shilling for them, but they'll also be there to help promote the videoblog, and as far as I can tell, the greatest capital in this game is promotion. Investors will also help see you through those early and lean times. You'll probably need a business plan, though, so you should think in a very serious and detailed way on how you're going to be an asset to your sponsors or investors. Using a videoblog to help advertise your capabilities as a videographer and a web developer, however, may land you in some interesting jobs, especially if you have access to some really good equipment and you make good material. Even running around with my less-than-pro camera and slinging around my little videos, I've had some pretty nice side job offers, ranging from helping a barbershop quartet do a TV head stunt like the Blue Man Group...to training videos for a political party...to music videos for medium-level bands. When people get a feel for what you can do and feel that they can like and trust you, you can pick up work. Everyone needs videos made, and often they're just waiting for someone who's figured out a workflow to show up and do it. In all honesty, I've ended up turning down a lot of paying gigs because they wouldn't fit my busy schedule of work and doctoral thesis. Anyway, I admire your courage to give it a go. Think higher than you know is realistic and stick with it, and I'm sure something will emerge out there. Just don't forget to have Plan B on hand. :) -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime Sam Meager wrote: Been join this group awhile and really enjoy various interesting topics. I am currently consider doing videoblogging full-time but not sure if this can make enough for a living. What would be the best way to make a decent living as videoblogging? Get couple of major sponsors? doing freelance videographer on the side?... Any suggestions would really appreciated...(so I can make up my mind.) Sam _ Get the power of Windows + Web with the new Windows Live. http://www.windowslive.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_powerofwindows_122007 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Best sport ever
Sweet. Now if only I could convince some people to start a hovercraft polo league with me... -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime This has very little to do with videoblogging, so I'll keep it short. When Hunter Thompson was still alive, one of his last paying gigs was a (sometimes) weekly column for ESPN.com called Hey Rube. He wrote an article in early 2005 about a new sport he had invented with his friend, the Sheriff. (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?id=1992213) The sport is called Shotgun Golf, and I was determined to play it one day. Over this Thanksgiving holiday the stars aligned, and I found myself back home in Indiana with a bag full of golf balls, 200 shotgun shells, and some willing friends. I can finally mark this off my list of things to do before I die: http://office.wreckandsalvage.com/video/ws-045-shotgun-golf/ -- Adam Quirk Wreck Salvage 551.208.4644 Brooklyn, NY http://wreckandsalvage.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
[videoblogging] Spamming via Trackback?
Since Greentime is supported in (a very, very tiny) part by Google Ads, we did not feel right installing Akismet to handle our spam for us. I've gotten pretty good at weeding through Greentime's spam, but I came across something I haven't seen before. It looks like someone's trying to spam via a trackback. The person or thing in question seems to have set up a blog that does nothing but scrape the subject line and an except of the body from other blogs, then link to them. The blog is covered with ads, so I'm guessing the idea is that people will approve the trackbacks and then there will be lots of inbound links to the ad-laden blog. The blog in question is at http://apartment.wpbloggers.com/ Has anyone else seen this sort of thing before? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Spamming via Trackback?
Yeah...I've seen a lot of faux comments. Some of them get fairly intricate. I'd just never seen this trackback-based spamming before. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Yes, this happens a lot. I think the term is splog (spam blog). Mark as spam! We've also been seeing a rise of comments that look like comments, but aren't (i.e. will say I really liked your article [article name], but i am not sure I 100% agree - or something similar to that). Regards, -Frank http://www.mefeedia.com/user/franks/ - What are you watching? --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since Greentime is supported in (a very, very tiny) part by Google Ads, we did not feel right installing Akismet to handle our spam for us. I've gotten pretty good at weeding through Greentime's spam, but I came across something I haven't seen before. It looks like someone's trying to spam via a trackback. The person or thing in question seems to have set up a blog that does nothing but scrape the subject line and an except of the body from other blogs, then link to them. The blog is covered with ads, so I'm guessing the idea is that people will approve the trackbacks and then there will be lots of inbound links to the ad-laden blog. The blog in question is at http://apartment.wpbloggers.com/ Has anyone else seen this sort of thing before? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Spamming via Trackback?
I'd imagine it's not hard to get your hands on the spam filter algorithm. If you know what spam you and other spammers have been sending, then you can train the filter using it and determine what weights it's giving to different words and phrases, then form a new phrase that scores low on the filter's algorithm. Just a guess, though. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime it really blows my mind when the comment spam gets thru my typepad comment captcha -- how do they do that? On 10/15/07, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yiteah...I've seen a lot of faux comments. Some of them get fairly intricate. I'd just never seen this trackback-based spamming before. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Yes, this happens a lot. I think the term is splog (spam blog). Mark as spam! We've also been seeing a rise of comments that look like comments, but aren't (i.e. will say I really liked your article [article name], but i am not sure I 100% agree - or something similar to that). Regards, -Frank http://www.mefeedia.com/user/franks/ - What are you watching? --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since Greentime is supported in (a very, very tiny) part by Google Ads, we did not feel right installing Akismet to handle our spam for us. I've gotten pretty good at weeding through Greentime's spam, but I came across something I haven't seen before. It looks like someone's trying to spam via a trackback. The person or thing in question seems to have set up a blog that does nothing but scrape the subject line and an except of the body from other blogs, then link to them. The blog is covered with ads, so I'm guessing the idea is that people will approve the trackbacks and then there will be lots of inbound links to the ad-laden blog. The blog in question is at http://apartment.wpbloggers.com/ Has anyone else seen this sort of thing before? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Yahoo! Groups Links -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
[videoblogging] Acoustic echo control
Hey guys! You guessed it. We're back with another production-related question. We've been learning to use this new condenser boom-mounted mic in our videos and we love the freedom it's offering us, but we're also noticing that it picks up a fairly heavy amount of acoustic echo when our voices bounce off of the walls and floor. I'm sure people on here have faced this issue before, so would some of you veterans pass on your wisdom on either removing the acoustic echo or preventing it? I've been trying a mixture of notch filters and a bass boost on the editing console, but the results haven't satisfied me. Most of the Google searches I do on this only deal with telephony, so I haven't found good resources yet. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
Re: [videoblogging] Embedding vs. Not
Call us mercenary, but the numbers don't lie. Our audience seems to prefer embeds, so we give them embeds. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime Brook Hinton wrote: I'm curious what others feel about the experience of watching video embedded in a blog / webpage of other content vs the old fashioned experience of just the movie opening in a new window. Like not even a pop up - a whole window. Maybe its my emotional tie to a more theatrical world, but I am so much more focused on a piece when it is ALONE. I go to the actual sites for context, but when I click to play a video, I'm always so disappointed when it plays on the page, and even a little annoyed when its just a popup and all the other stuff is still in my visual field. The only exception is something like disco-nnect or some of the other hacky web art vlogs where the chaos of multiple looping windows is the whole point. On the other hand I completely see the plusses of embedded video from an overall design perspective, and for video which is more about information or entertainment than primarily an aesthetic/conceptual experience I wonder if the surrounding visual and textual material can be a boon. What do the rest of you find - as viewers and as creators? Or is the whole thing such a non issue to most that I'm just revealing my ever advancing age here? Brook ___ Brook Hinton film/video/audio art www.brookhinton.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] On the off chance someone has this USB Mic...
I haven't used that one, but I do have a Blue Snowball USB mic and I love it. Cheap, good, and rugged. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Jarod Dixon wrote: Looking to see if anyone has used the R0de podcaster usb Mic for voice overs and whatnot. Thinking of picking one up - I know the company is reputable but don't know anyone that's actually used the product. Thanks in advance! Jarod. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.8bit-me.com Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Please help me with Green TV, Lori Lake
Hi! I can't help you with website design, as I'm up to my elbows in my own work, but I have been trying hard to foster better community and solidarity among green video bloggers. I'd like to link you from my project, Greentime (http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime). Perhaps if you like the work we do, you'd do the same? Cross-pollination is always a good thing. :) -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime My name is Lori Lake, I am the creator of Green TV and request the help of this very creative group of minds. I am debt-free and located on a small waterfront estate at the head of the Chesapeake Bay. I created Green TV over years ago because people around me kept getting sick and dying from pollution. I am not an activist or extremist, I am a business woman and considered a green expert by many because I (with my own hands and mind) designed, built and personally financed my own green facility on a killer waterfront that includes two furnished guest suites. I write to find how Green TV could make a great interactive site and the reason is not my existing Green TV web site or content. Since going live on the internet less than 1-year ago, I have had people from all over the globe asking how they could contribute their green photos and/or videos (ranging from amateurs to architects, local politicians to government leaders, educators to media) After much thought, I decided to forgo my original Green TV platform and move towards allowing others to create their own Green TV stations like GreenTV.com/India, GreenTV.com NewYork and so on. The site I like for my Green TV stations to be modeled after is http://cu.naturalhomemagazine.com/ yet it does not accept videos yet, however, it would provide a basic idea of what people coming to Green TV want to report on; Green building projects, green people in their community, green business/government/educator leaders again, all on a local to them basis. Imagine thousands worldwide contributing to a better planet while riding on the coat tails of Al Gore's 5-year green campaign! Thank you and I look forward to a mutual beneficial business relationship with one or members of the incredibly helpful videoblogging. Lori Lake Direct contact: Lori Lake http://www.greentv.com/contact.htm Web site: Green TV.com Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Hiss from audio mixer
Rob Danielson wrote: Hi Rhett-- The sensitivity (output) of the SE1 is 10mV/Pa which is the lower-end of condenser mics but still acceptable. Noise of 17dBA is acceptable. It seems to want at least 44 volts phantom. It doesn't sound like you are getting just mixer or camcorder preamp noise-- more like you are not getting enough phantom power to the mics or have a mixer - camcorder connection issue. The Peavey PV-6 pre/mixer manual specs don't state that the phantom voltage is 48 volts. I've seen Phantom power at 40 volts or less on some inexpensive mixers. Are you going to a 3.5mm mic level input on a camcorder or line level? If the former, I'd just use a Rolls PB224 which will provide 48 volts and add absolutely no audible noise. You can make a 2-XLR to 3.5mm stereo plug unbalanced Y cable and plug right into the camcorder's stereo mic input. The Rolls PB224 is small enough to attach to the end of your boom pole and its stereo so you can run two SE-1's. The Rolls will power just one mic at a time too but use the stereo cable. Takes 2- 9 volt batteries (~2 hours) or you can make a sled with 8-AA's (~6-10 hours) for the 12 volt coax input. If you are using line inputs on the camcorder, let us know more about the model, jacks etc. Rob D. Rob, Thank you for your detailed response an analysis. With respect to phantom power, the Peavey PV-6 is supposed to be providing 48V phantom power. That's what it says in the manual I got with it, and the mixer itself says +48V Phantom on the button for engaging phantom power. My first guess right now is that it's a question of the connection between the camcorder and the mixer. I say that because, as I mentioned in my previous email, I ran two tests-- (1) headphones plugged into mixer -- no noise (2) headphones plugged into camcorder, camcorder plugged into mixer (any output) -- noise, even when no mic is plugged in and gains are all down I don't know if it's a line level or a mic level input, but offhand, I'd suspect it's a mic level input. The camcorder is a Panasonic PV-GS150. For the sake of argument, though, let's say that it is a matter of it being a mic level instead of a line level. I already have a phantom power source in this mixer, so is there something I could do that wouldn't involve buying some new phantom power source? I'd just like the feeling that my investment wasn't wasted. :) If I really need to get a new phantom power supply, I will, but it'll be the last time I do business at that store, because the pro audio guy bilked me. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
[videoblogging] Hiss from audio mixer
Guys, We've been trying to improve our sound setup, but to no avail. I'm mildly desperate for advice. Most of the time, we've been using a Shure handheld microphone. Sounds great, but looks stupid unless you're in the field. So, we tried to upgrade. We bought an SE Electronics SE1A condenser microphone, boom, and a Peavey PV-6 mixer to provide the condenser mic its phantom power. We hook everything up, and we check the headphone out (after adapting the 1/4 stereo plug to 1/8), and it sounds beautiful. Love it. Can't wait to use it. So, we run one of the outputs to the camera (again, this requires a 1/4 to 1/8 adapter). Even with the gain turned all the way down, there's a constant audible hiss in the background. It doesn't matter if everything on the mixer is off and all the inputs are unplugged. It also doesn't matter if we run the headphone (stereo) out to the camera or if we run one of the mono channels to the camera. The noise floor is there, it's just a question of how many ears we hear it in. So, what gives? Why the hiss and noise floor when we run it to the camera, but not when we listen in on the headphones directly? Is there a way to remedy this, or did I get an expensive pile of junk for my birthday? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
Re: [videoblogging] Owning a television...
