Re: [videoblogging] 2010 the year of the flip?
David Jones wrote: Sanyo Xacti VPC-HD2000 I have the HD1010 which is almost identical in terms of feature set for most practical uses, and a fair bit cheaper. Interesting. I'll bear that in mind. The lens and sensor size are streets ahead of any pocket cam, and it supports add-on lenses. That's the thing that really interests me. It's funny... for years I've used Canon's line of cameras with removable lenses, but I've never been able to afford the lenses! I just recently bought a pair of more consumer oriented Canon HDV cameras used, got 'em really cheap. The seller basically sold me his whole outfit with lots f spare bits, and my favorite is the screw-on fisheye adapters. He's a still camera so he some pretty high standard for this stuff. He sort of put down the quality of these add-ons, but I'm as pleased as punch. In film school, I was a little too into shooting wide-angle, and had to give that up when I entered video. So, I definitely want to play with the Xacti, especially with the extra lenses. I've been trying to interest a few magazines into having me a do a pocket cam shootout, but since these aren't seen as very pro I haven't been very successful in pitching the article. BTW I just had an article puvblished about Macro videography in Videomaker if any of you might be interested. http://www.videomaker.com/article/14745/ -- -- Bohus Blahut (BOH-hoosh BLAH-hoot) modern filmmaker
Re: [videoblogging] 2010 the year of the flip?
I recall when David first got his Xacti, he had to do some leg work to figure out the best ways to edit the MP4 file format of the Xacti with his current video editing software. From looking at his video blog, David is a smart guy, and he knew where to go (this list, for example) when trying to solve his problems with the encoding process. I would argue that most people are not like David. They want something that works out of the box and is easy to use. They don't want to do a lot of pre-encoding or processing just to be able to edit there films. That is the real beauty of the Flip and Kodak series cameras. Anyone can create video whenever they want without spending a whole lot of time and effort on the process. I've had one for almost two years, and it is almost always in my pocket. It's since been replaced by a Canon SD780 point and shoot, but I still use the Flip quite a bit, particularly in places where I might lose or damage my camera (roller coasters and bike rides come to mind). The Flipshare software is also very easy to use, and has a lot of features that *most* users will appreciate. Take a look at http://libraryvoice.com/technology/beyond-the-lens-the-real-power-of-the-flip-camerafor a write-up I did on the FlipShare software. The format factor and the built-in software make the Flip and Kodak very attractive for the masses. Power to the people, or something like that. Take care, Chad 2010/1/11 Bohuš bo...@xnet.com David Jones wrote: Sanyo Xacti VPC-HD2000 I have the HD1010 which is almost identical in terms of feature set for most practical uses, and a fair bit cheaper. Interesting. I'll bear that in mind. The lens and sensor size are streets ahead of any pocket cam, and it supports add-on lenses. That's the thing that really interests me. It's funny... for years I've used Canon's line of cameras with removable lenses, but I've never been able to afford the lenses! I just recently bought a pair of more consumer oriented Canon HDV cameras used, got 'em really cheap. The seller basically sold me his whole outfit with lots f spare bits, and my favorite is the screw-on fisheye adapters. He's a still camera so he some pretty high standard for this stuff. He sort of put down the quality of these add-ons, but I'm as pleased as punch. In film school, I was a little too into shooting wide-angle, and had to give that up when I entered video. So, I definitely want to play with the Xacti, especially with the extra lenses. I've been trying to interest a few magazines into having me a do a pocket cam shootout, but since these aren't seen as very pro I haven't been very successful in pitching the article. BTW I just had an article puvblished about Macro videography in Videomaker if any of you might be interested. http://www.videomaker.com/article/14745/ -- -- Bohus Blahut (BOH-hoosh BLAH-hoot) modern filmmaker -- Chad F. Boeninger libraryvoice.com - blog libraryvoice.com/videos - videoblog twitter.com/cfboeninger [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] 2010 the year of the flip?