I have three televisions, one of which is HD. I sometimes (very rarely) use the HDTV as a monitor for my laptop, but that's a minimal use case. I watch TV a pretty fair amount and own a TiVO. In fact, it was via my TiVO that I found Rocketboom and got inspired to videoblog. I have also converted one of our older videoblog entries to a DVD format to submit to more traditional film and video festivals. Additionally, it's pretty common for me to watch YouTube or flash videos on my TV using my Nintendo Wii. It's the easiest way to see them on a large screen without having to fiddle with cables. TV is one screen of many, and it's not to be ignored, in my estimation. It's so iconic of the bad old days that, when people speak of media convergence or new media, they throw out the TV, but I think there's an unexplored country in ways to bring new media and better options for media convergence to the TV. Given how many households will continue to use it as their first screen, it's still an essential part of the mix. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime I wanted to conduct a quick straw poll to see how many people here don't own a/don't watch 'normal' tv. I was just reading a message from MissB where she comments on the fact that she doesn't have a tv. I know Tanja from Freshtopia doesn't, I don't either. It would be interesting to find out whether this is true of lots of people here, or just a few. Is there any correlation between turning off your television and making the content yourself? Just thought I would throw that question to the group.
RE: [videoblogging] Owning a television...
Wii access to online video basically works this way-- it plays flash video, and I think only up to Flash 7 or something like that. It's enough to play YouTube, and YMMV outside of that. To do it, go to the Wii Shop Channel and get the Opera web browser. It used to be free...I think now they sell it for a small amount of money. I love having the browser on my Wii and use it quite often. It's a handy way to show a website on a larger screen when I don't feel like fumbling to get my laptop connected. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime Very interested in how the Wii accesses online video. Any links to info on that? My wife just bought one and I'd like to start viewing my personal Mefeedia channel on it, which gives me one consolidated feed to the 67 videoblogs that I am watching. Devices such as the Wii are exactly why a personal channel works. I can manage all of my subscriptions on the Web and maybe even enjoy a few videos on my computer - but when I am ready to really relax, lay back with a beer, and sit in front of the TV, I want to just watch this personal channel of everything that is new from the 67 videoblogs that I like. I am infinitely excited to start using this. The path to the TV is becoming much clearer. Regards, -Frank Frank Sinton CEO [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mefeedia.com/user/franks/ http://mefeedia.com - Discover, Collect, and Share video blogs _ From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of J. Rhett Aultman Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 2:49 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Owning a television... I have three televisions, one of which is HD. I sometimes (very rarely) use the HDTV as a monitor for my laptop, but that's a minimal use case. I watch TV a pretty fair amount and own a TiVO. In fact, it was via my TiVO that I found Rocketboom and got inspired to videoblog. I have also converted one of our older videoblog entries to a DVD format to submit to more traditional film and video festivals. Additionally, it's pretty common for me to watch YouTube or flash videos on my TV using my Nintendo Wii. It's the easiest way to see them on a large screen without having to fiddle with cables. TV is one screen of many, and it's not to be ignored, in my estimation. It's so iconic of the bad old days that, when people speak of media convergence or new media, they throw out the TV, but I think there's an unexplored country in ways to bring new media and better options for media convergence to the TV. Given how many households will continue to use it as their first screen, it's still an essential part of the mix. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherl http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime ight.com/freetime http://www.weatherl http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime ight.com/greentime I wanted to conduct a quick straw poll to see how many people here don't own a/don't watch 'normal' tv. I was just reading a message from MissB where she comments on the fact that she doesn't have a tv. I know Tanja from Freshtopia doesn't, I don't either. It would be interesting to find out whether this is true of lots of people here, or just a few. Is there any correlation between turning off your television and making the content yourself? Just thought I would throw that question to the group. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Owning a television...
It's worth noting that, despite the fact that I watch a lot of television, I'm generally not focusing on it. Between my job, my doctorate, Greentime, Freetime (still technically active), the ever-impending-event (was my wedding, now it's Dragon*Con), gym, garden, baking and brewing, etc, etc, I don't have a lot of time in the day. But, I often have time when I'm cooking dinner. So, I flip on The Simpsons and listen to an episode. When I come home to eat lunch, I catch up on The Daily Show or The Colbert Report. While I'm digging through a book, editing, or updating a website, I might put on an episode of Mythbusters or maybe a lacrosse or hockey game. My attention span is a funny beast. I have a hard time focusing on one thing for any period of time, but if two things compete for my attention, things get easier. The only thing on TV that gets my undivided attention is Battlestar Galactica. Anything resembling vegging out is usually done after I've been out with friends and I'm a little too drunk to be productive anymore. I almost never use my TV for watching a movie, incidentally. I don't sit still long enough for watching movies, and when I do, they generally annoy me. I loved movies until I started making my own. Then I started noticing awkward cuts, bad performances, plot and pacing issues, etc. If I want to get frustrated, Fox News broadcasts 24 hours a day, and they'll do the job much quicker than a film. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime For one thing, making media simply takes time and that cuts down amount I might watch television. These days, most of my video watching is online and through out the day, not at one time. I watch almost no television programming, although I still use my tv to watch DVD and VHS movies that I own. Unfortunately, I still feel that I see more tv programming than I would like just by passing by when others are watching. Most people that I have asked who claim to like television say that they like the veg time. While I can still get absorbed in a good video or film, I not into vegging at all. Recently we had a major fire. I turned on the TV to find out what was up. I must admit, it gave me great information. There was just a bulletin on the screen that said to check out my friend Tyler's http://ojaipost.com vlog!!! So much for television :) Markus -- http://tools.ourmedia.org [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] new ways to distribute your shows
What makes these sites a preferable choice to other places offering similar features? Places like Veoh have offered these kinds of syndication, and Blip.tv also has similar features. Why would I want to use these sites over others? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime just read this on Shelly Palmer's Media 3.0 site. you can sign up for a daily email from him. i find it very useful and concise. thx, eric. VIDMETRIX has launched its own multi-site video uploader. The tool will allow video publishers to automatically distribute their content to seven video-sharing sites: YouTube, MySpace, Metacafe, Google, Yahoo, Revver, and Veoh. Tubemogul, which announced a multi-site uploader last week, is adding 3 new distribution sites to its service today, bringing its total reach to 9 video-sharing sites. MY DAMN CHANNEL is a new online video destination launching this morning. The site will emphasize professional, episodic content, and promises to disrupt media by giving content creators artistic freedom. The early roster of professionals includes comedian Harry Shearer, producer Don Was, actor Paul Reiser, and Web phenom Andy Milonakis. MDC will syndicate its content across video-sharing sites, and collect advertising revenue. The site has signed a distribution deal with YouTube. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
[videoblogging] Blank tape detected in Premiere
Guys, When I dump a tape to Premiere, it sometimes stops in the middle of the capture process and says capture stopped because blank tape was detected. I've become used to this as a minor glitch that occurs once in a blue moon. Lately, though, it's been happening a lot. It seems to crop up once every two minutes of footage. The footage itself is there, and if I back up to the beginning of the scene and capture again, everything's fine. This is becoming an annoyance, though, and I'm afraid it might be a sign of impending equipment failure, which is something I can't afford. The camera itself is only about a year old, and it hasn't seen heavy, regular use until about last March when Greentime began. Does anyone have any experience with this error? Is there something I need to do to help fix this? I tried my head cleaner on my camera, but to no avail. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime
Re: [videoblogging] Blank tape detected in Premiere
I am using Scene Detect. If I turn it off, though, won't I have to go in and split out all the scenes by hand? I haven't noticed a problem with it mis-detecting scene boundaries, only with it thinking that it's hit blank tape or something. I'll try getting more religious about what tape brand I use and I'll try re-cleaning with a little more alcohol (I used virtually none last time). -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime I've had that problem before too. Are you using Scene Detect during capture? That could be part of the problem. It tries to add a few extra frames in between stop points during batch captures, and it usually fails.
Re: [videoblogging] The Vloggies (was Re: irina gone)
I strongly agree with this. I realize it's business as usual for more traditional media businesses to use award shows as a way to scratch the backs of their VIPs and biggest stakeholders, but I find something like that entirely disingenuous in the case of PodTech and the Vloggies. Not only that, but it's bad business sense in a market where the largest stakeholders are ill defined and change every few months. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime John, this is why you have to talk about this here and not on the phone with someone. If you want to engage this community then engage us. You can't have private, offline conversations about things like this. For everyone else, if you don't like the way PodTech is handling things then DON'T LET THEM HANDLE IT. Don't participate in their awards show and don't accept any awards. If nobody recognizes The Vloggies then it doesn't matter who owns the trademark. If you still want awards then someone will have to organize the community to do it. - Verdi On 7/24/07, Kent Nichols [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Off-list? If you want to engage my professional services, contact my agents. Barrett Garese at UTA. If you want to talk about the Vloggies, let's talk about the Vloggies here in public. I support an open awards show that is owned by no company. I think that Trademarking Vloggies gives your company too much control. The Oscars are owned by the film industry, and the Emmys are owned by the TV industry. There were several sponsors last year, don't they also have as much right to the mark of the Vloggies as PodTech? Oh but you have more rights don't you? Because the person that came up with the idea, the person that organized it and made it a success was on your dime... The person that was just let go, right after the Trademark was filed... By landgrabbing Vloggies, you are trying to own an industry, which is unconscionable. You guys are smart, you're just caught in a lot of bad decisions. You should donate that mark to the Creative Commons, or EFF, or create a new non-profit that will run the awards. That would be the right thing to do, and might start repairing the PR nightmare you guys are experiencing right now. -Kent, askaninja.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, John Furrier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kent, Email me if you'd like to get involved and we can chat off list John -- http://michaelverdi.com http://spinxpress.com http://freevlog.org Author of Secrets Of Videoblogging - http://tinyurl.com/me4vs Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] The Vloggies (was Re: irina gone)
For what it's worth, Freetime is profoundly unpopular, and we still won a People's Choice for Best Documentary, so this isn't necessarily true. Also, having the Vloggy definitely improved our viewership, as we went from being completely unknown to being only moderately unknown. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime Popular shows win, because they get more votes. Popular shows tend to be commercial show concepts rather than, say, personal videoblogs. So in the end the main benefactors of awards are popular shows who can then put up banners saying Winner of 5 vloggies and tell that to their viewers and the press. That might help Ask A Ninja or Galacticast or Ze Frank who benefit from being seen by the maximum number of people because they have mass appeal.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone
No offense, but our Vloggy has meant a lot to us. In fact, it's the only positive regard we ever got from Freetime. It's also the only time that project ever got linked by anyone else's blogs. If we hadn't had that modicum of success in getting even the most rudimentary audience, I probably wouldn't have had the energy to go forward with Greentime. When you've already made it, awards are pretty pointless. When you're desperately trying to make a name for yourself, every bit of positive attention counts. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime Awards don't mean a goddamn thing. They're stupid. They're all stupid. It's beyond me that we feel the need to set aside a night to give out these jagoff bowling trophies so all these people can pat each other on the back about how much money they're making boring the piss out of half the world. Jerry Seinfeld http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_OqvUbBNA4 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] The Cult of the Amateur
Anyone who promotes their book on Coast to Coast AM with Georgy Noory is already on my list of windbags who just enjoy the sound of their own voices slightly more than they enjoy the sound of cages being pointlessly rattled. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime On 7/12/07, terry.rendon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In the book The Cult of the Amateur http://ajkeen.com/e.htm , Andrew Keen basically trashes 'Web 2.0'. Excerpt here http://ajkeen.com/e.htm . I was wondering what you all thought of the premise of this book??? Keen is the biggest troll of all time. I've heard him interviewed twice and both times he backtracks, makes ridiculous statements (for example he said that there is no legitimate reason to be anonymous on the web, tell that to dissidents, whistle blowers, activists etc working around the world) and bravely battles his 'cult of the amateur' straw man. This guy is a complete joke. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Is Blip DOWN?