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 1:45 AM, Chad Boeninger cfboenin...@gmail.com wrote: I recall when David first got his Xacti, he had to do some leg work to figure out the best ways to edit the MP4 file format of the Xacti with his current video editing software. Whilst it's true that it took me some time to get my system working, technically it was not a problem with the Xacti. The HD (1280x720 is what I shoot because that's what YouTube wants) MP4 files the Xacti produces were fully compatible with every program I ever tried. So it's not a matter of file compatibility, it's a matter of being able to actually edit HD MP4 files directly, and I believe this is a common problem regardless of what camera you use. The Xacti actually helps in this matter because it produces widely compatible MP4 files. BTW, my editing process is still not completely smooth, it can be quite jerky and unresponsive at random times, but I've put that down to my ordinary machine and the price to pay for editing HD MP4 directly. At least I've got it working when almost everyone else told me I was crazy for even trying to edit HD MP4 directly! From looking at his video blog, David is a smart guy, and he knew where to go (this list, for example) when trying to solve his problems with the encoding process. I would argue that most people are not like David. They want something that works out of the box and is easy to use. They don't want to do a lot of pre-encoding or processing just to be able to edit there films. That is the real beauty of the Flip and Kodak series cameras. Can you actually edit (trim) 1280x720 HD video smoothly frame-by-frame with the Flip or Kodak camera software? If not, then technically it's not a fair comparison I don't think, but I do agree with your sentiment that that sort of ease of use the average consumer wants, heck, that's what *I* want too! Anyone can create video whenever they want without spending a whole lot of time and effort on the process. I've had one for almost two years, and it is almost always in my pocket. It's since been replaced by a Canon SD780 point and shoot, but I still use the Flip quite a bit, particularly in places where I might lose or damage my camera (roller coasters and bike rides come to mind). The Flipshare software is also very easy to use, and has a lot of features that *most* users will appreciate. Take a look at http://libraryvoice.com/technology/beyond-the-lens-the-real-power-of-the-flip-camerafor a write-up I did on the FlipShare software. The format factor and the built-in software make the Flip and Kodak very attractive for the masses. Power to the people, or something like that. Nice article. It does look good for the average user, but does it work with HD on an ordinary power machine? Is HD ready for the masses yet? Dave.
Re: [videoblogging] 2010 the year of the flip?
I neglected to say that my Flip is the Mino SD, not HD. For HD (720 P) video, I use my Canon SD780is, and edit with the Canon Zoombrowser software. I'm running the zoombrowser software on a 4 year old Gateway laptop. It chuggs, but it gets the job done. Granted, most of my videos are under 5 minutes, so the file sizes are not *that* big. I think HD video is ready for the masses, as YouTube has proved. HD editing, and all the issues it brings (codecs, system requirements, file size, etc), may be a different story. I'd be curious how much post-production the masses actually do. On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 4:50 PM, David Jones david.jo...@altium.com wrote: On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 1:45 AM, Chad Boeninger cfboenin...@gmail.comcfboeninger%40gmail.com wrote: I recall when David first got his Xacti, he had to do some leg work to figure out the best ways to edit the MP4 file format of the Xacti with his current video editing software. Whilst it's true that it took me some time to get my system working, technically it was not a problem with the Xacti. The HD (1280x720 is what I shoot because that's what YouTube wants) MP4 files the Xacti produces were fully compatible with every program I ever tried. So it's not a matter of file compatibility, it's a matter of being able to actually edit HD MP4 files directly, and I believe this is a common problem regardless of what camera you use. The Xacti actually helps in this matter because it produces widely compatible MP4 files. BTW, my editing process is still not completely smooth, it can be quite jerky and unresponsive at random times, but I've put that down to my ordinary machine and the price to pay for editing HD MP4 directly. At least I've got it working when almost everyone else told me I was crazy for even trying to edit HD MP4 directly! From looking at his video blog, David is a smart guy, and he knew where to go (this list, for example) when trying to solve his problems with the encoding process. I would argue that most people are not like David. They want something that works out of the box and is easy to use. They don't want to do a lot of pre-encoding or processing just to be able to edit there films. That is the real beauty of the Flip and Kodak series cameras. Can you actually edit (trim) 1280x720 HD video smoothly frame-by-frame with the Flip or Kodak camera software? If not, then technically it's not a fair comparison I don't think, but I do agree with your sentiment that that sort of ease of use the average consumer wants, heck, that's what *I* want too! Anyone can create video whenever they want without spending a whole lot of time and effort on the process. I've