Looks it to me. Their site is timing out and all the material on my blog that loads through them is stalled out. At least when I hosted my own videos, the blog and videos all went down together. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime what timing Yahoo! Groups Links
[videoblogging] My iPod format is wrong?
Gang, I've had some complaints from my viewers that the .m4v files we generate for distribution on iTunes are not compatible with video iPods. We're finding this horribly confusing because we generate them with Quicktime using the Movie to iPod exporter. Could I trouble someone to pull up http://greentime.blip.tv/?file_type=mov,mpeg4,mp4,m4v,mp3skin=rss in iTunes, look at Greentime Episode #6 or #5 and see what might be wrong? We can't find anything wrong at all, but we also don't have an iPod to try it on. We'd be most grateful. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
Re: [videoblogging] Re: My iPod format is wrong?
Thanks for a little sanity checking, Steve. I really will need to follow up with the user in specific and see what's going on, because we've been pretty sure that, at least for the recent episodes, things were fine. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime That is indeed horribly confusing because m4v's created by quicktime ipod export option should always play. I just tried episode 6 on my ipod and it transferred and played fine. So I dunno, got any detail on what the people with a problem are experiencing? Plays o in itunes but wont transfer to ipod? Strange! Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gang, I've had some complaints from my viewers that the .m4v files we generate for distribution on iTunes are not compatible with video iPods. We're finding this horribly confusing because we generate them with Quicktime using the Movie to iPod exporter. Could I trouble someone to pull up http://greentime.blip.tv/?file_type=mov,mpeg4,mp4,m4v,mp3skin=rss in iTunes, look at Greentime Episode #6 or #5 and see what might be wrong? We can't find anything wrong at all, but we also don't have an iPod to try it on. We'd be most grateful. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Re: My iPod format is wrong?
Well, I'm not using 640x480 videos. I generally render my NTSC avi into a 320x240 MOV file first, then transcode the 320x240 MOV into a 320x240 FLV and a 320x240 M4V. Since I'm not allowed to manually set options when I use the movie to iPod export in QT, that would basically mean that QT is intentionally choosing a bitrate that's too high for some iPod generations, no? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime FYI, 640x480 videos do not play on my video iPod. I think maybe it's a generational thing with the iPod. I have the latest version of iTunes. When I plug my iPod in and check for updates, I get the message that my iPod is up to date - so I am not being offered the opportunity to update the firmware (maybe I was in the past - if it says I need an update, I update). Nevertheless, the 640x480 videos will not transfer onto the iPod even though they play fine in iTunes. Your users may be in the same boat with me. I believe I bought my iPod last February, so that's approximately 15 months ago. I think a new generation of video iPod came out after that - I don't remember - if it did then it's possibly an iPod generation thing. When I have time, which will be in about 2 weeks, I intend to take the iPod over to my local Apple store and ask about this problem. If I learn anything useful I'll post it here. Cheryl Colan I vlog: hummingcrow.com I make: whatwefound.blogspot.com I teach: node101phoenix.org --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for a little sanity checking, Steve. I really will need to follow up with the user in specific and see what's going on, because we've been pretty sure that, at least for the recent episodes, things were fine. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime That is indeed horribly confusing because m4v's created by quicktime ipod export option should always play. I just tried episode 6 on my ipod and it transferred and played fine. So I dunno, got any detail on what the people with a problem are experiencing? Plays o in itunes but wont transfer to ipod? Strange! Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman wlight@ wrote: Gang, I've had some complaints from my viewers that the .m4v files we generate for distribution on iTunes are not compatible with video iPods. We're finding this horribly confusing because we generate them with Quicktime using the Movie to iPod exporter. Could I trouble someone to pull up http://greentime.blip.tv/?file_type=mov,mpeg4,mp4,m4v,mp3skin=rss in iTunes, look at Greentime Episode #6 or #5 and see what might be wrong? We can't find anything wrong at all, but we also don't have an iPod to try it on. We'd be most grateful. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Re: My iPod format is wrong?
You're a research machine, Steve. Thanks. Luckily, the complaining viewer shows up at my parties a lot, so I can just ask him to bring the iPod with him or something and see what the heck is going on. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime OK Im concluding that all video ipods should be able to be updated to run the same spec files as the current 5.5G ipod. And I looked into the bitrate thing a bit more and I dont think there's anything wrong with your bitrate. The slightly larger bitrate being stated is because that includes the audio, this is totally normal. When I export your video from quicktime but select 'pass-though', it tells me the bitrate for the video is 678kbps, which is lower than the max ipod 768kbps spec for that sort of file. So just to re-iterate, the stated 768kbps ipod bitrate limit for 320x240 baseline h264, is just for the video part, doesnt include audio, so its normal that your video audio combined can exceed that bitrate. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Steve Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Strange, I thought I bought an ipod as soon as they could do video, yet mine is updated and can play the 640x480 stuff. What version of software does itunes say is on your ipod? Mine is 1.2.1 Meanwhile Im not exactly sure about this bitrate thing. To be honest theres usually a bit of flexibility with bitrates, not least because the numbers we usually take about are the average bitrate, it often varies quite a bit throughout the file. Quicktime may report one bitrate for the file, but expensive mp4 analysis software can show how the bitrate changes over the length of the video. I'll see what I can find about ipod or itunes bitrate limits. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman wlight@ wrote: Well, I'm not using 640x480 videos. I generally render my NTSC avi into a 320x240 MOV file first, then transcode the 320x240 MOV into a 320x240 FLV and a 320x240 M4V. Since I'm not allowed to manually set options when I use the movie to iPod export in QT, that would basically mean that QT is intentionally choosing a bitrate that's too high for some iPod generations, no? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime FYI, 640x480 videos do not play on my video iPod. I think maybe it's a generational thing with the iPod. I have the latest version of iTunes. When I plug my iPod in and check for updates, I get the message that my iPod is up to date - so I am not being offered the opportunity to update the firmware (maybe I was in the past - if it says I need an update, I update). Nevertheless, the 640x480 videos will not transfer onto the iPod even though they play fine in iTunes. Your users may be in the same boat with me. I believe I bought my iPod last February, so that's approximately 15 months ago. I think a new generation of video iPod came out after that - I don't remember - if it did then it's possibly an iPod generation thing. When I have time, which will be in about 2 weeks, I intend to take the iPod over to my local Apple store and ask about this problem. If I learn anything useful I'll post it here. Cheryl Colan I vlog: hummingcrow.com I make: whatwefound.blogspot.com I teach: node101phoenix.org --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman wlight@ wrote: Thanks for a little sanity checking, Steve. I really will need to follow up with the user in specific and see what's going on, because we've been pretty sure that, at least for the recent episodes, things were fine. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime That is indeed horribly confusing because m4v's created by quicktime ipod export option should always play. I just tried episode 6 on my ipod and it transferred and played fine. So I dunno, got any detail on what the people with a problem are experiencing? Plays o in itunes but wont transfer to ipod? Strange! Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman wlight@ wrote: Gang, I've had some complaints from my viewers that the .m4v files we generate for distribution on iTunes are not compatible with video iPods. We're finding this horribly confusing because we generate them with Quicktime using the Movie to iPod exporter. Could I trouble someone to pull up http://greentime.blip.tv/?file_type=mov,mpeg4,mp4,m4v,mp3skin=rss in iTunes, look at Greentime Episode #6 or #5 and see what might be wrong? We can't find anything wrong at all, but we also don't have an iPod to try it on. We'd be most grateful. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com
Re: [videoblogging] Need advice on how to conduct an interview for use on a blog.
Hi, can anyone recommend any books or articles, etc, that give advice on how to conduct an interview with a guest. I am looking for tips on things to do, and not do during an interview with a guest, from the perspective of being the host. OK, thanks, Ed. Creative Cow Magazine covered this in...I think it was their February issue. The big thing to remember is that it's the guest who's the focus, not you, so just ask a question and let the guest riff. If you need to steer them back onto an intended topic, just ask a follow up question, but let the guest run. Also, prep is good. Lots of guests appreciate knowing the questions you'll be asking in advance, and this gives you both time to work out what angle the interview will be taking. Working out the questions in advance, and even writing them down, can be good because it gives you a chance to ensure you've got all your bases covered. Draw up an outline of points, if it helps you think of more questions. Also, too much is better than not enough. It's better to have an interview go long than it is to have missed a major point. Other than that, just remember you're there to let the guest talk, and it'll go fine. Unless it's a hostile interview, in which case, disregard that. :) -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Josh Wolf to be releases
I can't stop to watch the video at work...what happened? The Wiki for his blog now reads: Josh Wolf is an independent journalist and blogger who finked on his friends when he agreed to testify and turn over unpublished video out-takes to a federal grand jury investigating a July, 2005 anti-G8 demonstration. Did he cave? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime Regardless of whether he gets MSM attention or not, I am glad he is going to be released. Heath http://batmangeek.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, schlomo rabinowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is good news, indeed!!! Now, hopefully, Josh Wolf gets more MSM attention than justin.tv is getting... Schlomo http://schlomolog.blogspot.com http:/winkshow.com http://hatfactory.net http://evilvlog.com On 4/3/07, Steve Rhodes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It has been annouced that Josh will be released. He has put the video he didn't include in his original piece on blip. the video a brief statement are at http://joshwolf.net/blog/ -- Steve Rhodes http://ari.typepad.com http://tigerbeat.vox.com blogs http://flickr.com/photos/ari/ photos http://del.icio.us/tigerbeat interesting articles sites http://twitter.com/tigerbeat [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Dreamhost vs blip.tv?