had one for almost two years, and it is almost always in my pocket. It's since been replaced by a Canon SD780 point and shoot, but I still use the Flip quite a bit, particularly in places where I might lose or damage my camera (roller coasters and bike rides come to mind). The Flipshare software is also very easy to use, and has a lot of features that *most* users will appreciate. Take a look at http://libraryvoice.com/technology/beyond-the-lens-the-real-power-of-the-flip-camerafor a write-up I did on the FlipShare software. The format factor and the built-in software make the Flip and Kodak very attractive for the masses. Power to the people, or something like that. Nice article. It does look good for the average user, but does it work with HD on an ordinary power machine? Is HD ready for the masses yet? Dave. -- Chad F. Boeninger libraryvoice.com - blog libraryvoice.com/videos - videoblog twitter.com/cfboeninger [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] 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: videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[videoblogging] Re: Mystery
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman jay.ded...@... wrote: Does anyone know who made this site? http://alpha.publicvideos.org Its very cool...seems to use Ogg format. Jay -- http://ryanishungry.com http://momentshowing.net http://twitter.com/jaydedman 917 371 6790 Hi, As I have replied to Jay on twitter, the project is still in it's early stages and a little more about the reasoning of it can be found at http://alpha.publicvideos.org/about Regarding Chrome vs Safari vs FF3.5 vs FF3.6 and their support for HTML5 Video tag, they behave slight different on their interpretation/implementation of the spec, Safari and Chrome will autobuffer regardless if you used the autobuffer parameter or not, (and chrome will not display the controls until video fully loaded, which sucks), FF3.5 does not support the poster attribute and does not update/refresh the player upon changing the source element via DOM among other small things. Firefox 3.6beta looks great though, and have an option to play in fullscreen :) I had to tweak my code a little bit in order to get the behavior I wanted on this 4 browsers, and I still need to add the necessary flash/quicktime fallbacks in place, but overall I am excited with the awareness about the importance of open formats this new html5 push is promoting. []s Fabricio C Zuardi http://fabricio.org
[videoblogging] Re: Brief history of video compression
Flash causes Safari to crash at least once a day for me. I would hate (and my guess is so would Apple) to have that experience on my mobile browser, where page and boot speeds are significantly reduced. So I for one dont mind there being no flash on the iPhone, although Hulu would be nice. But thats what the SDK is for I suppose. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, forestm...@... wrote: Joly MacFie wrote: Forest - are you suggesting that flash is more cpu-intensive than baseline h.264? Is that so? I was referring to the flash player in general and wasn't suggesting the flash container itself requires significantly more resources on the client side. (Also, flash is a container format; 264 is a compression format, so not completely sure what your question is.) Even so, when Adobe/Apple rolled out their 'compromise' last year, there was the usual hang-wringing about battery life browser performance; although to my mind it's not clear how a custom rolled app that plays flash video from a specific site (eg. Hulu) would *necessarily* realise significant performance gains. (At just 5MB the whole binary itself weighs in on the low side of a typical app, and not likely the app porter is going to improve its performance.) But then I haven't built an app such as that, myself yet. stay tuned, forest mars -- mnn.org http://mnn.org
Re: [videoblogging] 2010 the year of the flip?
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 8:55 AM, Chad Boeninger cfboenin...@gmail.com wrote: I neglected to say that my Flip is the Mino SD, not HD. For HD (720 P) video, I use my Canon SD780is, and edit with the Canon Zoombrowser software. I'm running the zoombrowser software on a 4 year old Gateway laptop. It chuggs, but it gets the job done. Granted, most of my videos are under 5 minutes, so the file sizes are not *that* big. I don't think file size is the issue. I have the same editing problems with a 5 second HD clip as I do with a 5 minute HD clip. As others have stated on here before, it's the inherent properties of the MPEG4 formats and the codecs that make them non-optimal for frame based editing. I've been told I'm one of the few people foolish enough to attempt to edit directly in HD MP4! I'm of the understanding that most others covert their camera MP4 files to MPEG2 first before editing. I think HD video is ready for the masses, as YouTube has proved. HD editing, and all the issues it brings (codecs, system requirements, file size, etc), may be a different story. I'd be curious how much post-production the masses actually do. My file sizes have actually dropped after I moved from MPEG2 720x480 to MP4 1280x720, so no complaints there! As for my editing, I trim and edit the HD MP4 files directly copied from my Xacti camera. But because my Ulead Pro X2 edit software cannot output HD MP4 directly, I have to render my final project to 1280x720 MPEG2 and then use Handbrake twice to convert to 1280x720 MP4 for YouTube, and 480x272 web optimised iPhone/ITouch/iPod compatible MP4 for the podcasters. Dave.