Yes. Making QT my main format caused no end of headaches from people telling me they had trouble with QT, so I decided to go with Flash. Dreamhost also offers their own Flash transcoder, but I felt that Blip.tv offered more in the way of social support, such as serving as the mouthpiece of vloggers when video got scraped against people's CC licenses, that I went with them for my new show. Blip has its ups and downs, but I've been pleased overall. I now host Greentime on Blip and have it crosspost to a Wordpress blog I keep on Dreamhost. It is a pretty good arrangement, and I don't know that I'd go back to doing everything completely off Dreamhost. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime Daniel Foster wrote: New to vlogging and setting up my vlog now. Not certain whether I should go with an inexpensive high disk-space / bandwidth server (dreamhost) or a host such as blip.tv. This will be on my own domain. I¹ve read over blip¹s licensing terms, so I¹m aware of that. I plan to eventually post numerous videos (more than 100) as I already have lots of content. I¹m tending toward dreamhost, which seems to give me more control and I could use their QT streaming capabilities. Would this be a good choice ? Any other guidance regarding this is much appreciated! Thanks. * DF [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] vbweek is canceled!
Heath, with us launching Greentime, we haven't had the time to be able to even think about VBW, but we'd love to consider another week. Personally, I'd love to do a green video blogging week. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime Heath wrote: Just kiddingwell it is for me anyway. I will try but I just don't see how I can possibly do it this week. One, I will be gone 4 nights out of the week doing play stuff, Two - I will be gone most nights doing play stuff Maybe I will play catch up on the other days, I thought about filming a bunch of stuff todaybut responsability looks like it is getting in the way again of me having fun...Oh joy... So I am declaring this for all those who can't vlog this week, let's do another week! why not, right? We can do what we want no rules! The beauty of internet vloggingno rules... So who's with me?! knowing my track record.I am guessing no one. ;) but I don't care, I'm going to do it cause I can, and I will still tag it video blogging week 2007, cause who is going to stop me! Heath (fighting the man, since before I was born!) http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Alternative to Videoblogging Week
I recognzine only one soverignty, and that is the nationless nation of Subgenii. I recognize only one propaganda, which I interpret in the rings of smoke which emerge from the face of the Great Piped One. 13013 be his number, Dobbs be his name. An orange is nothing but a juicy pumpkin. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime valdezatron wrote: The videoblogulebrities will have you believe that April 1st marks the beginning of Videoblogging Week. I'm here to tell you, brothers and sisters, that the first week of April is traditionally reserved for WRECK SALVAGE PROPAGANDA PURPOSES ONLY. We at Wreck and Salvage encourage you to not create your own media during this time. Any such actions will be seen as an imminent threat to our sovereignty. Instead, sit there and ingest Wreck and Salvage transmissions. If you have to make anything, please - WRECK SALVAGE PROPAGANDA ONLY and be sure to tag your videos Bikini Grease. Thank you for your support (really, you have no choice). We will be disseminating 21 new doctrines from the following locales: http://www.bullemhead.com http://www.bottomunion.com http://www.valdezatron.com Sincerely, Aaron Valdez Yahoo! Groups Links
[videoblogging] Greentime, the new green video blog.
Hey...I hate to stound dim, but I accidentally deleted the email explaining how I can sync up my Planet2025 show with my main RSS feed. Could you resend it? Also, you'd mentioned desiring my input as a mobile devices developer. I'd by happy to offer input. What were you looking to do? -- Rhett. caroosky wrote: Hey Rhett, Sounds like an amazing project! Be sure to list it over at Planet2025.tv http://planet2025.tv . It's just the sort of thing we are looking for! In fact, if you decide to join us over there, be sure to let me know. I'd love to feature you. Best, Carter Harkins http://planet2025.tv http://crowdabout.us --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey, everyone. Amy and I have been rubbing our heads together over the last month or so, and we've launched a second video blog. This one is going to be much closer to a true blog than Freetime because it's going to be mostly about us and our lives. The premise of the new video blog, called Greentime (http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime), is that it is going to record and share a slice of our lives as we work, week by week, to make our lives more green. We're planning on doing episodes on going vegan, growing your own food, how to reduce consumption or better recycle, carbon offsets, etc, etc. It's quite literally what we were thinking about and trying out (and often committing to) that previous week. This show is more than just a little bit of fun for us. We're actually very serious about sustainability, fair trade, globabl warming, and whatnot, and we're putting out this show because, like a lot of people, we want to be part of the solution but can't just abandon our careers and live on our own self-sustainable farm. We want to use the vlog to help others like us who live urban lifestyles understand there are things they, too, can be doing, and that environmentalism is for all of us and starts at home. I'm trying to get the site out to the general community, and if anyone out there would like to join in on the process, I'd really appreciate it. I've posted releases on both Digg and Hugg (Digg for green topics). You can find the articles here: http://digg.com/videos/educational/Greentime_New_Green_Video_Blog_Launch\ ed http://www.hugg.com/story/Greentime-New-Green-Video-Blog-Launched-1/ And if you could Digg and Hugg them it would mean a lot to me. Also, if you would like to blogroll us, link to us, blog about us, or whatnot, the site's main URL is http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime and we're also on Blip.tv at http://greentime.blip.tv. Thanks a lot, to everyone in this community, for your continued support. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Greentime, the new green video blog.
Whoops...wrong recipient. Sorry about that, everyone. J. Rhett Aultman wrote: Hey...I hate to stound dim, but I accidentally deleted the email explaining how I can sync up my Planet2025 show with my main RSS feed. Could you resend it? Also, you'd mentioned desiring my input as a mobile devices developer. I'd by happy to offer input. What were you looking to do? -- Rhett. caroosky wrote: Hey Rhett, Sounds like an amazing project! Be sure to list it over at Planet2025.tv http://planet2025.tv . It's just the sort of thing we are looking for! In fact, if you decide to join us over there, be sure to let me know. I'd love to feature you. Best, Carter Harkins http://planet2025.tv http://crowdabout.us --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey, everyone. Amy and I have been rubbing our heads together over the last month or so, and we've launched a second video blog. This one is going to be much closer to a true blog than Freetime because it's going to be mostly about us and our lives. The premise of the new video blog, called Greentime (http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime), is that it is going to record and share a slice of our lives as we work, week by week, to make our lives more green. We're planning on doing episodes on going vegan, growing your own food, how to reduce consumption or better recycle, carbon offsets, etc, etc. It's quite literally what we were thinking about and trying out (and often committing to) that previous week. This show is more than just a little bit of fun for us. We're actually very serious about sustainability, fair trade, globabl warming, and whatnot, and we're putting out this show because, like a lot of people, we want to be part of the solution but can't just abandon our careers and live on our own self-sustainable farm. We want to use the vlog to help others like us who live urban lifestyles understand there are things they, too, can be doing, and that environmentalism is for all of us and starts at home. I'm trying to get the site out to the general community, and if anyone out there would like to join in on the process, I'd really appreciate it. I've posted releases on both Digg and Hugg (Digg for green topics). You can find the articles here: http://digg.com/videos/educational/Greentime_New_Green_Video_Blog_Launch\ ed http://www.hugg.com/story/Greentime-New-Green-Video-Blog-Launched-1/ And if you could Digg and Hugg them it would mean a lot to me. Also, if you would like to blogroll us, link to us, blog about us, or whatnot, the site's main URL is http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime and we're also on Blip.tv at http://greentime.blip.tv. Thanks a lot, to everyone in this community, for your continued support. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] A question about viewership habits....
In my experience, one-time mentionings in blogs and such is good but will not yield a lasting viewer base that one would expect. Freetime did start to take off after The Vloggies, which was in part because of iTunes featuring it and part the bloglove, but a big reason why is because TV Tonic picked up Freetime after that, and now most of our subscribers come from there...our iTunes numbers gently faded over time, despite us getting some of the best promotion from there. Likewise, Greentime had great traffic the day we announced it, and it's much calmer now. But...what makes me happy there is the amount of dialog and involvement I see. A promotional push is a good step, but IMHO, it must do two things to be successful-- (1) it must bring users away from the promoting site's turf and bring them to your turf (2) It must get them excited and involved about coming back. Without this, viewers continue the casual browse-and-play behavior you see with YouTube and other sites and don't stop to get involved with your site like they would with a blog. I don't think I'll ever know what the way to sustainably promote is. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime Heath wrote: We've discussed this a bit but I had a very personal experiece recently that proved (at least to me) an interesting viewship fact. Being featured somewhere does not mean you will gain a jump in views to your other videos. Recently one of my posts was featured on the Yahoo video page, I was one there for over a day, that video did great numbers by far my most popular video, over 8,000 views which for me...is HUGE. Anyway, I was really pumped but I noticed that while I did gain some subscribers I didn't gain a whole lot of views on my other videos. Being featured was great but unless you are being featured all the time, it doens't appear to mean a thing really. So I am curious, what has been other's experience's? And why is it that it never seems to translate? I mean I know if I see something I like I check out other stuff. Am I alone in that? Is my 15 minutes of fame already up? How many licks does it take to get to the center of a tootise roll tootise pop? I need to know! Heath http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Apple TV
What resolution should we be resizing to if we want to work with Apple TV? Gary Rosenzweig wrote: On 3/25/07, Tim Street [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So has anyone got your mits on an Apple TV yet? Just vlogged about it at MacMost.com: http://macmost.com/blog/video-tutorials/appletv-first-look/7/
Re: [videoblogging] Green Vlogging?
How green is video-blogging itself? Do personal computers and video cameras grow on trees? Or, are they made out of petro-chemicals? What is the carbon footprint of the equipment used to product a videoblog? Does that include the internet infra-structure? Where can I buy carbon credits to cover the electricity used in the making and distribution of my video blog? What is the carbon-unit-per-minute-of-videoblog rate? Could I win a prize on Vlogging for Dollars to cover it? Well... * There's a company offering wind-powered web hosting. We may transition Greentime to them in the future, depeding on a few things. * Vloggers can, of course, be choosy with their equipment and buy only what they need, ensuring low use. * Many utility companies now offer green electricity for a tiny extra fee (here it's about $10/month). * Dell will let you purchase offsets for the computer you buy. * You can always charge the camera and laptop battery with solar. ...really, all this leaves is the electricity used in bandwidth generation, and if you can quanitfy it, you could buy an offset. Oh, and if you covered this, we'd love to mention it or run an excerpt on Greentime. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Green Vlogging?
Steve, The fever pitch, in a lot of ways, is already here, and it has been for a while. Plenty of so-called green products are coopting the marketing of greenness for the purpose of selling but are not green in and of themselves. I actually think things have gotten better as people are starting to take a show me the money attitude. Also, the USDOE has plenty of figures refuting that argument about solar panels, and not all biofuels are bad. ;) -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime My biggest fear is that as talk of green sustainable issues reaches fever pitch, there are going to be so mny things that sound good but are actually bad. Many of the carbon offsetting programs are murky and its hard to be sure how much genuine difference they are actually making. Its no use getting a solar panel if the energy used to make it is greater than all the energy the device will generate in a lifetime. And dont even get me started on biofuels. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How green is video-blogging itself? Do personal computers and video cameras grow on trees? Or, are they made out of petro-chemicals? What is the carbon footprint of the equipment used to product a videoblog? Does that include the internet infra-structure? Where can I buy carbon credits to cover the electricity used in the making and distribution of my video blog? What is the carbon-unit-per-minute-of-videoblog rate? Could I win a prize on Vlogging for Dollars to cover it? Well... * There's a company offering wind-powered web hosting. We may transition Greentime to them in the future, depeding on a few things. * Vloggers can, of course, be choosy with their equipment and buy only what they need, ensuring low use. * Many utility companies now offer green electricity for a tiny extra fee (here it's about $10/month). * Dell will let you purchase offsets for the computer you buy. * You can always charge the camera and laptop battery with solar. ...really, all this leaves is the electricity used in bandwidth generation, and if you can quanitfy it, you could buy an offset. Oh, and if you covered this, we'd love to mention it or run an excerpt on Greentime. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Green Vlogging?
You might find it interesting to note that a lot of the 1970s green enthusiasm died with the election of Reagan, who had, in his first two years, removed all subsidies for projects focused on developing renewables...anyway, a link that's germane to much of your response: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/03/how-to-green-your-electronics.php -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime Disposal of computers and other electronic devices is another part of the jigsaw. Again its not good, certainly in the EU manufacturers are now being made responsible for the cost of disposal of the goods they manufacture, once they reach end of life. This is in part due to llimits increased costs on landfill disposal. Recycling in general is improving but I sometimes see disturbing pictures on the TV of waste that has been sent from here to India or China, where poor people melt it down and expose themselves to many harmful chemicals :( Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Steve, The fever pitch, in a lot of ways, is already here, and it has been for a while. Plenty of so-called green products are coopting the marketing of greenness for the purpose of selling but are not green in and of themselves. I actually think things have gotten better as people are starting to take a show me the money attitude. Also, the USDOE has plenty of figures refuting that argument about solar panels, and not all biofuels are bad. ;) -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime My biggest fear is that as talk of green sustainable issues reaches fever pitch, there are going to be so mny things that sound good but are actually bad. Many of the carbon offsetting programs are murky and its hard to be sure how much genuine difference they are actually making. Its no use getting a solar panel if the energy used to make it is greater than all the energy the device will generate in a lifetime. And dont even get me started on biofuels. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman wlight@ wrote: How green is video-blogging itself? Do personal computers and video cameras grow on trees? Or, are they made out of petro-chemicals? What is the carbon footprint of the equipment used to product a videoblog? Does that include the internet infra-structure? Where can I buy carbon credits to cover the electricity used in the making and distribution of my video blog? What is the carbon-unit-per-minute-of-videoblog rate? Could I win a prize on Vlogging for Dollars to cover it? Well... * There's a company offering wind-powered web hosting. We may transition Greentime to them in the future, depeding on a few things. * Vloggers can, of course, be choosy with their equipment and buy only what they need, ensuring low use. * Many utility companies now offer green electricity for a tiny extra fee (here it's about $10/month). * Dell will let you purchase offsets for the computer you buy. * You can always charge the camera and laptop battery with solar. ...really, all this leaves is the electricity used in bandwidth generation, and if you can quanitfy it, you could buy an offset. Oh, and if you covered this, we'd love to mention it or run an excerpt on Greentime. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links
[videoblogging] Greentime, the new green video blog.
Hey, everyone. Amy and I have been rubbing our heads together over the last month or so, and we've launched a second video blog. This one is going to be much closer to a true blog than Freetime because it's going to be mostly about us and our lives. The premise of the new video blog, called Greentime (http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime), is that it is going to record and share a slice of our lives as we work, week by week, to make our lives more green. We're planning on doing episodes on going vegan, growing your own food, how to reduce consumption or better recycle, carbon offsets, etc, etc. It's quite literally what we were thinking about and trying out (and often committing to) that previous week. This show is more than just a little bit of fun for us. We're actually very serious about sustainability, fair trade, globabl warming, and whatnot, and we're putting out this show because, like a lot of people, we want to be part of the solution but can't just abandon our careers and live on our own self-sustainable farm. We want to use the vlog to help others like us who live urban lifestyles understand there are things they, too, can be doing, and that environmentalism is for all of us and starts at home. I'm trying to get the site out to the general community, and if anyone out there would like to join in on the process, I'd really appreciate it. I've posted releases on both Digg and Hugg (Digg for green topics). You can find the articles here: http://digg.com/videos/educational/Greentime_New_Green_Video_Blog_Launched http://www.hugg.com/story/Greentime-New-Green-Video-Blog-Launched-1/ And if you could Digg and Hugg them it would mean a lot to me. Also, if you would like to blogroll us, link to us, blog about us, or whatnot, the site's main URL is http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime and we're also on Blip.tv at http://greentime.blip.tv. Thanks a lot, to everyone in this community, for your continued support. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime
Re: [videoblogging] Re: YouTube sued for 1 billion dollars.....(Insert doctor evil laugh)
I don't follow your logic. You say that if they put out more good shows, we would watch them on TV instead of viewing their good clips online. If we're already getting the good stuff online, by this logic, wouldn't making a good show just mean it would end up being posted and viewed online? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Maybe if networks like MTV and Comedy Central put out more then 1 or 2 interesting shows instead of some of the crap they are trying to pass off as TV more people would be interested in watching them on television instead of posting and viewing their good clips online. If the big network execs are worried about losing money they should look internally at who is choosing the programming? --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Check it http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17592285/ I mean seriously, 1 billion dollars?!?! Give me a freaking break...I worry about the future I really doI mean yeah, they have got content but 1 billion?!? Get real. Interesting that this announcement comes on the heals of Viacom saying that they are going to create a site where people can leagaly mash up their work...Ah...corprate politics at it's finest. NEW YORK - MTV owner Viacom Inc. said Tuesday it has sued YouTube and its corporate parent Google Inc. in federal court for alleged copyright infringement and is seeking more than $1 billion in damages. Viacom claims that the more than 160,000 unauthorized video clips from its cable networks, which also include Comedy Central, VH1 and Nickelodeon, have been available on the popular video-sharing Web site. The lawsuit marks a sharp escalation of long-simmering tensions between Viacom and YouTube. Last month Viacom demanded that YouTube remove more than 100,000 unauthorized clips after several months of talks between the companies broke down. In a statement, Viacom lashed out at YouTube's business practices, saying it has built a lucrative business out of exploiting the devotion of fans to others' creative works in order to enrich itself and its corporate parent Google. Viacom said YouTube's business model, which is based on building traffic and selling advertising off of unlicensed content, is clearly illegal and is in obvious conflict with copyright laws. A representative for Google didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. Other media companies have also clashed with YouTube over copyrights, but some, including CBS Corp. and General Electric Co.'s NBC Universal, have reached deals with the video-sharing site to license their material. Universal Music Group, a unit of France's Vivendi SA, had threatened to sue YouTube, saying it was a hub for pirated music videos, but later reached a licensing deal with them. Viacom filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and is also seeking an injunction prohibiting Google and YouTube from using its clips. Heath http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Re: YouTube sued for 1 billion dollars.....(Insert doctor evil laugh)
The turn on, tune in, and put your feet on the ottoman model of television marketing has been in decline since the invention of the first remote control. Network loyalty has repeatedly been shown to be a function largely of limiting viewer choice. The final nail in the coffin of such a model came when theme primetime blocks finally devolved on the major networks some years ago. Programming coherence is at an all-time low as Cartoon Network picks up live action shows and SciFi picks up pro wrestling. The shows have always been all that mattered, and increasing viewer choice only creates increasing amounts of mercenary behavior where pairing viewers with shows is concerned. VOD is just the ultimate realization of that. Content providers, once they can figure out the business model for it, will leap on this like nothing before. Until then, content providers know they can't keep people loyal based on their content, so they find themselves losing in so many directions, and they fight for what they have left. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime I think the point of what he said was that if a channel was better than just a few shows, you might care a bit less about wanting video on demand. but since TV in general sucks and for the most part the traditional programming model is still in full effect... people turn to where they CAN get video on demand, on the internet a la YouTube etc. VOD might even become law at some point. I unsubscribed from cable tv last April (just get internet) because i am fedup with the force feeding of crap i dont want. So netflix fills in the void and I'm also very interested in any new VOD service like Joost etc which i can also take advantage of. Anyway On 13 Mar 2007 09:11:05 -0700, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't follow your logic. You say that if they put out more good shows, we would watch them on TV instead of viewing their good clips online. If we're already getting the good stuff online, by this logic, wouldn't making a good show just mean it would end up being posted and viewed online? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Maybe if networks like MTV and Comedy Central put out more then 1 or 2 interesting shows instead of some of the crap they are trying to pass off as TV more people would be interested in watching them on television instead of posting and viewing their good clips online. If the big network execs are worried about losing money they should look internally at who is choosing the programming? --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Check it http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17592285/ I mean seriously, 1 billion dollars?!?! Give me a freaking break...I worry about the future I really doI mean yeah, they have got content but 1 billion?!? Get real. Interesting that this announcement comes on the heals of Viacom saying that they are going to create a site where people can leagaly mash up their work...Ah...corprate politics at it's finest. NEW YORK - MTV owner Viacom Inc. said Tuesday it has sued YouTube and its corporate parent Google Inc. in federal court for alleged copyright infringement and is seeking more than $1 billion in damages. Viacom claims that the more than 160,000 unauthorized video clips from its cable networks, which also include Comedy Central, VH1 and Nickelodeon, have been available on the popular video-sharing Web site. The lawsuit marks a sharp escalation of long-simmering tensions between Viacom and YouTube. Last month Viacom demanded that YouTube remove more than 100,000 unauthorized clips after several months of talks between the companies broke down. In a statement, Viacom lashed out at YouTube's business practices, saying it has built a lucrative business out of exploiting the devotion of fans to others' creative works in order to enrich itself and its corporate parent Google. Viacom said YouTube's business model, which is based on building traffic and selling advertising off of unlicensed content, is clearly illegal and is in obvious conflict with copyright laws. A representative for Google didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. Other media companies have also clashed with YouTube over copyrights, but some, including CBS Corp. and General Electric Co.'s NBC Universal, have reached deals with the video-sharing site to license their material. Universal Music Group, a unit of France's Vivendi SA, had threatened to sue YouTube, saying it was a hub for pirated music videos, but later reached a licensing deal with them. Viacom filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and is also seeking an injunction prohibiting Google and YouTube from using its clips. Heath http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com
Re: [videoblogging] Re: YouTube sued for 1 billion dollars.....(Insert doctor evil laugh)
I wouldn't be so sure. As a lacrosse fan, the best way for me to see the games I want is via the Internet. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime I don't see sports moving to the net anytime soon though, because of the sheer amount of live production work it takes to make a successful broadcast. On 3/13/07, sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think the point of what he said was that if a channel was better than just a few shows, you might care a bit less about wanting video on demand. but since TV in general sucks and for the most part the traditional programming model is still in full effect... people turn to where they CAN get video on demand, on the internet a la YouTube etc. VOD might even become law at some point. I unsubscribed from cable tv last April (just get internet) because i am fedup with the force feeding of crap i dont want. So netflix fills in the void and I'm also very interested in any new VOD service like Joost etc which i can also take advantage of. Anyway On 13 Mar 2007 09:11:05 -0700, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't follow your logic. You say that if they put out more good shows, we would watch them on TV instead of viewing their good clips online. If we're already getting the good stuff online, by this logic, wouldn't making a good show just mean it would end up being posted and viewed online? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Maybe if networks like MTV and Comedy Central put out more then 1 or 2 interesting shows instead of some of the crap they are trying to pass off as TV more people would be interested in watching them on television instead of posting and viewing their good clips online. If the big network execs are worried about losing money they should look internally at who is choosing the programming? --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.comvideoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Check it http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17592285/ I mean seriously, 1 billion dollars?!?! Give me a freaking break...I worry about the future I really doI mean yeah, they have got content but 1 billion?!? Get real. Interesting that this announcement comes on the heals of Viacom saying that they are going to create a site where people can leagaly mash up their work...Ah...corprate politics at it's finest. NEW YORK - MTV owner Viacom Inc. said Tuesday it has sued YouTube and its corporate parent Google Inc. in federal court for alleged copyright infringement and is seeking more than $1 billion in damages. Viacom claims that the more than 160,000 unauthorized video clips from its cable networks, which also include Comedy Central, VH1 and Nickelodeon, have been available on the popular video-sharing Web site. The lawsuit marks a sharp escalation of long-simmering tensions between Viacom and YouTube. Last month Viacom demanded that YouTube remove more than 100,000 unauthorized clips after several months of talks between the companies broke down. In a statement, Viacom lashed out at YouTube's business practices, saying it has built a lucrative business out of exploiting the devotion of fans to others' creative works in order to enrich itself and its corporate parent Google. Viacom said YouTube's business model, which is based on building traffic and selling advertising off of unlicensed content, is clearly illegal and is in obvious conflict with copyright laws. A representative for Google didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. Other media companies have also clashed with YouTube over copyrights, but some, including CBS Corp. and General Electric Co.'s NBC Universal, have reached deals with the video-sharing site to license their material. Universal Music Group, a unit of France's Vivendi SA, had threatened to sue YouTube, saying it was a hub for pirated music videos, but later reached a licensing deal with them. Viacom filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and is also seeking an injunction prohibiting Google and YouTube from using its clips. Heath http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com Yahoo! Groups Links -- Sull http://vlogdir.com (a project) http://SpreadTheMedia.org (my blog) http://interdigitate.com (otherly) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links -- Adam Quirk Wreck Salvage 551.208.4644 Brooklyn, NY http://wreckandsalvage.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] How often do you post new videos?