Re: [videoblogging] 2010 the year of the flip?
David raises a good point here, what might be missing in flipshare is a 'podcast' function, which sites provide it, given 720p AVC input? I am talking 640x360 baseline .m4v's with auto iTunes store listing. joly On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 6:29 PM, David Jones david.jo...@altium.com wrote: But because my Ulead Pro X2 edit software cannot output HD MP4 directly, I have to render my final project to 1280x720 MPEG2 and then use Handbrake twice to convert to 1280x720 MP4 for YouTube, and 480x272 web optimised iPhone/ITouch/iPod compatible MP4 for the podcasters. Dave. -- --- Joly MacFie 917 442 8665 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com ---
[videoblogging] Re: Brief history of video compression
I don't think compression or standards are really the limiting factor in stopping people editing video more casually. I think the technical limitations are far more limiting to the casual videographer. Hard drive space and technical know how probably put many off. QuickTime is a widespread standard and files can easily be shared across platforms. in fact editing formats MJPEG and PHOTOJPEG have been around for years. There are the H/DV and ProRes, but alot of development and advances have come in delivery formats. You can edit in other formats of course like the MP4 that comes off consumer cameras, but even then you get more than a few minutes of video and it takes up a lot of space. I doubt most casual users can really be bothered with that. And the fact that editing video is still pretty techy even with iMovie and whatever the PC version is, it can be intimidating and thats a barrier to entry too. Editing a text doc is second nature as its the language and medium we are most familiar with. We learn to do it at such a young age there is no thought behind it. And the technical requirements are negligible. And I was just thinking, online video really doesnt seem to be suffering and kind of hampering at this stage. Wherever you look there is a web video show and theres more content every day than one can reasonably consume. Is there an area of web video you think is particularly lacking? Just my own, unfounded thoughts :) cheers adam --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman jay.ded...@... wrote: Video compression (especially proprietary) is a bottleneck with online video. Just the opposite ... video compression is a boon to online video. If there were no video compression there would not be any online video. Very very true. Improved video compression has helped spread web vide the last 10 years. My more specific point is simple this: video codecs have gotten better...but the fight between the proprietary standards is hampering online video from further spreading. The idea of people editing video like they edit a text document is still a long ways away. Why? Because every platform uses different standards. Its difficult for a PC and mac to trade video files without a lot of conversion nonsense. Flash is pretty universal for playback but useless for editing. Open Source community cant really build good video editors without stealing compression technology. I cant play Flash videos on my iPhone bcause Apple doesnt want to pay Adobe for the rights for the codec playback. These are problems. Jay -- http://ryanishungry.com http://momentshowing.net http://twitter.com/jaydedman 917 371 6790
Re: [videoblogging] 2010 the year of the flip?
I have edited the MP4 output of both the Flip HD and the Kodak Zi8 with varying degrees of success. As someone here mentioned, the included software is there to chop the heads and tails off of clips, but really isn't good for anything more involved than that. A lot of the issue is just ram throughput and how quickly the MP4 stream can be decoded so you can see it and edit with it. I've tried most of the major pro software, and I didn't get especially good performance. The best performance came from software called SpeedEDIT by NewTek (the same folks who make the TriCaster the old Video Toaster from the 90's). It's not exactly cheap, and it doesn't have the sheer number of features of Premiere of Final Cut, but it is far more robust especially when editing with multiple formats. It fared pretty well with MP4 footage, but certainly was not as snappy as with the stuff coming from my HDV cameras. I have occasionally transcoded into other more edit friendly codecs, but I just hate doing that. Recompressing is never a good idea, especially if the fotage you started with is already compressed to within an inch of its life. My idea was to use pocket cams for impromptu interviews and such, but MP4 really is too fussy for editing with at this point... even on a beefy edit machine. Possibly the next generation of PC hardware software will do better, but I vastly prefer the responsiveness of stuff I capture with HDV cams. Still can't match how portable and spontaneous those little pocket cams are. -- -- Bohus Blahut (BOH-hoosh BLAH-hoot) modern filmmaker 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: videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[videoblogging] My book was released on Amazon.com today