We do shows that last anywhere from 2 to 15 minutes, but because of our extremely busy schedules and because there's often a fair amount of editing involved, we're doing good if we get out a post every other week. We're considering a quality over quantity step, though, where we post more like once a month and try to have a little better creative focus. We have a new vlog on the way and we plan to post on that once a week, but that will be closer to a true vlog-- shot mostly at home, with us talking about ourselves and our lives. The production of that kind of video is much easier for us to sustain. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/blog Shawn Carpenter wrote: This is something I would really like to know. For me I do a big show once per week (5-7 minutes) and now I am doing a 30 second mobile video each day (the quality isn't so hot though, but it is what it is!) What I want to know is how often everyone puts up a new video or how many you post per week, and also teh approximate length of your videos? I want to get a good ballpark figure so that I know what a good number would be for me! Thanks! Shawn C. http://spcbrass.blogspot.com http://loudtourtv.blip.tv Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Vlog Fade
Anyhow... just remember that the time you, as a vlogger, are investing in creation, there are others who are also investing their time in watching. This is a really good reminder. I don't think my viewers expect high regularity, but I am past-due for a post. The next post slated for release is going to be a nightmare of editing, and after doing three posts in three days at the beginning of the month, I haven't made the next post a priority. We've been using the time to rethink certain parts of production, do some website overhauls, and plan for a second vlog that we're getting ready to launch. You're right, though, that one should at least put up a little news/clip show or something every once in a while as a keepalive. We'll have to think about doing that very soon. Oddly enough, our subscriber count has soared, almost to the point of doubling, during our current drought. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
Re: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday FlashMeeting)
What about discussing marketing plans for vlogs? I think there are a number of us who are trying a number of things, and having a forum to riff on what's worked, what hasn't, etc, might be useful. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime I would like to see a better way to find vlogs, right now you can use tags and such but it is still hard to find vlogs that you might be interested in. Maybe creating groups within the communities that host video? or something similar to Amazon where you get recomendations and such. I'll keep thinking. Heath http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What are people thinking they'd like do at another vloggercon aside from meet and hang out (which is a given!)? What developments in the last 9 months do you want to see addressed? What wasn't addressed last time that should have been? Basically I'm trying to steer the conversation from when and where to why. - Verdi On 2/22/07, schlomo rabinowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I can be, yes. And between you and the multitudes of New Yawkers, I think something beautiful can happen. Schlomo http://schlomolog.blogspot.com http://webshots.com/is/spotlight http://hatfactory.net http://evilvlog.com On 2/22/07, Robyn Tippins [EMAIL PROTECTED]robyn%40sleepyblogger.com wrote: Schlomo, will you be a planner this year again? I'll be glad to lend a hand to whoever is organizing it. I'm on the east coast. Robyn Tippins Sleepyblogger.com | Gamingandtech.com | Intel.com/software _ From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com[mailto: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of schlomo rabinowitz Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 2:11 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday FlashMeeting) I'm into having it in NYC. I've been offered a couple spaces for the event as well. Schlomo http://schlomolog. http://schlomolog.blogspot.com blogspot.com http://webshots. http://webshots.com/is/spotlight com/is/spotlight http://hatfactory. http://hatfactory.net net http://evilvlog. http://evilvlog.com com On 2/22/07, Enric [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:enric% enric% 2540cirne.com com wrote: If Vloggercon is on the East Coast, who would be the organizers? -- Enric --- In videoblogging@ mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com, Robyn Tippins robyn@ wrote: I'll amen NY because it's cheap to fly into from almost anywhere. Robyn Tippins Sleepyblogger.com | Gamingandtech.com | Intel.com/software _ From: videoblogging@ mailto:videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging@ mailto:videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Charles Hope Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 12:32 PM To: videoblogging@ mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday FlashMeeting) No, it was never in Ohio, but such suggestion was floated a few months ago. Our European friends would prefer easier access, and since our community sort of stretches between the West Coast and Europe, New York City is in the middle, and that is where I am rooting for! Can I get an Amen? -Original Message- From: videoblogging@ mailto:videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging@ mailto:videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Robyn Tippins Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 11:03 To: videoblogging@ mailto:videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday FlashMeeting) Is that where it was last year? Robyn Tippins Sleepyblogger.com | Gamingandtech.com | Intel.com/software _ From: videoblogging@ mailto:videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging@ mailto:videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of RANDY MANN Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 7:05 AM To: videoblogging@ mailto:videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday FlashMeeting) of corse it would be nice to have vloggercon this year. Any on ever go to ohio? On 2/20/07, Enric [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:enric% enric%25 40cirne.com com wrote: We
Re: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday FlashMeeting)
We can get cheap tickets to NYC and can stay with a friend there, so it gets our vote, too. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Anne and I definitely need to get out to NY.if this is a vote, that's what 'd vote for. -- Devlon Mike Hudack wrote: NYC! NYC! NYC! -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Frank Sinton Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 4:16 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday FlashMeeting) NYC is fine with me. I know Peter was involved in the last vloggercon, and I will continue this and voluteer my services in any way that is helpful. -Frank Frank Sinton CEO, Mefeedia [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mefeedia.com - Find, Watch, and Share great videoblogs and podcasts. Our blog: http://mefeedia.com/blog --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, RANDY MANN [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ok i will go along with the nyc thing as long as i can be the sound guy again On 2/22/07, Charles Hope [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With Schlomo's blessing, it's pretty much a done deal! Blip.tv would totally help organize it. Why Vloggercon 2007? Because the last one was one of the greatest weekends of my life. We have months to work out the actual agenda. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Michael Verdi Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 14:45 To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday FlashMeeting) What are people thinking they'd like do at another vloggercon aside from meet and hang out (which is a given!)? What developments in the last 9 months do you want to see addressed? What wasn't addressed last time that should have been? Basically I'm trying to steer the conversation from when and where to why. - Verdi On 2/22/07, schlomo rabinowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] schlomo% 40gmail.com wrote: I can be, yes. And between you and the multitudes of New Yawkers, I think something beautiful can happen. Schlomo http://schlomolog.blogspot.com http://webshots.com/is/spotlight http://hatfactory.net http://evilvlog.com On 2/22/07, Robyn Tippins [EMAIL PROTECTED] robyn%40sleepyblogger.com robyn%40sleepyblogger.com wrote: Schlomo, will you be a planner this year again? I'll be glad to lend a hand to whoever is organizing it. I'm on the east coast. Robyn Tippins Sleepyblogger.com | Gamingandtech.com | Intel.com/software _ From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.comvideoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com[mailto: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.comvideoblogging%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of schlomo rabinowitz Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 2:11 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday FlashMeeting) I'm into having it in NYC. I've been offered a couple spaces for the event as well. Schlomo http://schlomolog. http://schlomolog.blogspot.com blogspot.com http://webshots. http://webshots.com/is/spotlight com/is/spotlight http://hatfactory. http://hatfactory.net net http://evilvlog. http://evilvlog.com com On 2/22/07, Enric [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:enric% enric%25 enric%2540cirne.com com wrote: If Vloggercon is on the East Coast, who would be the organizers? -- Enric --- In videoblogging@ mailto:videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com, Robyn Tippins robyn@ wrote: I'll amen NY because it's cheap to fly into from almost anywhere. Robyn Tippins Sleepyblogger.com | Gamingandtech.com | Intel.com/software _ From: videoblogging@ mailto:videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging@ mailto:videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Charles Hope Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 12:32 PM To: videoblogging@ mailto:videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday FlashMeeting) No, it was never in Ohio, but such suggestion was floated a few months ago. Our European friends would prefer easier access, and since our community sort of stretches between the West Coast and Europe, New York City is in the middle, and that is where I am rooting for! Can I get an Amen? -Original Message- From: videoblogging@ mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging@ mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Robyn Tippins Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 11:03 To: videoblogging@
Re: [videoblogging] Re: viewer feedback
It makes me feel good to hear this. I often feel like, when I just ask people to email us or to friend us on MySpace, that I'm screaming into the void. I know I have an audience, because FeedBurner stats show the subscribers. I also, as far as I can tell, have never grown my audience through word of mouth from one viewer to the next. Early stats on Google Analytics show that most people who visit the website are new users who don't come from a search engine or directory. So, we're winning viewers largely by getting our URL directly in new hands. This all runs curiously contrary to how I thought things would go. Yes...Freetime is still just a toddler of a vlog, but I somehow expected the viral effect would be in stronger force. I think part of it's content, too, though. I've noticed on LiveJournal, friends of mine with the largest friends list are generally quite controversial. They give people something to argue about. I'm beginning to wonder if vlogs that don't give people a reason to regularly pound their keyboards in discussion just don't fan out. I see similar things happening in text blogs. Also, I wonder if the aggregator makes a difference. A lot of my audience comes from TV Tonic, and I didn't see ways for people to access comments, leave reviews, etc, using the TV Tonic software. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Speaking only from my own experience, it's a very small minority of viewers who comment and interact. On one of my shows I developed an extremely active, interested and vocal audience who have created a project inspired by my efforts and tangential to it. They remain a minority of my audience, however.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Videobloggers YouTube Group - Anyone Interested?
I'm also already on YouTube (freetimevlog), and I'd happily join any groups going. I need that networking! :) -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Robyn Tippins wrote: I'm on YouTube already, so if you set up a group and invite us I'd certainly join you. Of course, I'm a social networking whore. Robyn From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RODLI PEDERSON Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 9:44 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Videobloggers YouTube Group - Anyone Interested? sure i would join rodli --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com , Patrick Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi everyone: A thought occured to me a little while ago that if there was a group that would probably be interested in a different kind of discussion group, it would be this one. And YouTube would be the place for it. So my question to all of you how many of you would be interested in such a group? What are the advantages you say? Well, the BIGGEST one would be that you would get to use your cam to compose posts just like you use your email editor to post here. The second of which is your fingers won't get worn out from all that tapping as your voice would do that in talking for about 10 minutes or so. Plus, we could use it to help support Josh just that much more. Lastly we'd also get acquainted and meet other vloggers from all walks of life who, for one reason or another, simply prefer to do it only via YouTube and/or other viral video sites. Anyhow, it was just an idea I had. Thoughts? Comments? Tar? Feathers? Flames? ALL OF THE ABOVE (Gulp!)? Cheers :D -- Pat Cook Denver, Colorado WEBSITES - AS MY WACKED OUT WORLD TURNS (Now In Vlog Format!) - http://asmywackedoutturns.blogspot.com/ Pat's VideoCast - http://www.freewebtown.com/patsvideocast/ Pat's Health Medical Wonders VideoCast - http://patshealthmedicalwondersvideocast.blogspot.com/ DIVB-TV | The Dumbass Idiots VideoBlog - http://dumbassidiots.blogspot.com/ MY LIVE CAM - http://patscam.camstreams.com/ YouTube Channel - http://www.youtube.com/amwowttv/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Mooninites take over Boston
I sincerely doubt the charges that end up sticking on these guys will be all that strong, but the truth of the matter is that they did disrupt the public, and disrupting the public is a crime. Yes, the authorities probably overreacted, but planting strange devices in public places, some of them depicting what is, by American standards, an obscene gesture, for the sake of advertising a corporate television show...yeah, that's a crime. There's a reason that the public has a process of filing permits for use of public space, and it's to keep nonsense like this from happening in the first place. I mean, if I have to file a permit so that I can use a public beach for my wedding ceremony...or if I have to file a permit so I can shoot a short on public land, then it stands to reason that I can't go throwing Lite Brites around to advertise a product, either. So, red alert...not necessary...but this was BAD guerilla marketing, and it was a public nuisance. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime yes, but it's also the story of a major world city being put on red alert (which could have been avoided), and also the story of some people who - however stupid - may go to jail for a long time unnecessarily for a guerilla marketing video stunt, which is how all this got started. Despite all my good words in the last email, the reason people in Europe might roll their eyes is that it seems like a uniquely American response. So really it's the story of a political/societal response to the threat of terrorism, which is for another group and which I keep on prolonging here. sorry. goodnight. On 1 Feb 2007, at 21:38, J. Rhett Aultman wrote: This is just a basic story of some dumbasses putting things where they don't belong and the cops having to diffuse/detonate them. Nothing more. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Mooninites take over Boston
I'd heard that the people who pulled this stunt were never actually ordered to, but were instead hired on as consultants and told to be creative. I can't find a source for that, though. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime The man on the street defense of their actions seems hauntingly stupid ... they were just doing their jobs, following orders. I want to see interviews with executives who approved this debacle. That would be a laugh riot. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I sincerely doubt the charges that end up sticking on these guys will be all that strong, but the truth of the matter is that they did disrupt the public, and disrupting the public is a crime. Yes, the authorities probably overreacted, but planting strange devices in public places, some [...]
Re: [videoblogging] iPhone flash youtube comments from Steve Jobs
Steve Jobs is a captain of industry in a monopolistically competetive market. True to form, he is plying his own flavor of monopoly, no different than Microsoft. Apple deals in a monopolistic package and it always has. It's just been such a cute monopoly with such a good line of marketing BS about its openness that its adherents don't care. Don't expect him to play nice unless it suits his current strategy. YouTube is antagonistic to Apple's strategy, so of course they won't play nice. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Steve Watkins wrote: I didnt exactly get a warm fuzzy feeling when I read these words... Markoff: Flash? Jobs: Well, you might see that. Markoff: What about YouTube– Jobs: Yeah, YouTube—of course. But you don't need to have Flash to show YouTube. All you need to do is deal with YouTube. And plus, we could get `em to up their video resolution at the same time, by using h.264 instead of the old codec. http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/01/13/ultimate-iphone-faqs-list-part-2/# A million miles away from the spirit of open mobile devices, as far as Im concerned. Cheers Steve Elbows Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[videoblogging] New camera...suggestions?
It's becoming clear that Amy and I are getting increasingly serious about Freetime and the places we can take video production for the web. After a lot of thinking about it, I'm starting to think that it's time for me to roll my pennies and consider getting a new camera. I've been using a Panasonic GS-150 for the past year, and it's been a wonderful little camera, but I feel I'm starting to really butt my head against certain limitations. The most difficult of these has been its light response. I have a lighting kit we use when in studio that really helps, but when we're out in the field, I can't keep carrying 1250W of light with me. It'd be nice to own something that will cope with slightly cloudy days or with normal indoor lighting (even bar lighting) without becoming muddy and super-grainy. So, I'm asking for suggestions here. Of course, I need the usual features (manual control, external mic, etc), but I'd like to move up the camera food chain and get something that's going to be more versatile in more challenging environments. Any recommendations you guys could offer, possibly with a price range, would be useful in helping me plan how to burn my budget this year. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
Re: [videoblogging] SUNDANCE
We are at Sundance right now and just spent a long, tiring day yesterday trying to get here, get the feel of the town, meet some people, and fail miserably at getting a ticket via a waitlist. I stayed up late into the night on an editing session of VERY rough footage, and the post is uploading now. Should be up in another hour or two. Then, today, we're likely to circulate around Tromadance more. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Gabriel Soucheyre wrote: any vloggers going to sundance ? Thi is a challenge : would you vlog this artist and send me your footgae ? http://gasprod.blip.tv/file/138144/ thx gabriel soucheyre -- VIDEOFORMES vidéo et nouveaux médias dans l'art contemporain www.videoformes.com BP 50 -64, rue Lamartine • 63002 CLERMONT-FERRAND Cedex 1 / France T + 33 (0) 473 17 02 17 • Direction : Gabriel SOUCHEYRE + 33 (0) 612 59 27 53 Skype : callto:gabrielsoucheyre [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[videoblogging] Audio too quiet when I use mono.
Guys, Our first Sundance video is stalled from being released because of a critical issue that I don't know how to fix! I bought us a new mic to use on the road...it's a handheld Shure that uses an XLR input. I step that down to the 1/8 plug on the camera. The audio sounds beautiful in the can and any cut I make of it that has the audio in stereo also sounds great. The moment I ask Adobe Premiere Elements or QuicktimePro to make a mono version of the video, the audio using that specific microphone becomes too quiet to hear. I don't want to put out a stereo version because it'll make the file size pretty big, but the audio for that microphone is borderline silent unless I keep it in stereo! What the heck is going on here, and does anyone know how to fix it? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
Re: [videoblogging] Audio too quiet when I use mono.
Philip, Thanks for the very clear treatment of this information. I didn't know so much about XLR phase inversion in the signal, but I had started to figure that the problem was due to the way things were getting combined, so I did a Fill From Left channel, and that had fixed it. Now I know the more clear solution...and knowing is half the battle! I'll have to consider another adapter cable or, minimally, just roll with the punches in post. Thanks for giving me the full picture. -- Rhett http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Philip Clark wrote: Hi Rhett -- Sounds like phase cancellation to me. Simply put, when the polarity is reversed on one channel of a stereo recording, and the recording is summed to mono, then the peaks of one waveform coincide with the valleys of the other waveform and they wind up cancelling each other out. The result is a drastically quieter signal, maybe even silence, depending on the waveforms of the source material. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destructive_interference The technically correct solution would involve using an audio editor to invert the polarity on one of your stereo channels, then recombining these channels into a new mono file. An even quicker solution that would probably work for you in this case would be to simply isolate one of your stereo channels, and use that channel by itself as your mono mix. If you don't have access to fancy editing software, you can use Audacity, which is freeware. Open your source stereo file in Audacity; click the down arrow and select Split Stereo Track; click the X on one of the resulting tracks to delete it; click the down arrow on the remaining track and select Mono. Export that file, and you're done. If phase cancellation is indeed the culprit, the fault is most likely with whatever adapter you are using to go from XLR to 1/8. XLR cables are meant to be used as mono sources. They send normal- and inverted-polarity signals along two of their three pins (using phase cancellation as a tool to lessen induced noise). Your 1/8 adapter then thinks these signals represent the two channels of a stereo sound... which is very much not the case! Hope this helps. -- xo philip http://swordfight.org On 27-Jan-07, at 10:54 PM, J. Rhett Aultman wrote: Guys, Our first Sundance video is stalled from being released because of a critical issue that I don't know how to fix! I bought us a new mic to use on the road...it's a handheld Shure that uses an XLR input. I step that down to the 1/8 plug on the camera. The audio sounds beautiful in the can and any cut I make of it that has the audio in stereo also sounds great. The moment I ask Adobe Premiere Elements or QuicktimePro to make a mono version of the video, the audio using that specific microphone becomes too quiet to hear. I don't want to put out a stereo version because it'll make the file size pretty big, but the audio for that microphone is borderline silent unless I keep it in stereo! What the heck is going on here, and does anyone know how to fix it? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
[videoblogging] Custom player skin
Hey, guys. We're considering putting our videos of last year on a CD so we can give them out to people we meet. Since our videos end up in 320x240, we can't make a DVD and have it look decent on a TV. We'd like to have some DVD-like features, though, like menus and whatnot. We thought it'd be neat if there was some app out there that might let us make a skinnable media player that would show a menu of our videos and play them in a 320x240 window on people's computers. Does anyone know if anything like this exists? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
Re: [videoblogging] camcorder recommendations
Yeah. The Panasonic GS line...you get 3 chips and some of them even offer full manual control over the aperature and shutter speed and focus and whatnot. My GS-150 seems a little thirsty for light, but otherwise, it's not done me wrong. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Randy Mann wrote: the panisionic 3 chip for 500 is a nice little cam. From: dinarebecca [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] camcorder recommendations Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2007 07:18:56 - I am finally taking the plunge and buying a new camera. Does anyone have recommendations? I followed the HD conversation but probably don't want to spend that much now...open to anything else. My $200 Panasonic camcorder makes everything look pretty dark, so I do look forward to upgrading. Thanks for any advice! Dina _ Get in the mood for Valentine's Day. View photos, recipes and more on your Live.com page. http://www.live.com/?addTemplate=ValentinesDayocid=T001MSN30A0701 Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Thumbnails into Democracy?
Good question. I use their Brodcast Machine software, but redirect it through Feedburner, and that seems to be quashing my thumbnails, too. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Anybody using PodPress WordPress know how to get thumbnails to show up in Democracy? -- Bill C. http://ems.blip.tv Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Sundance?
Any Vloggers heading to Sundance this weekend? We'll be at Sundace for the tail-end of the festival next weekend. Will you guys still be there? We should totally do a joing vlogging session if you will! -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
Re: [videoblogging] Are you learning another language?
Anyway: Are you learning another language? If so, what are your tools? How do you do it? Are there others who are documenting their attempts to learn a new language on a videoblog? I struggle with trying to learn Japanese. I do okay at it, but I don't have any regular conversation partners, so I get virtually no practice. I have kanji flash cards and I try to keep up with JapanesePod101 when I can, but I fall behind. I'd like to take the JLPT-4 next December, but it feels like such a far away goal. JapanesePod101 is interesting in that they created iLove, which is basically a mashup video blog of their viewers trying their conversational Japanese skills out. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
[videoblogging] Martin Luther King Day posts
Hi, all. I know I promoted a post here two weeks ago when I made a little New Year's video card, but you'll forgive me for doing it again so soon. I felt moved this year to make something for Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Day. My workplace declared it a company holiday, and with some free time on my hands and not really having any plans to attend any MLK memorial functions, I decided I wanted to keep the day in my heart a different way this year, and the more I thought about it, the better the idea of making a vlog post about it was. If MLK day is special to you like it is to me, please hop over to http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime to see my video. Also, I'd love to see any other MLK-related video posts anyone else makes, so please share them in this thread. Thanks, guys. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
Re: [videoblogging] more iPhones coming?