Hi, Just wanted to let you know that my book, Get Seen, was released on Amazon.com today. My first post to this group was on June 6th, 2004. The first message in this group was June 1, 2004. Mine was the 6th message. It's been a wild ride from 2004 to 2010. I remember the first Vloggercon in NYC in 2005 and the second in SF in 2006. My book is a nice how to guide for people starting out in online video. For some of us who have been putting video on blogs wince 2004, it's seems so easy now. When we started there was no YouTube, we were worried that our videos would get popular, because that would cost us money. Now we've got a myriad of free hosting solutions for have lots of great features. But there still are and will always be people starting out. That's where my book comes in. In the book I talk about choosing a camera, getting good sound and lighting, and how to conduct interviews. Also, how to edit and post, and how to go live. I've interviewed a number of Yahoo! videoblogging group members. I made a post today called, Where To Buy Get Seen. It's a very simple post showing where people can order the book. It's at: http://bit.ly/buy-getseen In addition to that the book has a website, http://stevegarfield.com/getseen Over there I'm posting video interviews that I made for the book and there are discussion forums for people who read the book who might have some questions. So that's it. Just wanted to drop by and give you guys an update. Thanks for your support. --Steve http://stevegarfield.com Author: Get Seen: Online Video Secrets http://stevegarfield.com/getseen Founder: Boston Media Makers http://bostonmediamakers.com Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/stevegarfield
Re: [videoblogging] My book was released on Amazon.com today
Congratulations! And it's also available on Amazon.co.uk: http://bit.ly/6PK1z8 More people than ever are starting out now. Good luck with it :) Rupert http://twittervlog.tv On 13 Jan 2010, at 01:01, Steve Garfield wrote: Hi, Just wanted to let you know that my book, Get Seen, was released on Amazon.com today. My first post to this group was on June 6th, 2004. The first message in this group was June 1, 2004. Mine was the 6th message. It's been a wild ride from 2004 to 2010. I remember the first Vloggercon in NYC in 2005 and the second in SF in 2006. My book is a nice how to guide for people starting out in online video. For some of us who have been putting video on blogs wince 2004, it's seems so easy now. When we started there was no YouTube, we were worried that our videos would get popular, because that would cost us money. Now we've got a myriad of free hosting solutions for have lots of great features. But there still are and will always be people starting out. That's where my book comes in. In the book I talk about choosing a camera, getting good sound and lighting, and how to conduct interviews. Also, how to edit and post, and how to go live. I've interviewed a number of Yahoo! videoblogging group members. I made a post today called, Where To Buy Get Seen. It's a very simple post showing where people can order the book. It's at: http://bit.ly/buy-getseen In addition to that the book has a website, http://stevegarfield.com/getseen Over there I'm posting video interviews that I made for the book and there are discussion forums for people who read the book who might have some questions. So that's it. Just wanted to drop by and give you guys an update. Thanks for your support. --Steve http://stevegarfield.com Author: Get Seen: Online Video Secrets http://stevegarfield.com/getseen Founder: Boston Media Makers http://bostonmediamakers.com Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/stevegarfield [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] 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: videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [videoblogging] My book was released on Amazon.com today
good job steve! On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Steve Garfield st...@offonatangent.comwrote: Hi, Just wanted to let you know that my book, Get Seen, was released on Amazon.com today. My first post to this group was on June 6th, 2004. The first message in this group was June 1, 2004. Mine was the 6th message. It's been a wild ride from 2004 to 2010. I remember the first Vloggercon in NYC in 2005 and the second in SF in 2006. My book is a nice how to guide for people starting out in online video. For some of us who have been putting video on blogs wince 2004, it's seems so easy now. When we started there was no YouTube, we were worried that our videos would get popular, because that would cost us money. Now we've got a myriad of free hosting solutions for have lots of great features. But there still are and will always be people starting out. That's where my book comes in. In the book I talk about choosing a camera, getting good sound and lighting, and how to conduct interviews. Also, how to edit and post, and how to go live. I've interviewed a number of Yahoo! videoblogging group members. I made a post today called, Where To Buy Get Seen. It's a very simple post showing where people can order the book. It's at: http://bit.ly/buy-getseen In addition to that the book has a website, http://stevegarfield.com/getseen Over there I'm posting video interviews that I made for the book and there are discussion forums for people who read the book who might have some questions. So that's it. Just wanted to drop by and give you guys an update. Thanks for your support. --Steve http://stevegarfield.com Author: Get Seen: Online Video Secrets http://stevegarfield.com/getseen Founder: Boston Media Makers http://bostonmediamakers.com Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/stevegarfield -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] 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: videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