Don't want to be rude, I may be wrong, but I'm not thinking that apple is trying to go after making converts of businesses. The thing is, the cellphone business is a pretty low-margin business, and this is actually the highest-yielding market segment. If I had to guess. I'd guess apple is going after 20 and 30 somethings who are gadget freaks... your pervebial young urban professional... just out of college... 1-5 years in the workforce, working in the big city, living in the city, spending lots of time on public transportation... The thing is, the cellphone business is pretty low-margin, and this is actually a very small segment. Last time I was in chicago one thing really hit me. I walked by Union Station in the business loop and I was AMAZED at all the people rushing to their trains wearing ipods. It just seemed like every other person was wearing and ipod... it was just sensationak... and that's exactly apple's market. Market structures are par for the course in the cell phone industry were not in place in the digital audio player market, which was basically a squabbling anarchy that Apple walked into unopposed. The successes in producing and marketing the iPod do not translate highly to phones. the idea that the iphone is going to replace the blackberry as ANY companies standard issue business phone is simply absurd... as absurd as thinking some business is just going to wholesale switch from windows to mac. That's fundamentally not apple's market. Your comparison is false, but you are right. iPhones lack push email, so they're useless in the enterprise market. BTW... one of the things that makes the ipod so appealing is it's an accessory, a fashion statement, and it's HIGHLY visible. The white earbuds are practically an advertisement and a trademark symbol of apple. I suspect that the iphone will do the same as a phone and a communications device... because it's also an mp3 player it will spend more time OUT of the pocket then ever, in the hand... ear buds in the ear. Its total lack of tactile features ensures it will never be in a pocket. You won't be able to touch-type, dial by feel, change ringtone, etc without pulling it out. The only pocketspace functionality apple hasn't tackled is the gaming space. Other than that the iphone has it all. I dunno. It's lacking in network connectivity, it's lacking in battery life, it's storage space is too expensive, it's pretty much a sealed item...as a portable Internet-enabled computer, it's no better than my PSP, and as a phone, it's no better than my RAZR. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Sprint WiMax in Chicago by year end, and Nokia + SixApart = mobile video sha
It does to a certain point, but it's not as serious a disruption as it looks like. Apple has lost out on network subsidies that would have made the price of their phone competetive, and a network is always free to tell a handset producer to go take a hike. Sure, you can still produce the handset, but the networks can choose to not sell it at their stores, market it, advertise it, or support it, and they control pricing power significantly. I'll take the small disruption, though. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All I know is Apple sure got Cingular to take a huge leap of faith with the iPhone. Depending on how the SDK pans out for the iphone it could be the most open mobile platform to date. It really disrupts the business model all cellular carriers have been pursuing with complete control over their network and anything connected too it. -Mike On 1/10/07, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I didn't think you were ignorant. Sorry if I gave you that impression. I was just not understanding why Jobs is touting Cingular...which is basically because they played ball with his company...so I was noting the business dog-and-pony show. Really...sorry. I was just out to point out that it's a dog and pony show with no compelling technological reason. Sorry a third time. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime francisco_daum wrote: Rhett- I wasn't ignorant of the fact the iPhone is going to be available in June using Cingular. My point is that it's great the iPhone will be introduced, and in 2000, Cingular was considered the new kid on the block. Sprint shareholders were told Cingular was nothing to worry about because they paid way too much for them to operate a mobile network, did not have the Synchronous Optical Network Sprint had, and was using in between technology at the time when Sprint PCS was all CDMA. On top of all that Sprint told me its pipes and tubes were operating at around 15% capacity because expansion was built in. Which brings in to mind that when these telcos start chipping away at Net Neutrality, the bean counters have to look into the actual load these networks (built with our taxes) are handling. I believe telcos are just hoarding capacity. I wasn't ignorant of the fact the iPhone is going to be on Cingular; for a young company compared to Sprint, they've got more to gain. Also Apple not making a strictly widescreen iPod to me looks like a way to get more people to use OS X (which I thoroughly enjoy for anything media over Windows and Linux). So let me repeat I wasn't ignorant of the fact the iPhone is going to be on Cingular. Ok? :) Francisco Daum franciscodaum.com franciscodaum.blogspot.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: First off, he's touting Cingular because Apple signed a deal with Cingular. There need be no reason above that. Business partners stand up for each other. Secondly, he's touting Cingular because Cingular is the biggest of the US networks, so it made sense to strike on that iron. Finally, he's touting Cingular because Cingular did Apple a lot of favors when it came to developing the iPhone, so he's happy to have found people to work with. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime francisco_daum wrote: When I was a Tech I for Sprint in 2001, the biggest selling point was the dominance of its fiber optic backbone, from Tier I all the way up to Tier III. Sprint boasted having the mostest and the fastest OC-96 fiber. Network capacity was below 15%. Cingular was laughed at because it wasn't CDMA (Sprint wireless is strictly CDMA, except for roaming). Cingular was paying the highest for its customers as far as air rights, nothing to worry about. Today I'm a puzzled how Steve Jobs was touting Cingular. Francisco franciscodaum.blogspot.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Meiser groups-yahoo-com@ wrote: The wimax is coming. And with it broadband communications. An actual firm date, by the end of this year. It's no longer just vaporware. *Sprint Nextel Corp.*http://kansascity.bizjournals.com/kansascity/gen/Sprint_Nextel_Corp_38D9B727DAD54EBE929378498D672ECA.htmlsaid Monday that will launch its WiMax wireless broadband service in Chicago and Washington by year's end. The wireless giant (NYSE: S), which began showing off products that use WiMax technology on Monday at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, has committed to spending $800 million this year and $1.5 billion to $2 billion next year on the new WiMax network. The company said in a release Monday that early products that will use WiMax include mobile PCs and personal media players by *Samsung Electronics
Re: [videoblogging] Recommendations for lav mic and lights?
There are some wonderful starter light sets available on Amazon. I bought this one: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/BAJB80/102-4970784-2736168 For the price, it's amazing. 1250W is great for many applications. If you want to see us using the new light kit to make the endless white void background, you can see our Vloggy acceptance speech video at http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime/?p=22 As for mics, my cheap ones came from eBay...they're all off-brand. YMMV. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Ben Zelevansky wrote: Hey guys-- Any thoughts on a good (and cheap) lav mic and light kit for a new video blog? Just lighting and mic'ing one stationary person, and looking to keep it in the $200 range, if at all possible. It'd be great to be able to plug the mic right into the mini-jack on my dv camera, without having to mess with an additional mixer. You know, I never had to worry about this stuff working with cartoon animals... Thanks! Ben
Re: [videoblogging] FM as transmitter/receiver combo for cheap wireless mic?
Hm...I use a wireless lavalier microphone I bought on eBay that's intended for DJs or people giving presentations. I think I spent $80 on it, and I think it uses FM on one of the commercial bands (not sure, though). It's not perfect, but a little noise gating on the editing console cleans it right up. You can hear it in action, without any noise gating but with a little background music to hide the room noise and a teeny bit of static on the first Tiki Tips episode on Freetime. It's worked for me, especially for being so cheap. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Robert wrote: All, Most wireless microphone suggestions for amateurs list UHF, VHF ($1000's) and these are not real options for example when shooting simple ski videos or simple line-of-sight and less-than-30-feet range work. Something less than $80 for both transmitter receiver would be more on the mark. I would try infrared transmitter/receiver combo (like for cheap wireless headphones) however these have stricter limitations (like only used indoors where there's no sunlight to interfere with the infrared, and very limited line of sight). bluetooth is just too expensive, $200 for a transmitter/receiver combo that has very limited (voice only) frequence response. HAs anyone used a mini-FM transmitter (like those now sold for ipod-to-car transmission) for wireless microphone to a mini-FM receiver (digital tuned) with output to the camcorder? This should have good frequency response and within limited range shoud be OK, even partially blocked line-of-sight should be ok. Or am I smoking crack by thinking it could work? Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Sprint WiMax in Chicago by year end, and Nokia + SixApart = mobile video sha
First off, he's touting Cingular because Apple signed a deal with Cingular. There need be no reason above that. Business partners stand up for each other. Secondly, he's touting Cingular because Cingular is the biggest of the US networks, so it made sense to strike on that iron. Finally, he's touting Cingular because Cingular did Apple a lot of favors when it came to developing the iPhone, so he's happy to have found people to work with. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime francisco_daum wrote: When I was a Tech I for Sprint in 2001, the biggest selling point was the dominance of its fiber optic backbone, from Tier I all the way up to Tier III. Sprint boasted having the mostest and the fastest OC-96 fiber. Network capacity was below 15%. Cingular was laughed at because it wasn't CDMA (Sprint wireless is strictly CDMA, except for roaming). Cingular was paying the highest for its customers as far as air rights, nothing to worry about. Today I'm a puzzled how Steve Jobs was touting Cingular. Francisco franciscodaum.blogspot.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Meiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The wimax is coming. And with it broadband communications. An actual firm date, by the end of this year. It's no longer just vaporware. *Sprint Nextel Corp.*http://kansascity.bizjournals.com/kansascity/gen/Sprint_Nextel_Corp_38D9B727DAD54EBE929378498D672ECA.htmlsaid Monday that will launch its WiMax wireless broadband service in Chicago and Washington by year's end. The wireless giant (NYSE: S), which began showing off products that use WiMax technology on Monday at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, has committed to spending $800 million this year and $1.5 billion to $2 billion next year on the new WiMax network. The company said in a release Monday that early products that will use WiMax include mobile PCs and personal media players by *Samsung Electronics Co.*http://kansascity.bizjournals.com/kansascity/gen/Samsung_Electronics_Co_0410697D58D74FAAA93930587D6236B6.htmland an infotainment device by *LG Electronics Inc.*http://kansascity.bizjournals.com/kansascity/gen/LG_Electronics_Inc_605CE10EFDA940E4B937F76CC1234CE2.html WiMax will allow devices to connect to the Internet at cable modem-like speeds wirelessly, in coverage areas similar to wireless phone service. An MP3 player with WiMax capability, for example, would allow music downloads on the go. The WiMax network is expected to reach 100 million people by the end of 2008. Wimax'ed networked mp3 players very interesting. After today's iPhone announcement with it's cellular and wifi capabilites I'm going to repeat my hair brained theories about direct to device audio and video podcast aggregation. Also of note. Nokia joins Sprint Nextel WiMax team http://sanantonio.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2007/01/01/daily29.html Nokia, the world's biggest wireless-phone maker, will provide equipment, including handsets and tablet computers, and do co-marketing for the planned WiMax network. Sprint says it may spend as much as $800 million developing its fourth generation, or 4G wireless network, this year and as much as $2 billion next year. The company (NYSE: S) is developing the high-speed wireless network using the spectrum frequencies it owns. It says the WiMax network could cover at least 100 million potential users by the end of 2008. Another good article on the Sprint Wimax network from Ars Technica http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070109-8582.html And a related article on Nokia's newly updated N93i http://www.mobilised.com.au/content/view/737/1/ Some choice quotes... Nokia has done a deal with Vox, the personal video and photo blogging service from Six Apart http://www.sixapart.com/. Depending on your country the phone may come pre-configured to use the service. With Vox users can share full size photo and video content with enforceable privacy controls. [...] With devices such as the Nokia N93i, we believe that video can become a similar kind of mass market phenomenon as mobile photography has become, said Satu Ehrnrooth, head of Nokia Nseries Cameras Category, Multimedia, Nokia. The slim and beautiful Nokia N93i is the ideal device for user-created video content, as i is a connected digital camcorder that is always with you. You can even instantly upload video clips in their original size directly from the device to online blogs or video communities. With the Nokia N93i, sharing your stories is now as easy as recording and viewing them. It may be pretty early but videoblogging and video sharing are definitely going to move beyond the
